[royhan]

VAR should be restricted to rule on whether or not the ball has crossed the goal line or whether the referee or his assistants have spotted an incident which they believe, but are not positive, merits a red card.

[ronnie_allen]

My understanding of off-side is that a scoring part of the attackers body (i.e. excluding hands, arms) need to be behind any part of the second last defender. So if a defender has an arm outstretched towards his goal and an attacker is behind the arm, then he is onside.

However, watching the protractor on Match of the Day there was a case where the defenders arm which was closest part to goal was not used as offside line.

Sorry for the convuluted post but am I misinterpreting something? Read the specified rule and this is how I interpreted it.

[Political Cake]

My understanding of off-side is that a scoring part of the attackers body (i.e. excluding hands, arms) need to be behind any part of the second last defender. So if a defender has an arm outstretched towards his goal and an attacker is behind the arm, then he is onside.

However, watching the protractor on Match of the Day there was a case where the defenders arm which was closest part to goal was not used as offside line.

Sorry for the convuluted post but am I misinterpreting something? Read the specified rule and this is how I interpreted it.

It goes both ways - arms (of either team) don't count for any offside ever.
As an AR you're taught - lower limbs, torso and head only. Notably: this includes both goalkeepers!
So, for instance (having heard the phrase a lot), 'playable part of the body' isn't really correct.

Also, the law doesn't say 'behind'... level is fine! (Or rather, same distance from the goal-line).

[Hull Baggie]

VAR should be restricted to rule whether or not the ball has crossed the goal line or whether the referee or his assistants have spotted an incident which they believe, but are not positive, merits a red card.

we already have other tech that does that. It's been in the Prem for 3 or 4 seasons now.

[elmo_in_swansea]

I thought it was for obvious mistakes and errors only. How on earth can millimetres be classed as an error/mistake god only knows, if its a foot offside fair enough. Yes its difficult for linesmen as it is but these marginal decisions are part and parcel of the game, win some lose some - just get on with it ffs

[Albionic]

I thought it was for obvious mistakes and errors only. How on earth can millimetres be classed as an error/mistake god only knows, if its a foot offside fair enough. Yes its difficult for linesmen as it is but these marginal decisions are part and parcel of the game, win some lose some - just get on with it ffs

exactamundo, completely farcical now. Needs to be canned for a while until the FA / League sort it out.

[AlbionFan]

How about switching from VAR to TMO, that works brilliantly in Rugby Union 

[Adder]

It does need a little pod or something where the ref can go and have a couple of looks while he's talking to the VAR ref. The match ref can then take more responsibility for correcting or otherwise.

Unfortunately in football I don't think we can have the ref looking at the big screens - the players would never keep out of it and likewise the managers and coaches if the ref was looking at a screen on the side of the pitch.

[caravanc58]

it should be shoved up the rear end of whoever invented the stupid thing. mistakes were made before it, mistakes are made with it so what s the point?

[ronnie_allen]

It goes both ways - arms (of either team) don't count for any offside ever.
As an AR you're taught - lower limbs, torso and head only. Notably: this includes both goalkeepers!
So, for instance (having heard the phrase a lot), 'playable part of the body' isn't really correct.

Also, the law doesn't say 'behind'... level is fine! (Or rather, same distance from the goal-line).

Thanks for the clarification. The rules I was reading only referenced scoring part of the body in relation to the attacking player.

Also correct on the behind or level. That was my bad shorthand.

[seteefeet]

exactamundo, completely farcical now. Needs to be canned for a while until the FA / League sort it out.

Needs a time limit of 30 seconds. If it's not clear enough in that time then original decision stands. You could have a countdown in the stadium, at least then it would involve the fans.

[LiamTheBaggie]

Pundits are ridiculous.

Moaned and cried for the introduction of VAR and technology.

When the aforementioned technology is introduced, they continue to moan and cry, stating that its ruining the game.

You reap what you sow.

All the game needed was goal-line technology, the raw emotion of celebrating a goal, bemoaning a refereeing decision and the fast-paced element of a football has been destroyed.

[TheJacko2000]

My main issue with VAR is that surely offside can be computer generated with a Hawkeye type system? This as opposed to some 2nd rate ref trying to do geometry on a laptop himself.

[AlbionFan]

I accept that the use of technology in games such as Cricket and Rugby that are, to all intense and purposes, played at a slower pace and that it does provide some benefit.

But I query how this version of VAR really benefits the flow of a game played at pace like football is. It can break the game up, while everyone involved waits around to see an outcome of, well any incident really and it ruins the spectacle, the thrill, the excitement etc. for supports. Refs get decision wrong and they get them right as does VAR. So?

[Hunnington Baggie]

My main issue with VAR is that surely offside can be computer generated with a Hawkeye type system? This as opposed to some 2nd rate ref trying to do geometry on a laptop himself.

without understanding the tech to a decent level, can Hawkeye or a derivative track multiple objects at once? As it would need to predict at least 5 objects (4 defenders and an attacker) at any given time. It’s use on the goal line is already validated but would the cost to cover such a large area as two halves of a pitch make it restrictive to implement?

[costa blanca baggie]

Pundits are ridiculous.

Moaned and cried for the introduction of VAR and technology.

When the aforementioned technology is introduced, they continue to moan and cry, stating that its ruining the game.

You reap what you sow.

All the game needed was goal-line technology, the raw emotion of celebrating a goal, bemoaning a refereeing decision and the fast-paced element of a football has been destroyed.

I thought the system was adopted in order to help referees that had doubts about penalty decisions, or whether there was an infringement that he was unsure of during a goal being scored. He would then ask for a replay, view it, then make a decision. It now seems like a fifth official is pointing out borderline infringements ,and making a decision for him. I can’t remember the last time a referee checked a replay and concurred with any decision. It has become farcical in a very short space of time.

[AlbionFan]

In theory VAR sounds great, in practice it’s questionable

[Windmill Baggy]

The problem is of course the definition of 'clear and obvious' when it comes to overturning a decision or pointing out an infringement missed by the referee.

The toe of a players boot 'playing' an attacker onside is not a 'clear and obvious error' surely, as due to the speed the game is played at it's more or less impossible to spot as it happens in the first place. It's absolutely ridiculous.

The phrase needs rewording to be more specific, at the very least.

I think there also needs to be a limit on how many checks can be made per half. Years before VAR was introduced I always felt a '1 claim per team per half' rule, or something similar would be a pretty decent system.

I'm all for video technology being used to an extent, but the way it is implemented at the moment is beyond a joke.

[alex1]

Depends also at which split second the image is taken. Half a second earlier or later would make a significant difference. Needs to have reliable guy taking the images. 

[TheJacko2000]

Depends also at which split second the image is taken. Half a second earlier or later would make a significant difference. Needs to have reliable guy taking the images.

Offside is a binary decision so clear and obvious error shouldn't come into it. Regards this post I've quoted Sky shoot in 50 frames per second so the accuracy of VAR regards contact when the ball is played is within 2 hundredths of a second.

[Adder]

The problem is of course the definition of 'clear and obvious' when it comes to overturning a decision or pointing out an infringement missed by the referee.

The toe of a players boot 'playing' an attacker onside is not a 'clear and obvious error' surely, as due to the speed the game is played at it's more or less impossible to spot as it happens in the first place. It's absolutely ridiculous.

The phrase needs rewording to be more specific, at the very least.

I think there also needs to be a limit on how many checks can be made per half. Years before VAR was introduced I always felt a '1 claim per team per half' rule, or something similar would be a pretty decent system.

I'm all for video technology being used to an extent, but the way it is implemented at the moment is beyond a joke.

Re the clear and obvious error on offsides, I think at the moment, the assistant ref is supposed to keep his flag down unless it's glaringly obvious offside so that play doesn't stop. So even if he thought it was offside and in previous years would have put his flag up, he now doesn't. So now when the VAR ref gets involved the flag hasn't gone up (what I'm trying to say is nobody has actually judged it offside although they might well have without the instruction to keep the flag down).

Re the 1 appeal per half. I generally like that approach. Man City though would have appealed the Alexander-Arnold hand ball on Sunday and still had it rejected (and lost their appeal into the bargain).

Think there has to be a development where match refs go straight to a pod, watch it back, talk to the VAR ref and the match ref takes total responsibility for the resulting decision. I repeat that because of the way football works with player and managerial behaviour, the ref has to go off to a pod or refs room where he's not going to be harangued while making his decision....all takes time of course.

[Atomic]

VAR is rubbish isn't it? Lets be honest about it it's rubbish.

It was introduced to be fair to ensure the big decisions were right but officials are still getting them wrong even after closer inspection. No-one can convince me the Alexander-Arnold handball was not handball. If that was an Albion player at Anfield that would be given every single time.

The rules are still open to abuse / interpretation so I really don't see the point in VAR.

It should be scrapped and the people that brought it in should admit defeat but they won't because a) the money spent on it and b) because they will be too arrogant to go back on it now.

VAR will be here to stay and instead of improving the game it will go on making it worse. When teams can't celebrate scoring a goal it is drastically wrong.

[AlbionFan]

The Offside rule has changed many times of the years because it is such a contentious rule. So, how about we scrap it altogether to avoid all the controversy that it breads.

There job done, VAR is great, long live VAR! 

[hardtobeat]

Biggest problem for me is they are trying to have a Bob each way. E.G.if Ref gives City a penalty on Sunday VAR would not have overruled him despite the fact that no penalty was given by Var on review ! This smacks to me and many others of just backing the ref not enforcing the facts !

[gerry m]

VAR is rubbish isn't it? Lets be honest about it it's rubbish.

It was introduced to be fair to ensure the big decisions were right but officials are still getting them wrong even after closer inspection. No-one can convince me the Alexander-Arnold handball was not handball. If that was an Albion player at Anfield that would be given every single time.

The rules are still open to abuse / interpretation so I really don't see the point in VAR.

It should be scrapped and the people that brought it in should admit defeat but they won't because a) the money spent on it and b) because they will be too arrogant to go back on it now.

VAR will be here to stay and instead of improving the game it will go on making it worse. When teams can't celebrate scoring a goal it is drastically wrong.

To be honest Atomic looking at it again i thought it was more ball to hand. Pep managed to get away with his sarcastic 'Thank you so much' comments to the officials.