Good news on subs and possibly on VAR?

[Sothall_Blade]

Sheffield United FC

The place to get all your Sheffield United news on the first team, academy and Sheffield United Women. Download the app via the App Store and Google Play Store

www.sufc.co.uk

 

[RammyBlade]

Good news - the 5 subs and 9 on the bench gave the big clubs a massive advantage . No surprise Chelsea wanted it with 73 players in their club !

 

[Tarqs]

Yep, the graphic that was posted on here the other day shows how small our squad is, even when compared to the likes of Burnley and Norwich.

We had 30 players registered I believe, the next lowest was in the 40s.

 

[Tynemouth Blade]

Something the Pigs won't have to worry about again next season

 

[Bladesman]

 

[JohnDenver]

Good news on VAR? Has Stockley Park burned down?

 

[PokerBlade]

If the news is anything other than that they're scrapping VAR I'm not impressed.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Be interesting to see how close it was and who voted for and against it. Chelsea were apparently trying to whip up support among the smaller clubs.

 

[Booker4]

So no change to the offside law then? Its not VAR that's the main problem its the law that allows VAR to then disallow a goal because one players toe is slightly in front of the opposition players toe.

 

[Tarqs]

5 Substitutes have been voted against.

7 on bench and 3 subs as per pre-covid regulations.

 

[PokerBlade]

So no change to the offside law then? Its not VAR that's the main problem its the law that allows VAR to then disallow a goal because one players toe is slightly in front of the opposition players toe.

That's always been the law. The problem is VAR isn't accurate enough to actually determine that.

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

Be interesting to see how close it was and who voted for and against it. Chelsea were apparently trying to whip up support among the smaller clubs.

From club website

" Shareholders unanimously approved the implementation of VAR, in line with the full FIFA VAR protocol. "

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

So no change to the offside law then? Its not VAR that's the main problem its the law that allows VAR to then disallow a goal because one players toe is slightly in front of the opposition players toe.

That's always been the law. The problem is VAR isn't accurate enough to actually determine that.

That's the letter of the law but it was also introduces to stopped teams "gaining unfair advantage" which is the spirit of the law.

I know which I prefer.

In the case of Lunny's big toe, if you look at the video again, I reckon he was actually checking back to try NOT to be offside.

 

[SwissBlade]

Good news on VAR? Has Stockley Park burned down?

I found the address for it...

Stockley Park,
The Port,
Beirut
Lebanon

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

That's the letter of the law but it was also introduces to stopped teams "gaining unfair advantage" which is the spirit of the law.

I know which I prefer.

In the case of Lunny's big toe, if you look at the video again, I reckon he was actually checking back to try NOT to be offside.

They just need to confirm the rules, and then apply them equally across the board.

Some of the rules I think are bollocks, but I was going mad at Hendo for stopping when he saw the flag against Newcastle because I knew that rule and he should have attempted a save. What was much worse than that, was the ref then stopping play as soon as he saw a flag when we were attacking.

While I don't buy into the notion that ref's favour the big clubs consciously, there were several times last season where we were punished and then very quickly examples of very similar things being let go in favour of the big boys. Whatever the do, just apply it consistently and independently and be able to explain the decision without it clearly being total horseshit.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

So no change to the offside law then? Its not VAR that's the main problem its the law that allows VAR to then disallow a goal because one players toe is slightly in front of the
opposition players toe.

True. I must admit I wasn’t entirely sure what the FIFA protocol was. Just working on the basis that it couldn’t be much worse than the way VAR was applied last season.

Still, would you want Collina or David Elleray in charge is what it appears to boil down to.

Fifa takes control of VAR to end Premier League's variation

Former referee Pierluigi Collina calls for a uniform use across all nations in order to avoid any confusion at international tournaments

www.independent.co.uk

FIFA takes full control of VAR in letter to member associations

FIFA has taken full operational control of Video Assistant Referees [VARs], world footballs governing body has informed all associations.

www.skysports.com

 

[Guesty]

Great news on the subs, I really thought it would go the other way.

It's not even just that we'd probably be disadvantaged, it's more that 5 subs each makes a match feel very disjointed and puts me in mind of England friendlies, especially when Eriksson was in charge.

 

[Addison]

FIFA have rightly taken over EPL VAR from Riley as his version was designed to avoid scrutiny of officials on the pitch transferring it to Stockley Park. The referee will now be the final arbiter and not Stockley Park and will use the pitch side monitor when called upon.

FIFA are also employing Wenger to look at the offside rule and come up with a better version than the current slide rule mentality. Any action that reduces Rileys influence has to be welcomed. That won't stop him trying to confuse the issue by still trying to limit the number of occasions the pitch side monitor is used so expect confusion to reign at the start of the season until he gets kicked into touch.

As far as the vote against 5 subs went it is reported as being 11-9 against so three non six top clubs voted with them. Answers on a postcard as to who they were. I'll go with Leicester and Wolves because of the extra fixtures in Europe and possibly Everton who've always considered themselves to be top six.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Leeds are a contender for the same reason as Everton

 

[hull-Blade]

Is the mid half drinks break still remaining ? It often interrupts the flow of the game in my opinion.

 

[PokerBlade]

That's the letter of the law but it was also introduces to stopped teams "gaining unfair advantage" which is the spirit of the law.

I know which I prefer.

In the case of Lunny's big toe, if you look at the video again, I reckon he was actually checking back to try NOT to be offside.

Sure, but if there were technology which could determine the position of players to that degree of accuracy such that there was no dispute over to where his big toe was at least we could all sit back and say we had an objective decision. Then we could have a discussion over whether that law was fit for purpose. Personally I'd be okay with the idea of settling the matter objectively, with the rules as written, instead of trying to work more subjectivity into footballing decisions. The problem though is that we don't have that technology. And what we have had is the footballing bodies try to pass it off as though we do.

If we hadn't had VAR, and a linesman had rightly or wrongly flagged Lundstram offside then the whole thing would've been forgotten. But instead VAR stepped in and added a huge break in the game without any improvement to the decision making.

 

[blade too long]

Is the mid half drinks break still remaining ? It often interrupts the flow of the game in my opinion.

no was a summer hot waether amendment
they are allowing a hug a hot water bottle break in january

 

[Bladesman]

5 Substitutes have been voted against.

7 on bench and 3 subs as per pre-covid regulations.

Big clubs will be a bit salty that they can't replace half their first 11 during a match.

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

Sure, but if there were technology which could determine the position of players to that degree of accuracy such that there was no dispute over to where his big toe was at least we could all sit back and say we had an objective decision. Then we could have a discussion over whether that law was fit for purpose. Personally I'd be okay with the idea of settling the matter objectively, with the rules as written, instead of trying to work more subjectivity into footballing decisions. The problem though is that we don't have that technology. And what we have had is the footballing bodies try to pass it off as though we do.

If we hadn't had VAR, and a linesman had rightly or wrongly flagged Lundstram offside then the whole thing would've been forgotten. But instead VAR stepped in and added a huge break in the game without any improvement to the decision making.

Hopefully that's where allowing the ref to look at the pitchside monitor will help.

Any decent ref will, presumably, have the authority to decide that a player wasn't seeking to gain unfair advantages and was, for example, checking back in an attempt not to. Otherwise, what's the point?

How can he come to a different decision from Stockley Park when they're looking at the same footage and the rules must be obeyed?

 

[Guesty]

FIFA have rightly taken over EPL VAR from Riley as his version was designed to avoid scrutiny of officials on the pitch transferring it to Stockley Park. The referee will now be the final arbiter and not Stockley Park and will use the pitch side monitor when called upon.

FIFA are also employing Wenger to look at the offside rule and come up with a better version than the current slide rule mentality. Any action that reduces Rileys influence has to be welcomed. That won't stop him trying to confuse the issue by still trying to limit the number of occasions the pitch side monitor is used so expect confusion to reign at the start of the season until he gets kicked into touch.

As far as the vote against 5 subs went it is reported as being 11-9 against so three non six top clubs voted with them. Answers on a postcard as to who they were. I'll go with Leicester and Wolves because of the extra fixtures in Europe and possibly Everton who've always considered themselves to be top six.

Is that so? The Guardian has it that clubs votee 'overwhelmingly against it'.

They have been wrong before, however.

 

[Magic hat FC]

Is that so? The Guardian has it that clubs votee 'overwhelmingly against it'.

They have been wrong before, however.

I believe FIFA have basically forced the FIFA VAR rules through so the English based player are playing the same rules when the Euros come around I.e. the defensive accidental handball being an automatic penalty.

 

[Guesty]

I believe FIFA have basically forced the FIFA VAR rules through so the English based player are playing the same rules when the Euros come around I.e. the defensive accidental handball being an automatic penalty.

Yes, sounds like that has been foisted upon us, joy of joys.

 

[PokerBlade]

Hopefully that's where allowing the ref to look at the pitchside monitor will help.

Any decent ref will, presumably, have the authority to decide that a player wasn't seeking to gain unfair advantages and was, for example, checking back in an attempt not to. Otherwise, what's the point?

How can he come to a different decision from Stockley Park when they're looking at the same footage and the rules must be obeyed?

I sincerely doubt that adding layers of subjectivity like "trying to gain an unfair avantage" would achieve anything other than make the rule even more convoluted and individual instances more open to debate.

 

[Dullblade]

For me offside needs changing to daylight between attacker or defender or, get better technology if you are being pedantic. Additionally, it should apply to foot position only. The arguement that it should be any part of the body you can score with is ludicrous, yeah you can score with your head but you don't get into that position by hopping upside down on it do you?

The handball rule, if true about it being an automatic pen if it's smashed against the defenders arm, will be even worse than it is this year! I didn't think that was possible!

 

[Magic hat FC]

For me offside needs changing to daylight between attacker or defender or, get better technology if you are being pedantic. Additionally, it should apply to foot position only. The arguement that it should be any part of the body you can score with is ludicrous, yeah you can score with your head but you don't get into that position by hopping upside down on it do you?

The handball rule, if true about it being an automatic pen if it's smashed against the defenders arm, will be even worse than it is this year! I didn't think that was possible!

I believe its to balance out the attacking handball negating a goal, for a change its one rule for both and no grey area around it.