GER DEN
- Thread starter JamesL
- Start date
Come on then, thoughts on the offside and then the Germany PK?
Both incredibly harsh for me.
Both incredibly harsh for me.
Offside is factual, get used to these very tight offsides when they eventually come into the PL next season eventually.
The handball may look harsh but I do think it's a handball as the defender gets an advantage by the ball hitting his hand but the same VAR did not think an outstretched arm in the Everton Forest game was a penalty and it's all because of the interpretation of handball in different competitions(UEFA is much stricter than the PL).
Not sure we can describe the offside as harsh. He was offside 
The handball is a very unfortunate one, but don’t think you could say it was wrong. Especially with the European interpretation of handball.
What did really peak my interest was the havertz 2 on 1 break where the same guy appeared to trip Sane off the ball, nothing given.
I’ve only seen this incident once, so I may have it totally wrong, but I wonder if this is the thought process.
Had it been given as a foul for the trip, it’s a free kick outside the box, so Havertz running it at the keeper is a clear advantage over the free kick outside the box.
The only reason not to play advantage would be if you’re going to be issuing a red card for the foul, which as much as it sort of denies a very easy square ball, we can’t call it DOGSO because the player didn’t even have the ball.
At best you could describe it as SPA, but then because the advantage was played, no card is given.
It just feels wrong that nothing is awarded in that situation, but then I don’t think there is necessarily any justification to award anything.
Either that or Oliver just didn’t think it was a foul.
Thoughts?
The handball is a very unfortunate one, but don’t think you could say it was wrong. Especially with the European interpretation of handball.
What did really peak my interest was the havertz 2 on 1 break where the same guy appeared to trip Sane off the ball, nothing given.
I’ve only seen this incident once, so I may have it totally wrong, but I wonder if this is the thought process.
Had it been given as a foul for the trip, it’s a free kick outside the box, so Havertz running it at the keeper is a clear advantage over the free kick outside the box.
The only reason not to play advantage would be if you’re going to be issuing a red card for the foul, which as much as it sort of denies a very easy square ball, we can’t call it DOGSO because the player didn’t even have the ball.
At best you could describe it as SPA, but then because the advantage was played, no card is given.
It just feels wrong that nothing is awarded in that situation, but then I don’t think there is necessarily any justification to award anything.
Either that or Oliver just didn’t think it was a foul.
Thoughts?
Not sure the size of the Rudiger’s boot matters, it was his heel that was the back point…
In all seriousness, I lose my mind when people bemoan marginal offside calls given by VAR.
There is no subjectivity. It is factual that he was offside, no law change you can make will stop the fact that occasionally people will be offside by millimetres.
No one has yet come up with a better solution. For offside they have to draw the line somewhere, it is now factual with the semi-automated technology. For those that are moaning I'd be really interested what they think is a better solution.
For the handball, the snickometer thing is a bit irrelevant as it clearly hit his arm from the naked eye. I don't like the law at all, but under the current law it is a clear handball.
I think it's counterintuitive to not have a margin of error built in to the tech. No one wants 'toe nail' offsides.
Now with the technology let the millimeters be for daylight between players. It should be the same rule for offside as it is for a goal, all of the player is offside. I feel that is more in the spirit of the game than a toenail being offside.
I did chuckle to myself, thinking this is karma after Beckham was sent off by the Danish ref against Argentina in 1998.
If the ball hits his palm and dropped straight down to the ground there isn't a single complaint right? These moments where the ball glances off the finger feel harsh but in the end the laws don't account for things like that.
That's exactly what the game wanted though. It shocks me that people can't remember the media drawing their own lines for very tight offsides, and managers coming out and bemoaning offsides that went against them by millimetres.
They've got what they wanted and now don't like it. Tough luck.
But if there isn’t a need for a margin for error because the technology is accurate enough, then why would you have a margin for error.
If you had a margin for error of say 10mm, then people would bemoan 11mm offsides saying it’s only 1mm away from being allowed to stand. Im sorry but it’s just a nonsense argument in my opinion.
The only thing that the daylight rule would change is making it 10 time harder to judge on field. It would also mean teams play much deeper defensively and ruin games.
Finally, as you’ve pointed out, it wouldn’t stop someone being offside by 1mm, it would just move where that decision was made.
Don't care tbh. It's sh*t to watch as a fan and sh*t to try and justify as a ref.
Nah, we can do better. No one wanted THIS