Wenger proposes changes to Offside Rule

Ronwol196061

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
3,766
Girouds goal was offside but I dont think most refs would have called it before VAR. Well placed and well hit....and nothing to do with goal hanging,Giroud and passer beat the defender without any great space between them the defender and Giroud
It was technically offside yes but in this case Wengers idea makes sense
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
24,794
Agree. I don’t agree with this proposed change as shown by that clip above.

I would much prefer a simple time limit and a naked eye check. It would still have all the benefits of being able to look at all the angles, but would still retain the general benefit of the doubt principle for the attacking aide. As it’s always been, but is now being eradicated.

It won’t be perfect ( nothing will), but will still be in keeping with the spirit of the game.

I can’t imagine any fan in the past has had a massive problem with a “too tight to call” offside decision.
That's definitely not true. Almost every time there's been a tight decision managers and fans moan about it.

All it will change is the amount of goals given instead of taken away.

What needs to change is the review time. If it's not "clear and obvious" within a 30 second time span then the onfield ruling remains.
The problem with this is that the linesman is told not to flag if its a tight call. So does the ref have to go back to the linesman to get their final decision after the thirty seconds is up? If they weren't sure the first time its just going to be a guess the second time. The guys watching the video will have a much better chance of getting to the right answer.
 

dagraham

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
14,933
That's definitely not true. Almost every time there's been a tight decision managers and fans moan about it.
Managers will always moan. I can only speak for myself, but before VAR, if an offside has looked level to my eyes ( before using software and lines to analyse it) then I’ve genuinely accepted its level and therefore onside.
 

Spurrific

If you disagree with me, you’re wrong.
Joined
Jun 2, 2011
Messages
12,446
Drawing the line at the foot makes absolutely no sense either, don't get why you lot would be on board with that. It should be goal-scoring body part of the attacker vs the same limbs from the defender - but, there should be a margin of error like in cricket reviews. If it's too close to call, go with referee's original decision. Somebody's head could still be a good yard offside when a ball is played to them, the feet are irrelevant if they smash a diving header in the top-corner.
 

Ionman34

SC Supporter
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Messages
6,103
That's definitely not true. Almost every time there's been a tight decision managers and fans moan about it.



The problem with this is that the linesman is told not to flag if its a tight call. So does the ref have to go back to the linesman to get their final decision after the thirty seconds is up? If they weren't sure the first time its just going to be a guess the second time. The guys watching the video will have a much better chance of getting to the right answer.
Not really bro, if it's not clear and obvious in 30 secs that the player was offside then the goal stands., or whatever the resultant is.

We don't need perfection, we can't get it regardless. 30 secs of review should be ample time to make a decision.
 

dagraham

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
14,933
Not really bro, if it's not clear and obvious in 30 secs that the player was offside then the goal stands., or whatever the resultant is.

We don't need perfection, we can't get it regardless. 30 secs of review should be ample time to make a decision.
Indeed. Example being Giroud’s goal. Marginal call yes, but as soon as you saw the video, fans and commentators alike could tell it was just offside almost immediately.

Whereas there have been countless others where it’s simply impossible to call with the naked eye. In those cases benefit of the doubt should remain with the attacker as it’s always been.

Get rid of the lines and software and just use a still frame paused video from several angles if necessary and the eyes of the officials looking at it.
 
Last edited:

philll

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2012
Messages
1,578
The Wolves one against Leicester was particularly annoying. How could he possibly have gained an advantage by his foot being 2 inches goal side of the defender when the ball was played backwards and he had to run back to get it?

The problem on the whole is that the cameras used to determine when the ball was hit shoot at 50 fps and quite a lot can happen in 0.02 seconds. You can see how much changes when they show the VAR review and they're flicking between frames trying to decide which one to base the decision off of. They then take that and try and apply millimetre precision to the players' positions. It just doesn't make sense to combine such a slow (relatively) camera system with such precision on the other end.

Even if the cameras worked at 500 fps they'd still spend ages umming and ahhing about which frame to use. Give them 30 seconds, if it's not obvious without fucking about with these lines then go with the on-field decision or give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker or whatever.

Something I thought of was to make the players wear tracking devices (I'm sure they must do already to allow those heatmaps to be generated) which report their position on the pitch exactly at any given moment. So they all wear them in the same part of their body (on a chest strap or whatever) and if, when the ball is hit, the attacking one is more than a certain distance goalside of the defending one (which can be decided instantly and automatically) then it's offside. Kind of like the goal line technology, the ref would get a beep on that watch-thing if it was offside and nothing if it wasn't.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
24,794
Managers will always moan. I can only speak for myself, but before VAR, if an offside has looked level to my eyes ( before using software and lines to analyse it) then I’ve genuinely accepted its level and therefore onside.
You're probably one of the few people who don't blame the officials for every defeat. Or maybe those who do just shout louder.

Not really bro, if it's not clear and obvious in 30 secs that the player was offside then the goal stands., or whatever the resultant is.

We don't need perfection, we can't get it regardless. 30 secs of review should be ample time to make a decision.
I'd be happy with that (y)
 

dagraham

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2005
Messages
14,933
You're probably one of the few people who don't blame the officials for every defeat. Or maybe those who do just shout louder.
I think this is it. The internet in general and Spurs chat on SC is often full on delusion/conspiracy stuff. I’ve seen fans from all clubs blame refs for defeat before the game has even kicked off :LOL:.
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
10,290
Where the line is makes no difference to anything. It's the uncertainty of when the ball is played that's the issue.
 

Bobby TwoShots

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2019
Messages
95
Where the line is makes no difference to anything. It's the uncertainty of when the ball is played that's the issue.
And yet you never see that on VAR replays, it's just a given that they got it millimeter-perfect
 

Amo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
11,230
All this noise about where to draw the line misses the point spectacularly.


If you have to draw fucking lines then it's not offside. Done.
 

Mr.D

Old Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
4,002
Move the line of off-side from half way to the edge of the penalty area. It'll be like kids football. 😂
 

punkisback

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2004
Messages
2,707
While I like it in theory, it won't change anything other than now we'll be looking at badly drawn MS Paint lines showing a shoelace arguably overlapping, it just moves the point of reference.
Exactly; what they should do is adjust the margin of error and ensure that there is consistent benefit of the doubt given to either the attacker or defender. Perhaps even bringing in an umpires call for offsides?
 

Rocksuperstar

just a child getting older...
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
46,761
It'll be nice once we figure out which body part or lack of is the line for offsides.

Once we've done that we can start arguing about if it's when the ball leaves the foot or when the ball is first struck...
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,026
Don't bother changing it.

Spurs have benefitted more than any other team, we have 7 more points, and are 6 places higher this season from VAR decisions, so why change what's working for us :)
 

EighteenEightyTwo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
357
Where the line is makes no difference to anything. It's the uncertainty of when the ball is played that's the issue.
I think with modern camera technology, "when the ball is played" is too vague as that takes place over 2 or 3 frames of the footage.
 

zx81

Active Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2005
Messages
994
Leave VAR as it is with all lines and the long wait for a decision. But give each side 3 reviews per match only , once used then no more VAR for rest of the match.
 

BehindEnemyLines

Twisting a Melon with the Rev. Black Grape
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
2,290
Why not keep the rule as it is, but build in a 15cm tolerance.
If you're within that 15cm then we can't be sure and the attacker is given the benefit of the doubt.
If you're outside of the 15cm then you're definitely offside.

Moving the point at which offside is actually measured does little to solve the arguments as there will still be that uncertainty...... It just means we'll be arguing about the defender rather than the attacker.
 

PLTuck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
7,804
Scrap the offside rule altogether just for the lolz for a season. Glorious chaos.

Seriously though, I'm in favour of the 30 sec rule for any VAR decision. If it takes longer, its not "clear and obvious" and therefore refs decision stands.
 
Top