|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 19, 2020 7:56:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Veritas on Feb 19, 2020 8:03:27 GMT
I don't think it makes much difference, the key point now is wherever the line is set if we have VAR reviewing decisions down to a millimetre it will continue to spoil the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2020 8:13:44 GMT
I don't think it makes much difference, the key point now is wherever the line is set if we have VAR reviewing decisions down to a millimetre it will continue to spoil the game. Totally agree. |
|
|
|
Post by thestatusquo on Feb 19, 2020 8:16:34 GMT
What happens if it’s a night match ? 😀 |
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Feb 19, 2020 8:44:24 GMT
Ah but was that daylight or was that a reflection off his yellow boots? "Can we zoom the camera in for a close up of that one Dave?"
|
|
|
|
Post by apb1 on Feb 19, 2020 8:53:19 GMT
I agree, although it won't eliminate the pain in the arse of VAR it at least gives a slight advantage to attackers and a likelihood of more goals being allowed to stand, which is what we want. Can't see why they got rid of that rule as it was in place a few years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by AlliG on Feb 19, 2020 11:25:06 GMT
But even with "daylight" there will still be the "toenail offside" decisions. The problem with VAR will always be that you are measuring a number of independently moving objects by using a series of still photographs and therefore no matter what criteria you apply, there will be a certain amount of movement that occurs between those still photographs. |
|
|
|
Post by fulagoals on Feb 19, 2020 12:03:45 GMT
But even with "daylight" there will still be the "toenail offside" decisions. The problem with VAR will always be that you are measuring a number of independently moving objects by using a series of still photographs and therefore no matter what criteria you apply, there will be a certain amount of movement that occurs between those still photographs. This exactly. Am I missing something here? When they freeze the frame now and the attacker is a toe nail in front of the defender he is deemed offside. So if I’m picturing it in my mind with the attacker like half a yard/a yard in front of the defender when they freeze it looking for clear daylight there will be a toe nail in reverse will there not? |
|
|
|
Post by Cast no shadow on Feb 19, 2020 12:07:09 GMT
The only way to stop the controversy is to have no offsides.
|
|
|
|
Post by Olgrligm on Feb 19, 2020 12:08:29 GMT
If you're a player playing off the last man, you can tell if there's daylight between you and the defender and whether or not you're offside. There's skill in being just the right side of the defender.
You have absolutely no way of knowing that your teammates nose is half a millimetre offside. There is no skill in staying onside under the current laws.
|
|
|
|
Post by ivorstokie on Feb 19, 2020 12:28:17 GMT
In all this controversy about big toes and armpits being offside, no one seems to discuss the point at which the freeze frame is taken in relation to the split second when the ball leaves the foot or head of the player playing the ball forward (I.e. the point at which his teammate becomes offside, or not). With such fine margins involved this is crucial to the decision making process, but seems to be ignored totally in the controversy.
|
|
|
|
Post by reddipotter on Feb 19, 2020 12:47:44 GMT
As several people have pointed out, this is just drawing the line in a different place so it solves nothing. An equivalent of 'umpire's call' from cricket might help. Also, if the system was based on challenges (one per half?) like most other sports, then you'd prevent every single goal being checked.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 19, 2020 12:58:54 GMT
But even with "daylight" there will still be the "toenail offside" decisions. The problem with VAR will always be that you are measuring a number of independently moving objects by using a series of still photographs and therefore no matter what criteria you apply, there will be a certain amount of movement that occurs between those still photographs. There will Ali, it just seems to that Wenger's suggestion is marginally better. I guess we are seeing a possible disadvantage of technology in practice....Offside has always been controversial...personally I think that the idea of " interfering with play" is a ridiculous condition....it is a subjective decision, and in a split second the player who is deemed " not interfering " can become important and as one manager said...by being on the pitch a player is interfering..... Without the technology arguably ( and it is proving to be an argument) more decisions were incorrect but the game did move on and it was accepted that mistakes are made and we move on ( still moaning). VAR has highlighted the mistakes and prolonged the agony |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 19, 2020 13:05:45 GMT
As several people have pointed out, this is just drawing the line in a different place so it solves nothing. An equivalent of 'umpire's call' from cricket might help. Also, if the system was based on challenges (one per half?) like most other sports, then you'd prevent every single goal being checked. Arguably I think it would be slightly easier to judge...the gap of light.....but I guess the reality is there are always going to be some marginal decisions. Would Wenger's idea give a slight advantage to the forward and in play mean that the defender would tend to go further back...potentially less offsides ( I could be imagining this). Personally I would have a 25 yard line to try to open play up...or at least pilot it. |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 19, 2020 13:42:11 GMT
The difference with this is that the marginal decisions favour the attacker rather than the defender, so it gets rid of the punitive "killjoy" element of VAR as it stands.
I posted exactly this suggestion on a VAR thread a few weeks ago. I think it's a sound idea in principle, however it would make the job of the on-field linesmen virtually impossible, and as 99% of matches don't have VAR it's not practicable.
|
|
|
|
Post by reddipotter on Feb 19, 2020 13:43:01 GMT
As several people have pointed out, this is just drawing the line in a different place so it solves nothing. An equivalent of 'umpire's call' from cricket might help. Also, if the system was based on challenges (one per half?) like most other sports, then you'd prevent every single goal being checked. Arguably I think it would be slightly easier to judge...the gap of light.....but I guess the reality is there are always going to be some marginal decisions. Would Wenger's idea give a slight advantage to the forward and in play mean that the defender would tend to go further back...potentially less offsides ( I could be imagining this). Personally I would have a 25 yard line to try to open play up...or at least pilot it. The authorities need to decide what the offside rule is for. Presumably to stop 'goal hanging'. In which case your idea of a 25 yard line or similar makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by reddipotter on Feb 19, 2020 13:45:41 GMT
Anyway, wherever the line is, Arsene Wenger wouldn't see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by lifelong on Feb 19, 2020 13:47:53 GMT
For my two penneth worth, I hate VAR and think it should be scrapped, but concerning the offside decisions it can be simplified and speeded up easily..
As far as I am aware the players wear a transponder to monitor their movements, that's where the player stats come from. Even if though don't wear one now they easily could.
Using this technology a decision as to whether a player is offside would be instantaneous, in racing such as formula 1 they measure lap times to a thousands of a second so I can't see why it could not easily be adapted for an offside decision without the stupid line drawing.
|
|
|
|
Post by lifelong on Feb 19, 2020 13:49:19 GMT
BTW Wengers idea does not solve the problem of the line, if anything it complicates it
|
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 19, 2020 13:50:25 GMT
For my two penneth worth, I hate VAR and think it should be scrapped, but concerning the offside decisions it can be simplified and speeded up easily.. As far as I am aware the players wear a transponder to monitor their movements, that's where the player stats come from. Even if though don't wear one now they easily could. Using this technology a decision as to whether a player is offside would be instantaneous, in racing such as formula 1 they measure lap times to a thousands of a second so I can't see why it could not easily be adapted for an offside decision without the stupid line drawing. Nice idea but that would make two different versions of the law for games with VAR and games without. So not possible. |
|
|
|
Post by lifelong on Feb 19, 2020 13:56:01 GMT
Potterlog, good point but they are talking about changing the law for VAR anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 19, 2020 14:05:00 GMT
Potterlog, good point but they are talking about changing the law for VAR anyway. Changing the law is one thing but it's not possible have two different versions of it for different scenarios. Anyway, if you look at my first post above, that's exactly why they won't approve this change - they'd be making a major, universal change to a law based on something that only applies to a tiny percentage of games. |
|
|
|
Post by lifelong on Feb 19, 2020 14:07:53 GMT
Potterlog, good point but they are talking about changing the law for VAR anyway. Changing the law is one thing but it's not possible have two different versions of it for different scenarios. Anyway, if you look at my first post above, that's exactly why they won't approve this change - they'd be making a major, universal change to a law based on something that only applies to a tiny percentage of games. In the end you're probably right, no-decision is the norm. Was just hi-liting that the definitive technology is existing. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 19, 2020 14:15:15 GMT
BTW Wengers idea does not solve the problem of the line, if anything it complicates it Aren't decisions on the line a bit easier because the line is straight and doesn't move? In a sense it is Wenger's suggestion that is used on the line...as soon as the whole ball crosses supposedly there's a glimmer of light. |
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Feb 19, 2020 14:25:52 GMT
BTW Wengers idea does not solve the problem of the line, if anything it complicates it Aren't decisions on the line a bit easier because the line is straight and doesn't move? In a sense it is Wenger's suggestion that is used on the line...as soon as the whole ball crosses supposedly there's a glimmer of light. Don't get what you mean by "the line doesn't move" jr (in the context of an offside). It wouldn't make the marginal decisions any less marginal, I don't think that's the point of it. The point is to avoid penalising attackers for stray toenails or armpits when they have, to all intents and purposes, remained level with the last defender. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Feb 19, 2020 14:45:03 GMT
Aren't decisions on the line a bit easier because the line is straight and doesn't move? In a sense it is Wenger's suggestion that is used on the line...as soon as the whole ball crosses supposedly there's a glimmer of light. Don't get what you mean by "the line doesn't move" jr (in the context of an offside). It wouldn't make the marginal decisions any less marginal, I don't think that's the point of it. The point is to avoid penalising attackers for stray toenails or armpits when they have, to all intents and purposes, remained level with the last defender. I think I've responded to the wrong post....I meant in reference to goal line decisions....the line being straight and still |
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Feb 19, 2020 16:02:10 GMT
The only way to stop the controversy is to have no offsides. And rush keeper |
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Feb 19, 2020 20:15:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2020 1:01:57 GMT
The only way to stop the controversy is to have no offsides. That was tried in a lower league somewhere in the 90s think it was. Turned into a shambles as you basically had player stood in front of keepers all game although they tried a slightly different version in Germany that worked a lot better. The NASL used to have a 35 yard line, I liked that to be fair, resulted in some great counter attacking play |
|
|
|
Post by lordherefordsknob on Feb 20, 2020 6:47:07 GMT
Any rule changes coming from a man that wanted to ban tackling and throw ins should be taken with a pinch of salt.
|
|
