[Albion] Premier League 7-10/5/21

[Acker79]

If the decision is that close, it brings into question the exact moment the ball left the other players foot, milliseconds count, that line is on top of the other, football isn’t meant to be perfect and mm lines being drawn by a computer, will eventually kill the game and the spontaneity we all love.

Because the lines and the boots are both blurry - so you cannot be 100% certain. Because from that angle, how can you tell that it was the precise millisecond at which the ball was touched. A millisecond earlier, and the 'blur' would be different.

I despair sometimes. I can only understand this viewpoint from armchair fans - no, I take that back, I don't understand it.

I wasn't really looking for a genuine answer. It was more a rhetorical point aimed at people who seem to think the problem with VAR offside decisions is what part of the body they use to judge it. I don't claim to know what the answer is, but it isn't using feet (as this shows), it won't be "any part of the body onside", it won't be "daylight!"

There is a fundamental underlying disagreement - the authorities absolutely trust the accuracy of the technology, and believe that offside is offside. Others don't trust it, and believe there should be some wiggle room/margin of error. And changing those sorts of idealogies will be tough, whichever side budges. The only simple solution is to do away with offsides. Anything else will not be as simple/successful as some people like think.

 

[Robinjakarta]

Come on Sheffield United! You've beaten better sides than that crap.

 

[jimhigham]

Some day we will get a jammy deflection.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

How come MS Paint wasn't used for that goal? Probably was onside but there was a period around the time that he was off.

 

[vagabond]

Come on Sheff Utd [emoji120]

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

View attachment 136487

I was at that game with my old mate Howard Gravett. Hans Kraay scored (the winner?) and ran the length of the pitch back to the Albion fans and half climbed the fencing to get in and celebrate wit us. Legend.

[Hey kids - in the old days, we used to be fenced in at football by 10 foot steel fences. Happy days]

 

[GT49er]

I wasn't really looking for a genuine answer. It was more a rhetorical point aimed at people who seem to think the problem with VAR offside decisions is what part of the body they use to judge it. I don't claim to know what the answer is, but it isn't using feet (as this shows), it won't be "any part of the body onside", it won't be "daylight!"

There is a fundamental underlying disagreement - the authorities absolutely trust the accuracy of the technology, and believe that offside is offside. Others don't trust it, and believe there should be some wiggle room/margin of error. And changing those sorts of idealogies will be tough, whichever side budges. The only simple solution is to do away with offsides. Anything else will not be as simple/successful as some people like think.

If it's that close, the referee has not made a clear and obvious error, whichever way he's called it. That's the salient point which the VAR in this country hasn't been able to grasp. If a player's a yard offside, and the ref misses it, that's a clear and obvious error; if the ref blows for offside and there is a player he hasn't noticed playing the attacker onside, that's a clear and obvious error.
If it's a millimetre either way, there is no clear and obvious error.

 

[Simster]

If the decision is that close, it brings into question the exact moment the ball left the other players foot, milliseconds count, that line is on top of the other, football isn’t meant to be perfect and mm lines being drawn by a computer, will eventually kill the game and the spontaneity we all love.

You're either offside or you're not. Just because it's CLOSE doesn't make it any more incorrect if the wrong decision is made.

Imagine Sheffield Wednesday had just scored that "goal" in their game and you're in the VAR box making the decision:

Ref: "looks like he's just offside there. Unlucky, but we can't let Mike Dean give that"
The Wizard: "but it was REALLY close and although we have the technology we probably shouldn't spend an extra 20 seconds confirming it in case the dullards whinge that VAR is killing the game"

 

[Motogull]

Same old Wankpuffins. Another antifootballing smash and grab in the offing.

 

[Simster]

If it's that close, the referee has not made a clear and obvious error, whichever way he's called it. That's the salient point which the VAR in this country hasn't been able to grasp. If a player's a yard offside, and the ref misses it, that's a clear and obvious error; if the ref blows for offside and there is a player he hasn't noticed playing the attacker onside, that's a clear and obvious error.
If it's a millimetre either way, there is no clear and obvious error.

But offside is different - you're either offside or you're not. Handball can be subjective and if a hand means a goal is scored then sure, bring it back. But offside is like goal line technology - it's a yes or no decision.

People forget that back in the day, offsides were frequently blown just to be on the safe side, and then the TV would show he was well onside. It happened to us in the last minute at Millwall in the cup. We scored an onside goal incorrectly called offside. This rule stamps out that nonsense safety first officiating.

 

[bhanutz]

That is the most Palace goal ever..... their luck will surely turn one day!

 

[VAL1850]

Won't be long until Utd join their city neighbours in div 1, they are dire....

 

[Simster]

Won't be long until Utd join their city neighbours in div 1, they are dire....

I reckon United will reorganise and be solid enough next season. They'll have a season like Cardiff or Reading have just had imo.

 

[Deadly Danson]

You're either offside or you're not. Just because it's CLOSE doesn't make it any more incorrect if the wrong decision is made.

Imagine Sheffield Wednesday had just scored that "goal" in their game and you're in the VAR box making the decision:

Ref: "looks like he's just offside there. Unlucky, but we can't let Mike Dean give that"
The Wizard: "but it was REALLY close and although we have the technology we probably shouldn't spend an extra 20 seconds confirming it in case the dullards whinge that VAR is killing the game"

Completely disagree. Other posters have clearly explained why if it's that close then there is a significant element of doubt (when the ball leaves the foot, where the line is measured from etc) It's 100% NOT either offside or it's not. Which is why if it's that close the call should go with the onfield decision, there should be thicker lines and it should only be measured using feet. This bollocks is completely ruining the game..

 

[Simster]

Completely disagree. Other posters have clearly explained why if it's that close then there is a significant element of doubt (when the ball leaves the foot, where the line is measured from etc) It's 100% NOT either offside or it's not. Which is why if it's that close the call should go with the onfield decision, there should be thicker lines and it should only be measured using feet. This bollocks is completely ruining the game..

How thick do you want the line then? It would only kick the can down the road. Next people would be saying "what bullshit, that's a goal if the line is 3mm thicker" or whatever.

You're either offside or you're not. Make it simple by only checking the feet. I think there are far worse examples of VAR than offside decisions that are ultimately correct. That penalty against Liverpool for one. Shocking VAR influenced decision. Never a pen, just glad that we benefited!

 

[blue-shifted]

Or just do away with the lines and let the ref have one more look in real time if it turns out to be a goal.

If that's a blatant error, then overturn it. Poring over mm is bloody stupid. The only point of offside is to do away with egregious goal hanging.

Better still do away with VAR totally

 

[Dick Head]

How thick do you want the line then? It would only kick the can down the road. Next people would be saying "what bullshit, that's a goal if the line is 3mm thicker" or whatever.

You're either offside or you're not. Make it simple by only checking the feet. I think there are far worse examples of VAR than offside decisions that are ultimately correct. That penalty against Liverpool for one. Shocking VAR influenced decision. Never a pen, just glad that we benefited!

Far too sensible.

 

[Simster]

Or just do away with the lines and let the ref have one more look in real time if it turns out to be a goal.

If that's a blatant error, then overturn it. Poring over mm is bloody stupid. The only point of offside is to do away with egregious goal hanging.

Better still do away with VAR totally

VAR isn't going away for obvious reasons so we have to get used to it. Your argument for doing away with lines and letting the ref decide with the naked eye is fine if you want to live with five times as many incorrect decisions as we currently have.

The example The Wizard gives is an interesting case in point. Without VAR 20 years ago, I'd guess 80% of the time the lino would have had his flag up and we'd all have shrugged. But the problem is, that would have been the case also if he'd have been 3 inches ONside. It happened ALL the time because officials were too scared to concede contentious goals.

Personally I think we should simplify the VAR rule with the much discussed feet only rule, and then add a time limit to VAR potentially overturning decisions. 30 seconds unless the decision involves a goal or penalty in which case 60 seconds. Something like that anyway.

 

[Deadly Danson]

How thick do you want the line then? It would only kick the can down the road. Next people would be saying "what bullshit, that's a goal if the line is 3mm thicker" or whatever.

You're either offside or you're not. Make it simple by only checking the feet. I think there are far worse examples of VAR than offside decisions that are ultimately correct. That penalty against Liverpool for one. Shocking VAR influenced decision. Never a pen, just glad that we benefited!

I agree with only using the feet. But this plan in Dutch football seems sensible.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....divisie-system-to-solve-var-20201129.amp.html
It's never going to be perfect but if it's a mm wrong then that can easily be down to how and when they draw the lines so it's subjective, not factual. I also agree that you should have 30 seconds max to check. If it isn't obvious after that, it remains with the on field decision.

 

[Swansman]

Palace to score 1.5+ goals must be the most dumb bet I've made... in fact I should probably just have put everything in my bank account on 0-1