A&H

Norwich Tottenham

Yes, players can gain an advantage from having their upper body in an offside position.

But, only if it's a part of the body that can legally play the ball. A goal shouldn't be ruled out if a players arm is offside for example.
Very debatable that Pukki, Zaha or Burn gained any advantage yesterday IMO.
 
The Referee Store
I'm not sure what the alternatives are though. Offside is a black and white decision, and if the VAR cameras showed that a player was 5mm offside and the goal was given the defending the would then be complaining. At the moment it is at least consistent even if a bit infuriating.

Im not so sure know, it should be but we are seeing that many border line decisions when myself and im sure lots of others cant say if its offside or not.

My take is if you need to look at more than two replays and draw lines then just let it be onside.
 
Very debatable that Pukki, Zaha or Burn gained any advantage yesterday IMO.

So, you accept that they were offside, and from being in an offside position they gained an advantage which led to them scoring, which were then correctly ruled out (as they were offside)?
 
Very debatable that Pukki, Zaha or Burn gained any advantage yesterday IMO.
You can’t debate whether they gained an advantage because the fact is, they scored, so you have to assume that they did. How many times has a defender slid in to make a block and been millimetres away from the ball? They can make a difference.

And for people to suggest that it should be from feet only clearly have never seen a player make a diving header, and the complaints would still continue regarding how tight a decision is, frame rates blah blah. The point is now, we have consistency. Managers, players, fans have all moaned about not having that for years and now that has well and truly smacked them in the face
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nij
You can’t debate whether they gained an advantage because the fact is, they scored, so you have to assume that they did. How many times has a defender slid in to make a block and been millimetres away from the ball? They can make a difference.

And for people to suggest that it should be from feet only clearly have never seen a player make a diving header, and the complaints would still continue regarding how tight a decision is, frame rates blah blah. The point is now, we have consistency. Managers, players, fans have all moaned about not having that for years and now that has well and truly smacked them in the face
It's been reasonably clear to an impartial observer for a long time that the average fan, wants the decisions to go in their team's favour when it matters, accuracy in fact and correctness in law be damned, because human perceptions are naturally biased to inflate benefits and deficits affecting their own in-groups, and deflate those affecting out-groups or Others.

Pundits are no better, often misremembering or making up laws, and reacting just as emotionally as fans do.

People don't typically know enough about the laws or VAR to even say whether a decision is correct, and of those that do, a majority of the disagreements I've seen over specific decisions is about an aspect that is ITOOTR.

Are there some VAR decisions that still go wrong? Yeah. Are they now fixing some of those that previously would have been a clear injustice to sport? Definitely. Could VAR improve in the next ten years if given a fair shot like the equivalent systems in other major sports had? Absolutely. Is it going to crash spectacularly when people sabotage, bitch and moan about how it's not perfect after a whole four years of experience? You bet!
 
So, you accept that they were offside, and from being in an offside position they gained an advantage which led to them scoring, which were then correctly ruled out (as they were offside)?
The law only quotes “gaining an advantage” in the context of playing a ball that is rebounded/ deliberately played. I never said that the awards were incorrect in the current law.

My earlier point was that it’s the law that needs changing. Are you telling me that if a player is 99% level but their armpit is leaning offside they have gained an advantage?

In addition, I’m not sure how the technology is accurate enough to decipher to a matter of millimeteres whether someone is onside or offside or not. Hence the VAR advocates’ argument for “no clear and obvious” metric needed for offside loses credibility here in my opinion.
 
It's been reasonably clear to an impartial observer for a long time that the average fan, wants the decisions to go in their team's favour when it matters, accuracy in fact and correctness in law be damned, because human perceptions are naturally biased to inflate benefits and deficits affecting their own in-groups, and deflate those affecting out-groups or Others.

Pundits are no better, often misremembering or making up laws, and reacting just as emotionally as fans do.

People don't typically know enough about the laws or VAR to even say whether a decision is correct, and of those that do, a majority of the disagreements I've seen over specific decisions is about an aspect that is ITOOTR.

Are there some VAR decisions that still go wrong? Yeah. Are they now fixing some of those that previously would have been a clear injustice to sport? Definitely. Could VAR improve in the next ten years if given a fair shot like the equivalent systems in other major sports had? Absolutely. Is it going to crash spectacularly when people sabotage, bitch and moan about how it's not perfect after a whole four years of experience? You bet!
Let’s not forget that managers are in high pressure positions and owners of clubs will happily sack and replace them in an instant these days, so managers will take any opportunity to blame anyone but themselves. Referees, AR’s, VAR .. it doesn’t matter as long as it’s not them. That’ll get played over and over on media outlets, MOTD etc and then the standard armchair fan will adopt the same opinions and continue to spout it into social media.

Both the Sheffield United and Liverpool offside calls were the big ones for me. Stills and VAR showed this to be offside. Minimal yes, but offside non the less. Pundits and fans alike jumped all over this saying it was too close to call, benefit to the attacker etc etc but had this been 2 seasons ago, Shearer and Linekar would have happily moaned about an AR not spotting that
 
You can’t debate whether they gained an advantage because the fact is, they scored, so you have to assume that they did. How many times has a defender slid in to make a block and been millimetres away from the ball? They can make a difference.

And for people to suggest that it should be from feet only clearly have never seen a player make a diving header, and the complaints would still continue regarding how tight a decision is, frame rates blah blah. The point is now, we have consistency. Managers, players, fans have all moaned about not having that for years and now that has well and truly smacked them in the face
You can absolutely debate whether any advantage was gained for all three (you’ll note again that I didn’t say any decision was incorrect in law).
 
Let’s not forget that managers are in high pressure positions and owners of clubs will happily sack and replace them in an instant these days, so managers will take any opportunity to blame anyone but themselves. Referees, AR’s, VAR .. it doesn’t matter as long as it’s not them. That’ll get played over and over on media outlets, MOTD etc and then the standard armchair fan will adopt the same opinions and continue to spout it into social media.

Both the Sheffield United and Liverpool offside calls were the big ones for me. Stills and VAR showed this to be offside. Minimal yes, but offside non the less. Pundits and fans alike jumped all over this saying it was too close to call, benefit to the attacker etc etc but had this been 2 seasons ago, Shearer and Linekar would have happily moaned about an AR not spotting that
People have a right to question the technology - when it comes down to a matter of millimetres there are many variables in the technology itself that can affect whether a player is deemed to be offside or onside.

Hence my previous points - the law needs changing.
 
You can absolutely debate whether any advantage was gained for all three (you’ll note again that I didn’t say any decision was incorrect in law).
OK, you can, but why? The player scored so the assumption is that they did gain an advantage. Nobody can categorically say what would happen had the player been millimetres in another direction but as referees, we aren’t there to guess/predict these sorts of things, we are there to react to what has happened.

Was the player offside? Yes
Was it by millimetres? Yes
Does that matter? No
 
This is what the club's wanted, 100% accuracy on every decision.

A human is never going to be able to tell whether someone is millimeters offside. VAR can, to an extent.

Don't like it? Hope that the club's put enough pressure on the FA to pressure IFAB to change the law, or the VAR protocol.
 
OK, you can, but why? The player scored so the assumption is that they did gain an advantage. Nobody can categorically say what would happen had the player been millimetres in another direction but as referees, we aren’t there to guess/predict these sorts of things, we are there to react to what has happened.

Was the player offside? Yes
Was it by millimetres? Yes
Does that matter? No
Have you seen any of the incidents yesterday?

If so, just look at the Norwich disallowed goal and look where Pukki’s feet are compared to the Tottenham defenders.

I do not really know how he can have gained any advantage.

I also think it’s overly simplistic to say that an advantage was gained because millimetres of his body were leaning offside.
 
This is what the club's wanted, 100% accuracy on every decision.

A human is never going to be able to tell whether someone is millimeters offside. VAR can, to an extent.

Don't like it? Hope that the club's put enough pressure on the FA to pressure IFAB to change the law, or the VAR protocol.
Arguable that VAR can decipher millimetres.

VAR has not brought 100% accuracy - Riley said earlier in the season that it had incorrectly ruled the on field official on four occasions.

Let’s hope the protocol is changed, as I think the technology when used correctly could still be a positive but I don’t see how anyone who sees football as entertainment can be satisfied with the current situation.
 
Though people may not like the VAR decisions for offside calls, the point is that they are now consistent. We didn’t have consistency with AR’s making all the decisions. Genuinely, I’m still on the fence with VAR and I don’t think the technology/people using it are at fault. It’s the guidelines in place which are the issue but again, some people might not like the tight offside calls (reasons unknown to me because if they are correct then great! ) the decisions are consistent. One tight call against you would be identical to the one given for you. Or would fans rather an AR make a decision correct against you, then call your own striker offside when a yard onside and cost you a game?

Its obvious why people don't like tight offside calls.

1) The frame they use often isn't conclusive - as with 3 of the disallowed gaols yesterday

2) To be 100% accurate the still has to be taken at the exact moment ball is first touched by team mate making the pass - as can be seen in the images that isn't technically possible with 100% accuracy.

I'm with Danny Murphy (for a change on this) - forget the lines - go with 2 'normal' replays, if not sure - then call it 'level' and go with attacker - as is the case in 95% of matches around the world where humans decide!
 
Why on earth are we talking about gaining an advantage? The laws are clear that gaining an advantage is specific to the ball rebounding off an opponent or the goal frame to an attacker in an offside position, and that clearly didn't happen here. He touched the ball so interfered with play once they judged him to be in an offside position, gaining an advantage doesn't come into it.
 
Pretty sure I overheard a commentator yesterday (so take this with a Man City fan floating in the Dead Sea levels of salt) day that the graphic offside crosshairs line things they show to broadcasters / big screens are made thicker so people can see ‘em.
 
Why on earth are we talking about gaining an advantage? The laws are clear that gaining an advantage is specific to the ball rebounding off an opponent or the goal frame to an attacker in an offside position, and that clearly didn't happen here. He touched the ball so interfered with play once they judged him to be in an offside position, gaining an advantage doesn't come into it.
The discussion that was being had was a potential change to the offside law - you’ll see that I made the exact same point as your post above.

If the protocol is that VAR is going to check every goal with a microscope, then perhaps there does need to be a change in the law to prevent more and more goals being disallowed when the attacking player can’t reasonably be said to have gained any advantage.
 
Last edited:
OK, you can, but why? The player scored so the assumption is that they did gain an advantage. Nobody can categorically say what would happen had the player been millimetres in another direction but as referees, we aren’t there to guess/predict these sorts of things, we are there to react to what has happened.

Was the player offside? Yes
Was it by millimetres? Yes
Does that matter? No

Was the player offside - not sure, pictures are not conclusive
Was it by millimetres - see above
Does that matter - YES!!!
 
Pretty sure I overheard a commentator yesterday (so take this with a Man City fan floating in the Dead Sea levels of salt) day that the graphic offside crosshairs line things they show to broadcasters / big screens are made thicker so people can see ‘em.
I came into this thread to post exactly this point. The lines used by the actual VAR are pixel-wide and therefore are almost impossible to be "overlapping". The pictures sent to broadcasters then thicken these lines slightly to make them actually visible, but then can give the impression that two players are level when the VAR is looking at a picture that says they're not. Why they made this barmy decision I don't know (conspiracy?), but that does go some way to explaining how player who appear "level" actually aren't.
 
Back
Top