General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

citytillidie · 01-12-2020 09:50AM

Weepsie wrote: »

But he's being fouled before the ball is played so his being in an offside position is meaningless. He can't get back onside as ogbonna is manhandling him. It was just a bad decision all around

Still seems once you're offside it over rules everything else

rob316 · 01-12-2020 10:13AM

Wuff Wuff wrote: »

i was watchibg the Marine game against Havant & W in the FA Cup on the weekend and the goal was a scrappy one in the final minute of extra time, but what was great about it was the pure emotion from the players, the bench and the staff when the ball looped over the line, there was no pause to check for VAR that comes with a lot of PL goals, it was just a great moment for the club.

The big thing for me about football is I can get emotional over something that doesn't really effect my life, a means of escape. If VAR can sort out clear and obvious fair enough, but been a couple inches offside isnt clear and obvious. Its a quick game played on the shoulder of defenders, it just is sucking the enjoyment out of it, watching lines been drawing on the pitch and seeing where they intersect with each other. Last year I was willing to see it through and kept saying "they will iron out the problems next summer and it will be better". Its been talked about more and more now.

Quazzie · 01-12-2020 11:00AM

rob316 wrote: »

Its been talked about more and more now.

Only because people think their team should get an advantage by a video referee ignoring that a player is offside. If a player is offside, then he is offside. Doesn't matter if it's a mm or a metre. The VAR is using technology to his full advantage, and now we have fans saying they shouldn't. That's the whole point of VAR.

I think the biggest mistake VAR made was letting the audience see what they are doing. The audience at home, should be just like the fans in the stadium, looking at the screen for the result.

Potential Underachiever · 01-12-2020 11:06AM

Quazzie wrote: »

Only because people think their team should get an advantage by a video referee ignoring that a player is offside. If a player is offside, then he is offside. Doesn't matter if it's a mm or a metre. The VAR is using technology to his full advantage, and now we have fans saying they shouldn't. That's the whole point of VAR.

I think the biggest mistake VAR made was letting the audience see what they are doing. The audience at home, should be just like the fans in the stadium, looking at the screen for the result.

Awful idea imo, that would be painful, no clue what's happening or why, I think the opposite should happen, we should be able to hear what's being said between VAR and the refs, just like rugby, transparency would be way better than having it shrouded in mystery.

Bridge93 · 01-12-2020 11:09AM

Counting correct decisions as been VAR'd or whatever seems a bit disingenuous. The right decisions was reached, feeling hard done by because it was close is fine but that doesn't make it wrong.

I've always said VAR is only a small part of the problem its the application. The rules of football were not written with the ability of micro-analysis in mind. There is a disconnect between the laws like offside and our modern ability to see things the human eye would miss. VAR as a camera and video tool is just that, a tool to be used.
It is how it is interpreted and applied that needs to be looked at or a review of the rules. Same as the ability to see tiny handballs etc. The Dutch model a few have mentioned looks good for offsides anyway or maybe. Or perhaps something like what rugby do where the referee is shown the replays and if they still cant spot any reason to overturn then they dont. None of this minute line drawing nonsense. The eye is the judge. VAR at the minute is being torn apart for applying the rules as they are written. If you are offside, you are offside.

There also needs to be a margin of error as clearly it is impossible for it to be 100% reliable.

I cant get on board with not using some form of VAR. If the technology is available in this day and age, there is no excuse to not have it in some capacity. If it has to be limited to clear and obvious errors that is fine, get rules and policies in place around what that is like rugby do. But to just throw it out and allow the Henry's and Lampard's of this world happen again shouldn't be considered

rob316 · 01-12-2020 11:29AM

Quazzie wrote: »

Only because people think their team should get an advantage by a video referee ignoring that a player is offside. If a player is offside, then he is offside. Doesn't matter if it's a mm or a metre. The VAR is using technology to his full advantage, and now we have fans saying they shouldn't. That's the whole point of VAR.

I think the biggest mistake VAR made was letting the audience see what they are doing. The audience at home, should be just like the fans in the stadium, looking at the screen for the result.

"Clear and obvious" we were told. Been a toe or finger offside is not "clear and obvious". When it takes them 5 minutes to draw lines across the pitch and deliberate it, it is not "clear and obvious".

If it is that close, how confident are you that the freeze frame is at the right split second, showing the player is off side?

VAR was not introduced to rule on marginal calls. Here is a famous offside goal, this is what VAR was meant to eradicate, massive human error.

DM_7 · 01-12-2020 11:48AM

rob316 wrote: »

"Clear and obvious" we were told. Been a toe or finger offside is not "clear and obvious". When it takes them 5 minutes to draw lines across the pitch and deliberate it, it is not "clear and obvious".

If it is that close, how confident are you that the freeze frame is at the right split second, showing the player is off side?

VAR was not introduced to rule on marginal calls. Here is a famous offside goal, this is what VAR was meant to eradicate, massive human error.

The clear and obvious 'check' does not apply to offsides though. There is a decision for every goal to be checked for offside and do to so they use the software. The answer is on or offside in each case and is not subjective once the tech is used to make the decision.

Clear and obvious is for incidents like penalties or tackles where a more subjective decision is required.

DM_7 · 01-12-2020 11:56AM

Bridge93 wrote: »

Counting correct decisions as been VAR'd or whatever seems a bit disingenuous. The right decisions was reached, feeling hard done by because it was close is fine but that doesn't make it wrong.

I've always said VAR is only a small part of the problem its the application. The rules of football were not written with the ability of micro-analysis in mind. There is a disconnect between the laws like offside and our modern ability to see things the human eye would miss. VAR as a camera and video tool is just that, a tool to be used.
It is how it is interpreted and applied that needs to be looked at or a review of the rules. Same as the ability to see tiny handballs etc. The Dutch model a few have mentioned looks good for offsides anyway or maybe. Or perhaps something like what rugby do where the referee is shown the replays and if they still cant spot any reason to overturn then they dont. None of this minute line drawing nonsense. The eye is the judge. VAR at the minute is being torn apart for applying the rules as they are written. If you are offside, you are offside.

There also needs to be a margin of error as clearly it is impossible for it to be 100% reliable.

I cant get on board with not using some form of VAR. If the technology is available in this day and age, there is no excuse to not have it in some capacity. If it has to be limited to clear and obvious errors that is fine, get rules and policies in place around what that is like rugby do. But to just throw it out and allow the Henry's and Lampard's of this world happen again shouldn't be considered

I think the margin for error is accepted at the outset and what the lines show is what the decision will be. Both teams have a right to get the benefit of any margin for error. They can't check an offside decision and say, well the lines show the player to be onside by 5mm but the margin for error is 10mm so we will rule it out.

Other than that slight variance, fully agree with your post. I don't think the spirit of why an offside rule exists is to punish players who are effectively level with the opponent in the imaginary line but a small portion of the body is ahead of the line.

So a tweak to the rule would help rather than abandoning the technology.

8-10 · 01-12-2020 12:47PM

I'd still much prefer to abandon it completely.

Shanotheslayer · 01-12-2020 12:48PM

rob316 wrote: »

If it is that close, how confident are you that the freeze frame is at the right split second, showing the player is off side?

Why should the attacking player get the benefit of the doubt for the freeze frame and not the defender?

As I said before they've essentially just changed the Benefit of the doubt favouriting the attacker and with lines it benefits the defender.

I agree the lines are tedious but they're the laws if teams don't adapt to not playing off the shoulder that's their own fault

8-10 · 01-12-2020 12:57PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Why should the attacking player get the benefit of the doubt for the freeze frame and not the defender?

As I said before they've essentially just changed the Benefit of the doubt favouriting the attacker and with lines it benefits the defender.

Being 'level' should benefit the attacker. I have yet to see a VAR call result in a playing being level and therefore onside.

DVDM93 · 01-12-2020 01:44PM

Do the referees themselves know the rules? Genuine question. It's all well & good establishing rules but it's no good if the people applying them can't do just that.

Let's take David Coote for example.

He was dropped from VAR duty in the Liverpool V Leicester game after his less than satisfactory performance in the Merseyside Derby.

He was then appointed referee for the Man United V West Brom game. If he wasn't deemed up to standard to be on VAR duty for the Liverpool V Leicester game then how is he seen as being up to the standard required for the United game?

Anyway, roll on said match & David Coote is once again the centre of controversy for West Brom's penalty & was deservedly lambasted after the game by none other than Manchester United Football Club's legend & current BT Sports pundit, Rio Ferdinand.

That's not all.

Previously Coote was dropped from Premier Leagie duty for the Lo Celso red card incident in the the Chelsea V Spurs game.

He was also at the centre of another controversial decision when he chose not to overturn a Kevin De Bruyne handball in the Leicester game.

I'm sure there are more.

So again I ask, do the officials themselves actually know the rules?

KDB was quoted after a game saying he doesn't know the rules anymore, so maybe the same applies to the likes of David Coote also.

Do we have officials that just aren't very good at their jobs or are the rules just too much for them to keep up with & too difficult to apply?

NITRO95 · 01-12-2020 01:52PM

DVDM93 wrote: »

Jordan Pickford's assault on Virgil van Dijk.

Using the word assault to describe what was ultimately just a bad challenge in a football game is extremely sad and diminishes what it actually means to be assaulted. You really should chose your words more carefully

gimli2112 · 01-12-2020 01:56PM

in this day and age what constitutes an assault is simply putting your hand on someone, not that you should but I think what Pickford did to VVD can be characterised as an assault

certainly the end result was disastrous for the player

dfx- · 01-12-2020 01:58PM

DM_7 wrote: »

The clear and obvious 'check' does not apply to offsides though. There is a decision for every goal to be checked for offside and do to so they use the software. The answer is on or offside in each case and is not subjective once the tech is used to make the decision.

Clear and obvious is for incidents like penalties or tackles where a more subjective decision is required.

It does though. Offsides are given all game not based on the lines. Freekicks and corners are given or not given based on a human interpretation of offside, not the lines. Then one decision is refereed and determined based on an entirely different set of rules.

You can be offside by inches judged by the eye, not score a goal, but win and score from a resulting corner and the goal is given. Did they benefit from being offside?

VAR cannot bring consistency. It is designed not to.

Shanotheslayer · 01-12-2020 02:03PM

8-10 wrote: »

Being 'level' should benefit the attacker. I have yet to see a VAR call result in a playing being level and therefore onside.

Why should it benefit the attacker?

I'm not disagreeing just asking why. The lines show the players aren't level though.

Shanotheslayer · 01-12-2020 02:05PM

dfx- wrote: »

It does though. Offsides are given all game not based on the lines.

The refs don't flag for offside straight away now? They let play continue until the ball is out of play then they flag it and VAR reviews?

eigrod · 01-12-2020 02:05PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Why should it benefit the attacker?

I'm not disagreeing just asking why. The lines show the players aren't level though.

Because the attacker isn’t gaining an advantage. Offside was brought in to stop attackers ‘goal hanging’ effectively. Being level, neither attacker or defender has an advantage, so why not play on?

Quazzie · 01-12-2020 02:09PM

eigrod wrote: »

Because the attacker isn’t gaining an advantage. Offside was brought in to stop attackers ‘goal hanging’ effectively. Being level, neither attacker or defender has an advantage, so why not play on?

But they're not level, if the offside is given it is because the attacker has an advantage over the defender by being closer to the goal line.

The only difference is that VAR is used to determine that fact rather than a linesman. VAR is much more exact, and therefore fairer.

eigrod · 01-12-2020 02:10PM

Quazzie wrote: »

But they're not level, if the offside is given it is because the attacker has an advantage over the defender by being closer to the goal line.

The only difference is that VAR is used to determine that fact rather than a linesman. VAR is much more exact, and therefore fairer.

Who are not level? I was replying to a poster querying why the attacker should get an advantage when they are level.

Quazzie · 01-12-2020 02:12PM

eigrod wrote: »

Who are not level? I was replying to a poster querying why the attacker should get an advantage when they are level.

VAR proves every time that they are not level. It's near impossible for them to be level when you are judging it by the mm.

Shanotheslayer · 01-12-2020 02:13PM

eigrod wrote: »

Who are not level? I was replying to a poster querying why the attacker should get an advantage when they are level.

Quazzie wrote: »

VAR proves every time that they are not level. It's near impossible for them to be level when you are judging it by the mm.

This pretty much sums up what I mean. if they are level MM for MM then by all means give the benefit to the attacker but the VAR lines prove they are not.

People are claiming ' level' when it's extremely close by the MM. There's always going to be a debate surrounding this because even if you say 1-5MM leighway, when it's on the 5MM there will be a debate.

dfx- · 01-12-2020 02:13PM

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Don't the refs not flag for offside straight away now? They let play continue until the ball is out of play then they flag it and VAR reviews?

Only if the ball goes in directly from it. If the flag doesn't go up and you get a free-kick and score, no VAR review for that offside.

The reason for the stupid delay for obvious offsides is again because of VAR if the ball might go in.

The case where everyone knows the player is offside, but the play must go on to see if there's a goal to review it. Then it is flagged if it doesn't end in a goal...which is pointless.

eigrod · 01-12-2020 02:16PM

Quazzie wrote: »

VAR proves every time that they are not level. It's near impossible for them to be level when you are judging it by the mm.

Of course they can be level. Ever seen a dead heat in horse or greyhound racing? Again, I was giving an opinion on a question about the attacker getting the advantage when they ARE level - nothing to do with VAR at all.

Shanotheslayer · 01-12-2020 02:17PM

dfx- wrote: »

Only if the ball goes in directly from it. If the flag doesn't go up and you get a free-kick and score, no VAR review for that offside.

I think I'm misunderstanding this

Player A passes to Player B who is offside
Linesmen doesn't flag
Player B is then fouled

My understanding is that it calls back to the offside. Is this not the case? Or are you referring to the other team getting the ball from this and scoring at the other end?

Quazzie · 01-12-2020 02:19PM

eigrod wrote: »

Of course they can be level. Ever seen a dead heat in horse or greyhound racing? Again, I was giving an opinion on a question about the attacker getting the advantage when they ARE level - nothing to do with VAR at all.

Ok. Show me one single example where the two players were level.

By the way I know it can be possible, but as I said NEAR impossible.

eigrod · 01-12-2020 02:21PM

Quazzie wrote: »

Ok. Show me one single example where the two players were level.

By the way I know it can be possible, but as I said NEAR impossible.

Watch any Championship or League 1 or 2 game and you’ll see what happens when the lino deems them to be level. Ever played the game? Ever call for offside and the ref shouts ‘no, he was level’ ? I have.

Trigger · 01-12-2020 02:24PM

eigrod wrote: »

Watch any Championship or League 1 or 2 game and you’ll see what happens when the lino deems them to be level. Ever played the game? Ever call for offside and the ref shouts ‘no, he was level’ ? I have.

You are talking about the linesman & refs opinions and perceptions that they are level, they could be wrong, and many times as we have seen before Var they are wrong. Var takes that perception out, and gives a clear yes and no answer to offside by using the technology

Shanotheslayer · 01-12-2020 02:24PM

eigrod wrote: »

Watch any Championship or League 1 or 2 game and you’ll see what happens when the lino deems them to be level. Ever played the game? Ever call for offside and the ref shouts ‘no, he was level’ ? I have.

Ah yes because the ref shouted it, it must be factually correct. Did you go to VAR to verify this level? I guess no. So it was level from the Human eye. That doesn't mean he's level

Quazzie · 01-12-2020 02:25PM

eigrod wrote: »

Watch any Championship or League 1 or 2 game and you’ll see what happens when the lino deems them to be level. Ever played the game? Ever call for offside and the ref shouts ‘no, he was level’ ? I have.

Yes, the linesman makes a judgement call. Sometimes right, sometimes wrong. The whole point of VAR is to eradicate that judgement, and rely on facts.

General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

Comments