World Cup NGA FRA (GK off line)

[one]

That is a good alternative but if history is anything to go by I have my doubts. Can anyone remember PL announcing they are going to clamp down on dissent and players surrounding the referee? How long did that last?

 

[socal lurker]

Yes, saying it worthless unless they mean it and stick with it.

Any league that really wants to get rid of dissent can. But it takes moving through pain, and there has been no willingness to do so.

 

[Peter Grove]

"No VAR for keeper encroachment at penalties in Premier League"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48703852

England, home of football and common sense!

I'm not sure how much credence to put into that report. There are no quotations from any named source and in fact no quotations from anyone at all. Normally if I see a report with no sources and no quotes I tend to be sceptical of it.

Edit: Just read a Telegraph article would appear to confirm that this had not been made as an official announcement:

David Elleray, the IFAB technical director, indicated to Telegraph Sport that the Premier League's failure to adopt automatic VAR on the position of goalkeepers had come as a surprise.

"We are not aware of anything official from the Premier League on this so cannot comment," he said.

 

[Peter Grove]

I made an observation over in another thread about how this should be a relatively simple adjustment for goalkeepers to make, especially when it's not particularly helpful for them to come forward off the line anyway. It seems Hope Solo (undoubtedly one of the best goalkeepers the women's game has seen) agrees with me. Extracts from a post on her Twitter feed:

I never believed on stepping off my line, it's not advantageous, a couple of inches you're really not gaining an advantage.
[...]
I'd be telling them to stay on your line, move latterly - it gets you to the ball quicker anyway. I would teach them technique and how to get across your line very quickly.

 

[socal lurker]

Yeah, Hope never came off. Let's do some video review on that. And she's never been known to shoot off her mouth, either.

Of course, if this is to be enforced tightly we need to teach GKs to work on techniques that don't come forward. And of course just coming off a couple of inches isn't an advantage. But that's not really the issue right now--the issue is how fast GKs can adapt to a completely new standard. Skills are practices through many, many repetitions. I see two big issues from a practical perspective. First, telling GKs before the competition (how long?) that it was going to be enforced tightly for the first doesn't give a lot of time to practice new techniques. Muscle memory is a very powerful thing, Second, the timing is incredibly difficult--the GK wants to be moving as soon as possible and is judging when an opponent is going to kick it--an opponent actively trying to disrupt the GKs timing. That's simply hard--especially when it is going to be sanctioned using stop frame technology.

I don't have a huge problem with the change--but I do have a problem with pretending this is just a minor adjustment for GKs. It's a major change that goes against years and years of training. (And I do have a problem with cautions when the standard is this tight--calling it USB when we only called blatant violations was at least rational, but calling it USB when a GK mistimes by a tenth of a second is simply absurd.)

 

[Peter Grove]

Yeah, Hope never came off. Let's do some video review on that. And she's never been known to shoot off her mouth, either.

Well yes, I thought that too, she wasn't exactly telling the truth there. But her other point about how coming forward off the line isn't particularly good technique was well taken, and one that I had already made.

First, telling GKs before the competition (how long?) that it was going to be enforced tightly for the first doesn't give a lot of time to practice new techniques.

They were told in March and I don't know if you noticed but all the Women's International friendlies played from that date (at least all the ones I saw, which was a lot) were played using the new laws.

I also disagree that it would be too difficult for keepers you adjust to this. I never taught my keepers to come forward off the line at penalties and even those who had been doing it didn't seem to have any problem adjusting.

 

[Peter Grove]

I do have a problem with cautions when the standard is this tight--calling it USB when we only called blatant violations was at least rational, but calling it USB when a GK mistimes by a tenth of a second is simply absurd.

This I agree with and I think it's part of the reason why the IFAB has announced a dispensation on this when it comes to KFPM - and why I suspect they might do away with the caution altogether, in the long run.

 

[AlexF]

Well yes, I thought that too, she wasn't exactly telling the truth there. But her other point about how coming forward off the line isn't particularly good technique was well taken, and one that I had already made.

Actually, it's also a poor point.

Pythagorean math tells us that coming off the line and angling your dive slightly foward shortens the distance needed to cover to get to the ball.

The exact angle is, of course, dependent on the speed of the shot, but watch the best GKs, they all jump at an angle AWAY from the goal line.

 

[socal lurker]

I also disagree that it would be too difficult for keepers you adjust to this. I never taught my keepers to come forward off the line at penalties and even those who had been doing it didn't seem to have any problem adjusting.

We have pretty darn good empirical evidence that it is hard for GKs to adjust in both the WWC an U20 WC given the number of GK’s cautioned that it is very hard to adjust if it is going to be measured at this extreme level of sensitivity. They aren’t coming off the way some/many were before, they are shuffling marginally forward while trying to go sideways.

Actually, it's also a poor point.

Pythagorean math tells us that coming off the line and angling your dive slightly foward shortens the distance needed to cover to get to the ball.

The exact angle is, of course, dependent on the speed of the shot, but watch the best GKs, they all jump at an angle AWAY from the goal line.

There has always been a debate among GKs on whether the advantage of the marginal angle cutting outweighs the marginal reduction in reaction time in the context of a PK. But as I see it cutting the angle isn’t actually the issue here. The GKs getting called aren’t getting called from coming out to cut angles, they are getting called for being barely forward.

I don’t have a problem at all with deciding this is what the rule really should be. As One points out, PKs are supposed to be a harsh penalty—that’s the point. I can even live with VAR being used, though I think it is stipules and utterly antithetical to the supposed reason VARs we’re adopted. But I remain totally convinced that it is insane to have this precise sanctioning of trifling infraction sanctioned with cautions and implemented this way in a World Cup. Utterly insane.

People talking about the WWC are talking more about GKs and PKs than about the play. That’s a real disservice to the Game, and particularly to the development of the women’s game at the highest levels. Delaying the game so that VARs can nitpick on centimeters about where a GKs foot is, to me, is the opposite of everything the beautiful game is supposed to be.

 

[Justylove]

If an attacker has a foot partially in front of the second last defender at the time the ball is played to them, should that be called offside, or should it be ignored because it's trifling?

If a penalty taker places the ball a little way in front of the penalty mark, should the ball be moved back, or ignored because it's trifling?

At what point do you move from something that is absolute (and can be measured) to something that is considered trifling and ignored? As soon as you move to the latter, it becomes open to interpretation and therefore is likely to drive inconsistencies in application.