Red line ahead of blue line = clear and obviously offside.
I realise that’s the criteria but unless you have the minute detail they have in something like Hawkeye at Wimbledon how accurate is a big thick red line on a blurry freeze frame? It isn’t is it? If they’re going to say it’s down to mm then they need something more accurate than I just saw then on screen.
They use Hawkeye for VAR offsides… so yes they have the same minute detail.
Red line ahead of blue line = clear and obviously offside.
I realise that’s the criteria but unless you have the minute detail they have in something like Hawkeye at Wimbledon how accurate is a big thick red line on a blurry freeze frame? It isn’t is it? If they’re going to say it’s down to mm then they need something more accurate than I just saw then on screen.
They use Hawkeye for VAR offsides… so yes they have the same minute detail.
Maybe show that detail then and shut people like me up, but what I’m looking at on screen are two big lines on blurry picture from a long way off. I highly doubt it’s exactly the same as logistically it’s a totally different scenario. Goal line technology looks the same as hawkeye. Show me a close up image in high definition and two sharp lines at exactly 90 degree angles to the pitch and I’ll believe they have that minute detail.
The correct decision, but it ruins the emotion of football when a team can have such a massive high, and have it taken away on such small margins.
I think the team that are disadvantaged by virtue of playing in a league without out the shit show that is VAR should be given the benefit of the doubt in those situations.
Reinforces the problem of VAR it over analyses such that the ‘spirit’ of offside is completely lost.
Fortunately VAR won’t be an issue for Charlton fir some years.
I think this is a good point which was lost before VAR although a couple of mms offside needs technology to detect it. I suppose they could use it in a clever way and give say 30 cms leeway but maybe not. I have always thought the ref should have the power to decide if the attacking side were trying to gain an advantage by being offside but this will never happen.
I have supported VAR in many cases but the threshold shouldn't be a piece of grass on a toecap. Level means onside and the lines drawn showed that was level unless a cigarette paper can continue to screw the game.
I have supported VAR in many cases but the threshold shouldn't be a piece of grass on a toecap. Level means onside and the lines drawn showed that was level unless a cigarette paper can continue to screw the game.
This is right. The game isn't played by robots so that small level is too fine IMO. But others will say, it either is or it isn't. It does feel unsatisfactory.
VAR needs work. I feel when they ask a ref to look at something again they change their mind 99.99% of the time and then you think, the ref makes a call on the pitch and because of the system, that call is more likely to be overturned. That is crazy although if the threshold was higher to get them to look it might be better. Something like, is it a 100% error? It is a ridiculous concept to achive perfection and the hand ball law is a testiment to that. The best you can do is make it a bit fairer and if you start from that point you probably get a better system.
If you're unhappy with the offside rule, then the rule needs to change.
If the rule says a toenail is offside, then they're going to give it offside. The lines are proof that it is clear and obvious to figure out. There's no judgement, either the line is offside or it isn't.
VAR needs work. I feel when they ask a ref to look at something again they change their mind 99.99% of the time and then you think, the ref makes a call on the pitch and because of the system, that call is more likely to be overturned. That is crazy although if the threshold was higher to get them to look it might be better. Something like, is it a 100% error? It is a ridiculous concept to achive perfection and the hand ball law is a testiment to that. The best you can do is make it a bit fairer and if you start from that point you probably get a better system.
Isn't that what we were told it was going to be used for before it came in? I would've been all for that. But I knew they would fuck it up. They can't help themselves.
"A new system where the amount of advantage an attacker gets is based on how romantic the goal is."
It was offside. Sucks, but it was.
Congratulations.
Now, about that Arsenal handball that wasn't given when he picked the ball up in the area? Where was VAR then?
"Hey United, we can see it's offside but we're deciding to give the goal because 'the magic of the cup'. Hope you understand."
Yeah you're absolutely right. This was definitely 'clear and obvious' wasn't it?
Having to zoom x100 to check that the guy potentially had his little toenail offside.
Cheers Chris for posting that. We had posters on here saying they could see it was offside when watching live on TV. Fucking amazing eyesight !
The camera angle is different to what the Ass ref can see looking along the line. That obviously would've looked in line which as we can see it was if the threshold was a sensible margin.
It's an absolute fact that nothing ever could go wrong with automation. Never.
But to be honest, it's getting to the stage where I don't really care any more. Football is being ruined in so many different ways that I can never change, so what's the point getting worked up by it any more.
If you can draw two lines, you can draw in a margin which should be beneficial to the attacker in the spirit of the game. Would that improve the game? Maybe, I don't know. What would the margin be?
If you can draw two lines, you can draw in a margin which should be beneficial to the attacker in the spirit of the game. Would that improve the game? Maybe, I don't know. What would the margin be?
Is the spirit 10cm? 30? How about a metre? And what happens when a player is 0.5cm past the new spirit line?
The offside line is in the place where it makes the most sense. It doesn’t solve any problems by moving it somewhere else.
I was as disappointed as anyone that that was offside. But it was offside. And the right decision was made.
Comments
And I didn't think it was a penalty.
Just a shame though, would have been good to see Coventry win, means so much more to the Championship side.
Play the final at Bolton.
Then the London United fans have to travel.
Level means onside and the lines drawn showed that was level unless a cigarette paper can continue to screw the game.
It was offside. Sucks, but it was.
Now, about that Arsenal handball that wasn't given when he picked the ball up in the area? Where was VAR then?
He was on his phone paying for his Arsenal Season ticket for 24/25.
Having to zoom x100 to check that the guy potentially had his little toenail offside.
If the rule says a toenail is offside, then they're going to give it offside. The lines are proof that it is clear and obvious to figure out. There's no judgement, either the line is offside or it isn't.
Semi-automated offsides next year right? You're gonna love that.
Cheers Chris for posting that.
We had posters on here saying they could see it was offside when watching live on TV.
Fucking amazing eyesight !
The camera angle is different to what the Ass ref can see looking along the line.
That obviously would've looked in line which as we can see it was if the threshold was a sensible margin.
But to be honest, it's getting to the stage where I don't really care any more. Football is being ruined in so many different ways that I can never change, so what's the point getting worked up by it any more.
The offside line is in the place where it makes the most sense. It doesn’t solve any problems by moving it somewhere else.
I was as disappointed as anyone that that was offside. But it was offside. And the right decision was made.