McGoldrick's goal - observations

[Grey Blade]

The offside rule is the bigger problem than VAR at the moment, albeit the two problems are linked.

The offside rule have become so convoluted and open to interpretation that even referees can’t seem to agree on the correct application of the rule.

The example showing McGoldrick being offside is a good example. He’s technically a toe offside, but that shouldn’t be enough to call him offside. He’s not offside because of a clever trap played by the opposition team. He’s bang in line with the defender.

We need to go back to the daylight rule IMO. It’s the best way to clear it up.

I also agree that the day light rule should be brought back.

Another anomaly is the increasing number of times that an attacker stands two yards off side when a free kick is being taken. The ball comes across nowhere near the off side player and another attacker comes from an onside position plays the ball and the original off side player is then deemed onside because the play has moved past him. It's all very confusing and I'm still unclear as to whether the original off side player should be called off side if he went onto score.

If he is off side in the second phase, is his original positioning just a ploy to distract the linesman?

 

[Cerberus Blade]

I don't see where McGoldrick is offside TBH
He has a Brentford player stood next to him when the header is won
Maybe his right calf is offside, but the rest of his body looks onside

That’s offside then isn’t it - by the current rules of the game? It disadvantages players with big calf’s. Knobbly knees, big noses and other protruding appendages.

 

[BushBlade]

That’s offside then isn’t it - by the current rules of the game? It disadvantages players with big calf’s. Knobbly knees, big noses and other protruding appendages.

No one cares about Phil Thompson though

 

[Ridgeway Blade]

The offide rule is very difficult as many players start off in offside postions and then move back out, probably to make defenders and goalies think about their own positioning. My problem with VAR is that matches are going to take 15 to 20 minutes longer if it is used to look at all the controversial issues. The intention, as I understand it, is to use it correct an obvious error or oversight by the ref or his assistant. Anything that can take as along as some of the referrals have been taking cannot be regarded as obvious.
If matches do take longer how early are people going to leave before the final whistle to avoid traffic etec as added on time will get even longer? Night matches will finish even later than they do now.
And what are pundits going to do? Hope they are going to get training on the rules. Even ex pros have struggled with handball etc. God knows what they will make as VAR.

 

[SittingontheBall]

The intention, as I understand it, is to use it correct an obvious error or oversight by the ref or his assistant. Anything that can take as along as some of the referrals have been taking cannot be regarded as obvious.

This!

VAR referrals should only be done at full speed, no stills (ref and lino don’t have these) and a single pass of the video. Only obvious cock ups would be picked up then. It would/should also be quick.

 

[The Vicar]

Lets just stay in the Championship then and evade this nasty new incursion a bit longer!

MTLBWY

UTB

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

The offide rule is very difficult as many players start off in offside postions and then move back out, probably to make defenders and goalies think about their own positioning. My problem with VAR is that matches are going to take 15 to 20 minutes longer if it is used to look at all the controversial issues. The intention, as I understand it, is to use it correct an obvious error or oversight by the ref or his assistant. Anything that can take as along as some of the referrals have been taking cannot be regarded as obvious.
If matches do take longer how early are people going to leave before the final whistle to avoid traffic etec as added on time will get even longer? Night matches will finish even later than they do now.
And what are pundits going to do? Hope they are going to get training on the rules. Even ex pros have struggled with handball etc. God knows what they will make as VAR.

No doubt they'll put TV screens up in the bars, and people will spend more time there watching VAR. Good for sales, though...

 

[Cerberus Blade]

I will lament the day when fans have nothing to talk about after a game because everything is proven as absolute fact due to VAR.

Do any of you seriously want a situation where all decisions are ratified by video evidence?

Do you? I mean, really do you? Do you know what you are wishing for?

Do you want to take any slight doubt out of the game? Do you want it to be as sterile and clinical as a game of chess?

We could all stay home and watch it on our computers maybe?

Let’s turn 11 v 11 men into a video game eh? Be great that won’t it?

 

[PokerBlade]

We've reached a bizarre point in football where we have delays in games for tough decisions that people still argue about even after a VAR decision (see Man U's recent penalty), but when a player stamps another's face and lands him in hospital we won't offer retroactive punishment because the referee saw the incident differently at the time.

We'd be better off stamping out all the things that don't need any new technology. Nobody likes timewasting, feigning injury, or dissent, but football tolerates it a hundred times in every game while worrying about the really close decisions that aren't even clear after twenty replays.

 

[Smirth]

I will lament the day when fans have nothing to talk about after a game because everything is proven as absolute fact due to VAR.

Do any of you seriously want a situation where all decisions are ratified by video evidence?

Do you? I mean, really do you? Do you know what you are wishing for?

Do you want to take any slight doubt out of the game? Do you want it to be as sterile and clinical as a game of chess?

We could all stay home and watch it on our computers maybe?

Let’s turn 11 v 11 men into a video game eh? Be great that won’t it?

The way VAR is being applied at the moment it’s making more talking points post game not less! But I appreciate and agree with the sentiment.

 

[Jan Age]

Technology is needed to determine if the ball crosses the line.

I think VAR is a good thing if managed correctly.

I would suggest the following:

1. Each team has 2 appeals per game to ask the ref to refer to VAR - this can be for any incident they deem worthy but the request must come from the captain. E.g. A player goes over in the box and the ref determines its a good challenge. The player disagrees informs his capatain who challenges the decision. Ref to VAR no penalty 1 challenge left. Everything else down to ref and linesman decision.

 

[Eddiecolquhounsleg]

As we all know a person is offside at the moment the ball is passed (headed) forward. But with VAR how is that "moment" determined? With frame by frame scrutiny of the event, at what point is the ball actually moving forward? If you slow down a pass forward a player strikes the ball, it compresses slightly, then moves away from the player's foot. In those milliseconds the player who is about to receive the ball can move from being an inch onside to an inch offside. Is that what we want? If so we might be watching a night match until midnight while VAR sorts out the minutiae of the event, and in the process taking away all the immediacy of the game.
Unless an obvious mistake has been made then let the original onfield decision stand.

 

[BushBlade]

As we all know a person is offside at the moment the ball is passed (headed) forward. But with VAR how is that "moment" determined? With frame by frame scrutiny of the event, at what point is the ball actually moving forward? If you slow down a pass forward a player strikes the ball, it compresses slightly, then moves away from the player's foot. In those milliseconds the player who is about to receive the ball can move from being an inch onside to an inch offside. Is that what we want? If so we might be watching a night match until midnight while VAR sorts out the minutiae of the event, and in the process taking away all the immediacy of the game.
Unless an obvious mistake has been made then let the original onfield decision stand.

Agree. They should have one minute to review it and if they’re still undecided, it’s a goal.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

VAR is a good thing, I want it installing at our house. I asked the Mrs for cheese sarnis for today's pack up but I got potted dog. She swears I asked for potted dog, I know I didn't.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

This!

VAR referrals should only be done at full speed, no stills (ref and lino don’t have these) and a single pass of the video. Only obvious cock ups would be picked up then. It would/should also be quick.

How about putting it on an even faster speed, a bit like at the end of the Benny Hill show, and throw in a few semi-naked girls too? That would make it even quicker and a lot more entertaining.

 

[vorpal blade]

The TV pundits have demanded that the referees get defenestrated and that is effectively what will happen.

I've just quoted this for your use of the word 'defenestrated' - I've only seen this occur once at a match - I think it was Dukla Prague at home but I can't remember who they played. It can't technically happen on the pitch - only in some stadia depending where the TV station in question interviews the ref.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Those of you over a certain age will know that football, like many other things in life, has gone through a dumbing-down period over recent decades. Things we used to do - and enjoy doing - have been outlawed - just about - for our own protection. I started to realise this when we had kids in primary school and got letters home saying "no conkers" and "no sliding on the ice" and no snowballing" and even "no climbing up the trees" and I thought..."the world is going slightly mad!".

The same is certainly true of football. What used to be considered a hard but fair tackle is now a red card. What used to be considered a fair old challenge on the goalkeeper is now a free kick. You're even likely to get a yellow card for shoulder-barging someone these days, even though it's still permissible within the rule book. We seem to be intent on turning football into a non-contact sport. But more than that..we now want to make it "perfect" in so much as taking all the controversy out of it. Let's video it and stop the video and go back and look at it to make sure we get every decision right.

And before any of you VAR supporters come back and say..."it's not EVERY decision - it's only the important ones" - let me tell you this - it WILL spread to almost EVERY decision eventually. That's how it goes. It may start out as something to only rule whether a goal is a goal, or whatever, but it will spread, to offsides, handballs, even throw-ins. Because events in a game are related. If that team hadn't wrongly been awarded a throw-in then it wouldn't have led to them getting a free kick, from which one of their players appeared to be offside before slightly handling the ball in the area and knocking it into the goal. Re-wind back to the throw-in maybe and start play again from there? Is that what we want?

Most of all though, those of you who like VAR and want even more VAR - just take a look at the YouTube clip below. This is what football used to be like for some of us when we were younger. It's barely recognisable from today's game, for reasons both good and bad perhaps. But, when you vote for VAR you are voting to never have incidents like this. Maybe it's a matter of opinion, but I think football was a damn sight more interesting when it was controversial like this. In this case, it was only after the game when all the fans had gone home, that Jeff Astle realised he had a big white arrow on his back.