[Football] Wenger proposes changes to the offside rule due to VAR

[beorhthelm]

The problem is that "in line" doesn't really exist, eventually you will zoom in and find one is on or offside.

The idea of having "clear daylight" between is subjective and would just cause the same arguments over whether X case is "clear" or not.

I think that now the technology exists, it has to be a simple yes/no based on exactly where the defender is. It's the only way to remove subjectivity. Maybe have a buffer which covers the technology's margin of error, but no more.

The only issue is knowing that the freeze frame is from the exact moment that the ball was kicked. But now there is technology in the ball right? Hence the Alvarez penalty being disallowed in the Champions League earlier this season.

this shouldn't be dependant on "the technology", it's sufficent to eye ball it. the purpose of the rule as highlighted above is to prevent goal hanging, and in line or even daylight rule, should be fine. VAR is abused here trying to add precision to something that shouldn't need it.

 

[Gabbiano]

this shouldn't be dependant on "the technology", it's sufficent to eye ball it. the purpose of the rule as highlighted above is to prevent goal hanging, and in line or even daylight rule, should be fine. VAR is abused here trying to add precision to something that shouldn't need it.

But the whole point of VAR is to provide precision.

If you're going to eyeball it, then the lino can eyeball it. It's way more subjective and more open to bias.

Watering down VAR defeats the point of it, imo. Either have it fully or don't bother.

 

[Skuller]

Makes sense.

No way should this be offside IMO, which it technically is at the moment.

View attachment 201336

It’s funny how the magnifying glasses come out to detect a few millimeters of a toe between the receiver and the defender, yet nobody ever checks the accuracy of picking the moment the ball leaves the passer’s foot. The ball’s flexible and the foot’s flexible so it must be quite subjective when the ball has just left the foot. We never get to look at that.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It’s funny how the magnifying glasses come out to detect a few millimeters of a toe between the receiver and the defender, yet nobody ever checks the accuracy of picking the moment the ball leaves the passer’s foot. The ball’s flexible and the foot’s flexible so it must be quite subjective when the ball has just left the foot. We never get to look at that.

Yeh. The camera will run at 24 frames per second.

The boot of the passer and the ball will clearly be in contact for well more than a 24th of a second. Which frame gets picked is completely arbitrary as far as I can tell

 

[Was not Was]

I don't see how the 'daylight' rule would be giving "the benefit of the doubt" to the striker. Surely it just moves the line where offside or not is decided. There's still a point where offside meets not-offside, and that's where the disputes and the endless VAR checking would still happen.

 

[beorhthelm]

But the whole point of VAR is to provide precision.

If you're going to eyeball it, then the lino can eyeball it. It's way more subjective and more open to bias.

Watering down VAR defeats the point of it, imo. Either have it fully or don't bother.

VAR was supposed to deal with clear errors, then got applied to offside too, where letter of the law means precision can be used. yes, get rid of it for offside, leave it for obvious misses of dangerous play, penalty shouts.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I've made this point before. But I think football would be better without the offside law. All this bullshit pointless debate and technology. I don't think teams would put on beanpoles to rough up the keeper like they would have probably done 50 years ago. I reckon if it got abolished, it would only be a few weeks before we wondered why we persisted with it all that time

If we keep offside, then I agree that just let the linos get on with it. Then their careers need to depend on their performances. The one who allowed that Maguire goal against Leicester in the cup shouldn't get anything more than a u10s game until over the years he can show he has actual eyesight.

If we keep offside and VAR, then yeh go for Wenger's idea

But whatever, don't keep the present, awful state of affairs which is just looking for opportunities to disallow perfectly good goals, eg MacAllister v Leicester and about 3 million other examples

 

[Stumpy Tim]

This daylight rule, IMO, will be detrimental to the game. Teams will have to drop deeper as 95% of offsides won't be offside anymore.

Why not make the "line" thicker with VAR, so the attacker gets some extra benefit for offside. Having a gap is giving way too much advantage to the attacker and will have the opposite affect to what they're trying to have.

 

[rippleman]

Do you get to keep your challenge if proved right?

You would like to think so. It works well enough in cricket.

But then top level cricket umpires are far superior in quality to top level football referees and cricket "VAR" umpires are far quicker at making decisions despite cricket having more detailed laws than football.

 

[Skuller]

Yeh. The camera will run at 24 frames per second.

The boot of the passer and the ball will clearly be in contact for well more than a 24th of a second. Which frame gets picked is completely arbitrary as far as I can tell

Someone running at 5 mph covers 88 inches in one second (no, I couldn’t believe that either, but AI tells me that and I’ve checked it). So between each frame (24 per second you say), they travel about 3 inches. So that’s your margin of error (even if picking the moment of kicking is virtually 100% accurate) yet they measure offside down to an inch if not lower.

 

[schmunk]

Makes sense.

No way should this be offside IMO, which it technically is at the moment.

View attachment 201336

Mkhitaryan (white kit's) foot is infront of the Barca defender - why do you think it should it not be offside?

 

[pb21]

Yeh. The camera will run at 24 frames per second.

The boot of the passer and the ball will clearly be in contact for well more than a 24th of a second. Which frame gets picked is completely arbitrary as far as I can tell

Apparently they use accelerometers in the ball in the semi automated system, so this issue becomes a negligible one, in theory...

Edit: apparently also uses cameras at 100 fps

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Mkhitaryan (white kit's) foot is infront of the Barca defender - why do you think it should it not be offside?

The rule was applied correctly. It's just a shit rule. Having been bought up on level = onside, it pains me to see how many goals are getting ruled out

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

You would like to think so. It works well enough in cricket.

But then top level cricket umpires are far superior in quality to top level football referees and cricket "VAR" umpires are far quicker at making decisions despite cricket having more detailed laws than football.

I don't see that there's much of a useful comparison with cricket, where pretty much all the decisions that can be referred can be answered near conclusively by the technology.
I.e. edges can be checked by the snicko, lbw by hawkeye. Incidentally, Hawkeye has a much smaller margin of error than the half a ball width used for umpires call, unless there's an actual fault the margin on the predictions is only a few mm or so.

Half the time in football most of the players on both sides won't really have any way of knowing if there's been a genuine howler or not. And aside from offside most of the decisions just get referred to somebody else to make a subjective call on.

 

[Napper]

Use just the feet to judge

Or better still , scrap VAR and go back to linesmen . It's football , not everything has to be perfect.

 

[Perfidious Albion]

I have been saying the same thing for ages. Since Wenger is described as Head of Global Development at FIFA , it just might happen.

 

[AlbionBro]

I've been saying a long time that one of the worst things about VAR is that it has effectively removed the post Italia '90 ruling that being level was ONSIDE.

Now Arsene Wenger is looking to tweak the law so that the attacker once again gets the advantage.

Can't come soon enough in my opinion.

Arsene Wenger: Former Arsenal boss proposes change to offside rule after VAR effect

Arsene Wenger proposes a change to the offside rule that would mean attackers are onside if any part of their body is in line with the last outfield defender.

www.bbc.co.uk

I would say screw the attacker, goal hangers should not be rewarded. Wenger needs to poke his very large nose out of it.

 

[Brighthelmstone]

Keep the rules as they are but VAR only gets 30 seconds to override the on-pitch decision. if the point was VAR spots clear and obvious errors then if it take smore than that its not clear or obvious. Or is that to simple a view ?

 

[Blues Guitarist]

The point of VAR was to stop obvious errors. If you look at a replay (even in slo-mo) and it's not an obvious error, on-field decision stands.

 

[Motogull]

Put the VAR MFers on mushrooms or cocaine.