2019/20 - Other Games

Some of these offsides being given by VAR are an absolute joke and not in the spirit of what the offside law is intended for.

Application of rule needs changing to favour the attacking side in some way. Possibly as just suggested by Souness, flipping it to say if any part of body is onside, it's OK, instead of the other way round. Too many goals being ruled out where the attacker is basically level with current rules.

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Can only be a matter of time before VAR gives an offside because a follicle of the attackers hair was in an offside position.

Yes, true. A least they use the 'rocker' in cricket, running it forwards and backwards. Works well.

A rocker is not accurate enough with 50 frames per second.

To be fair it doesn’t have to be that precise. If you are giving the benefit of doubt to the attacker then you freeze it when there has obviously been contact with the ball (probably a split second after the ball has been struck).

But if the attacker is running at pace that wouldn’t give him any advantage. Delaying the adjudged contact would just make him look to be offside when possibly he wasn’t.

Some of these offsides being given by VAR are an absolute joke and not in the spirit of what the offside law is intended for.

 

Application of rule needs changing to favour the attacking side in some way. Possibly as just suggested by Souness, flipping it to say if any part of body is onside, it's OK, instead of the other way round. Too many goals being ruled out where the attacker is basically level with current rules.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

The law is quite clear at the moment. If an attacker scores against Liverpool then they must have been offside. If any Liverpool player scores a goal then they must by definition have been onside and definitely did not use any part of their arms either in scoring or in the build up.

Can only be a matter of time before VAR gives an offside because a follicle of the attackers hair was in an offside position.

Is a penis something you can score with?

But if the attacker is running at pace that wouldn’t give him any advantage. Delaying the adjudged contact would just make him look to be offside when possibly he wasn’t.

Obviously it depends on the movement of the players but the Frame can be frozen at the position that gives most benefit of doubt to the striker, if wether the contact is slightly earlier or later makes a difference.

And another one ruled out for Sheffield Utd.

To be fair it doesn’t have to be that precise. If you are giving the benefit of doubt to the attacker then you freeze it when there has obviously been contact with the ball (probably a split second after the ball has been struck).

But it does because that's what the authorities want. It shouldn't be as complicated because VAR should not be involved in offsides if the offside rule was rewritten to reflect the need for it to address 'the advantage' rather than whether it is 'mathematically' level or not. Sourness today had a sensible solution, that is to change so that the attacking player is onside if any part of his body is in an onside position, makes a lot more sense than the current law.

But it does because that's what the authorities want. It shouldn't be as complicated because VAR should not be involved in offsides if the offside rule was rewritten to reflect the need for it to address 'the advantage' rather than whether it is 'mathematically' level or not. Sourness today had a sensible solution, that is to change so that the attacking player is onside if any part of his body is in an onside position, makes a lot more sense than the current law.

That wouldn’t make any difference, there would still be someone offside/onside by a fraction of a boot, it would just move the lines.

But it does because that's what the authorities want. It shouldn't be as complicated because VAR should not be involved in offsides if the offside rule was rewritten to reflect the need for it to address 'the advantage' rather than whether it is 'mathematically' level or not. Sourness today had a sensible solution, that is to change so that the attacking player is onside if any part of his body is in an onside position, makes a lot more sense than the current law.

All that does is shift where the lines are drawn and the arguments centre.

Just have to accept VAR is here and hope it is made better

That wouldn’t make any difference, there would still be someone offside/onside by a fraction of a boot, it would just move the lines.

I’ve posted this on the other thread but I’d say have a 6 inch margin for error on the current rule, whereby you are offside but you get the benefit of the doubt. If you’re so close to that 6 inch line that you can’t tell within 5 seconds, then you’re offside.

Basically the question should be - is it immediately obvious that you’re less than 6 inches offside? It’s quick, simple and fair.

Is a penis something you can score with?

Would be funny if Ballack had still been playing. Or ****z

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wish we were West Ham.

I’ve posted this on the other thread but I’d say have a 6 inch margin for error on the current rule, whereby you are offside but you get the benefit of the doubt. If you’re so close to that 6 inch line that you can’t tell within 5 seconds, then you’re offside.

 

Basically the question should be - is it immediately obvious that you’re less than 6 inches offside? It’s quick, simple and fair.

Yes, it is claiming to be accurate but it isn’t. I would put the margin of error at more like 50cm than 15cm myself.

Yes, it is claiming to be accurate but it isn’t. I would put the margin of error at more like 50cm than 15cm myself.

a margin of error of half a meter?

no point having it

Yes, it is claiming to be accurate but it isn’t. I would put the margin of error at more like 50cm than 15cm myself.

Based on what? I haven’t seen this number mentioned anywhere else.

I wish we were West Ham.

Why? Getting Moyes you mean?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why? Getting Moyes you mean?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That wouldn’t make any difference, there would still be someone offside/onside by a fraction of a boot, it would just move the lines.

If the attackers are still caught offside, their would be less complaints with that amended rule IMO.

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Based on what? I haven’t seen this number mentioned anywhere else.

Based on my judgment on the technical methods that are used. In an earlier life I was a senior engineer in television picture processing and have written and presented several technical papers to international television conferences. You must always remember that what you think you see in your living room is an illusion created by flickering coloured pixels. It gives a general impression of what took place.

My figure of 50cm is what I suggest should be the ‘margin of allowance’.

All that does is shift where the lines are drawn and the arguments centre.

 

Just have to accept VAR is here and hope it is made better

No it doesn't, it means that an attacking player would be less likely to be penalised for gaining an advantage. At the moment players are penalised for gaining an advantage that does not exist. To make things better they should also scrap the use of VAR for offside and make it up to the linesman like it should be. Offside should not be a scientific decision, because it should be about gaining an unfair advantage. The whole problem here is not VAR, but about the definition of the offside law in the modern game. The law was changed in 1990 and needs to be changed again as a result of other changes. Fully support VAR in other aspects, but the offside part is ruining the spectacle and reducing the number of goals. Time before last they changed the offside law it was because the number of goals being scored had been reduced, the change immediately resulted in a very significant increase in goals scored. Laws can be changed and it is urgent that IFAB change them soon.

No it doesn't, it means that an attacking player would be less likely to be penalised for gaining an advantage. At the moment players are penalised for gaining an advantage that does not exist. To make things better they should also scrap the use of VAR for offside and make it up to the linesman like it should be. Offside should not be a scientific decision, because it should be about gaining an unfair advantage. The whole problem here is not VAR, but about the definition of the offside law in the modern game. The law was changed in 1990 and needs to be changed again as a result of other changes. Fully support VAR in other aspects, but the offside part is ruining the spectacle and reducing the number of goals. Time before last they changed the offside law it was because the number of goals being scored had been reduced, the change immediately resulted in a very significant increase in goals scored. Laws can be changed and it is urgent that IFAB change them soon.

Basically, you want to allow some offside goals.

Fair enough

Basically, you want to allow some offside goals.

 

Fair enough

No he wants to change the offside law so that goals that may currently be viewed as offside by a fingernail are no longer deemed offside.

There would have to be a measurable margin to allow these goals... that will be where the ruler will be used instead.

There would have to be a measurable margin to allow these goals... that will be where the ruler will be used instead.

Not neccessarily. The "measurable" part was only introduced in 1990 when they changed the offside law to be based on the attacking player being level. At the time this was fair enough, before technology was introduced a linesman could make a judgement based on line of sight to determine whether a player was level or not. The issue is that you cannot say accurately that a palyer (i.e. a rather nebulous blob) is "level" or not. A player is not a line so linesmen used to make a judgement based on whether the attacking player was gaining an advantage by being noticeably (to the human eye) in front of the defender. OK, they got it wrong sometimes, but apparently reviews have shown they got it right 95%+ of the time. Remove the "mathematical" definition and then remove the need for VAR to review it. The law should be along the lines of the attacking player is offside if he is clearly gaining an advantage by being ahead of the defensive player (I am not a law maker, but something along those lines). the offisde law was never meant to be about pinpoint accuracy (something which VAR cannot cope with anyway), it was about preventing an attacking player gaining an unfair advantage, effectively stopping the attacker "goal hanging". The IFAB need to go back to first principles and reflect on what the offside law is for, and not try to make the law more precisely worded. We have to get back to ensuring that goals are scored through skilful play, and not being prevented by some ridiculous attempt at millimetre accuracy. The suggestion by Souness on Saturday is another way of doing this, and has some merits, he is about the only pundit so far that has appreciated the problem is not VAR but the current offside law. Only problem for me is that any revised law needs to take into account all levels of the game, whether they have VAR or not, I hate the idea of having different rules for some games and not others.

Do we know if West Ham fans are happy with Moyes?

Just been banging on about what a winner he is. What have I missed?

a margin of error of half a meter?

 

no point having it

Precisely

Base decisions on the position of the feet, crazy to disallow a perfectly good goal because an arm was offside. Goals are hard enough to score without VAR totally favouring the defence. It's supposed to be about entertainment so give the strikers a fair chance.

Base decisions on the position of the feet, crazy to disallow a perfectly good goal because an arm was offside. Goals are hard enough to score without VAR totally favouring the defence. It's supposed to be about entertainment so give the strikers a fair chance.

Arms don’t count.

Do we know if West Ham fans are happy with Moyes?

 

Just been banging on about what a winner he is. What have I missed?

Looked at the replies yesterday on twitter to the announcement and the reaction was overwhelmingly negative.

He'll probably keep them up but they were hoping for a far more exciting appointment.

He says he has studied Liverpool's attacking style and would like to "copy" that style at WH !!!! We shall see ....

Looked at the replies yesterday on twitter to the announcement and the reaction was overwhelmingly negative.

 

He'll probably keep them up but they were hoping for a far more exciting appointment.

Yup everyone wants Pep - whilst he may be a dour man, he kept them up before, did a solid job at Everton and probably still has the highest win percentage of the heap of managers who have been through the doors of OT since SAF retired. Before anyone says Sunderland they were an absolute basket case. For Moyes himself I hope he succeeds, for West Ham themselves couldn’t give 2 hoots if they fell through the trap door, as slippery as the Eels they like in jelly around there.

I expect West Ham were hoping for an experienced foreign manager who has won titles at the highest level. Like Manuel..

Nothing is ever good enough for them, they are an embarrassment, mainly due to the owners' reckless approach to transfers.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Villa 1 up

Brighton 1 down

Every game on BT SPORTS today

Villa 2-0

"cut adrift" in 16th

Norwich 1-0 Palace

West Ham 1-0 Bournemouth

Bournemouth are plummeting!

Tis the season of the new manager bounce.

Howe out

Strange pen for West Ham, there.

Has there been a mass brawl in the WHam - Bompey match yet? With 8 players red carded, match abandoned, and 3 points deducted from both teams?

The South coast is theirs

4 more Man City goals and Saints will end the day in the top half of the league

Just the 8 defeats in 10 games for Bournemouth. But they have always been a weird streaky team who go on odd winning or losing runs, so not relegated yet.

You've got to fear for Eddie Howe's job.

One of the worst teams in the league by far. Eddie’s on a knife edge.

One of the worst teams in the league by far. Eddie’s on a knife edge.

4-0 down now. One more goal for WHU and their GD will be level with ours.

I hope Bournemouth go down. They add nothing to this league with their pathetic support and no one is interested in them. A noddy club who stupidly think the South Coast is theirs.

One of the worst teams in the league by far. Eddie’s on a knife edge.

Sent from my SM-T590 using Tapatalk

Do we want Arsenal to stay below us or are we looking to catch Utd?

Do we want Arsenal to stay below us or are we looking to catch Utd?