The Offside Rule is stupid !

[BlueMonkey79]

Think that’s what Souness was advocating last year, agree completely.

It would sort out all the toe nail offsides.

On current rules the attacker doesn't really gain that much of an advantage from being half a boot offside. Plus the frame rate argument.

On the above implementation I could stomach a close offside, if for example Sterling's whole body was "offside" and then when they drew the lines his trailing foot was marginally off as well, as he has probably gained more of an advantage.

In its current state all the advantage is going to the defender.

It needs reviewing or binning in my opinion.

Keep it for yellow card/red card challenges, handball in the box, other off the ball fouls, and penalty fouls/shouts.

Next season I think PiGMOL need to address time wasting as well. Certain teams get away with murder with it. Not just against us either.

 

[cyan]

I would love to see what the game looked like without offside.It has always been part of the game and has steadily developed from the same rule as Rugby where everyone has to be behind the ball to what we have today.

The fear is that it would result in players who are permanent goal-hangers (we all knew them at school) and the defenders would need to match them - but that then opens up space in midfield. It is the situation that City try to create by playing out from the back and tempting attackers to press them. I suspect that we would still have teams that expect everyone to defend and still have teams that would press forward. There is always the threat of the counterattack - but there is now and still players allow City's defenders to camp 30 yards from the goal and drop everyone back - when a braver team pushes an attacker up to the half-way line and forces a defender back. Without offside you would do that further up the pitch.

VAR means that we are working on millimetres - that stops a game that is intended to be free-flowing and whose offside rule was created to make it more free-flowing - it can't be right. But we also can't just try and adjust it (only offside in penalty area, or clear space between attacker and defender) because you would still have camera's trying to judge some one inside or outside the line.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

VAR means that we are working on millimetres - that stops a game that is intended to be free-flowing and whose offside rule was created to make it more free-flowing - it can't be right. But we also can't just try and adjust it (only offside in penalty area, or clear space between attacker and defender) because you would still have camera's trying to judge some one inside or outside the line.

The margin of error with the VAR system used in offside decisions is centimetres (up to 20 for a player running at full speed), not millimetres.

The (subjective and open to corruption) system used for making offside decisions that can and do effect the results of fixtures in a £multi-billion entertainments industry IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.

 

[ancoats]

Until we have the technology with the ball leaving the foot then offside under VAR will struggle
video technology is not the way because the ball takes a impact and changes shape before leaving the foot

the KDB pass to sterling is clearly guessing by the officials and VAR because the video replay shows a blurred ball already left the foot ? We need data technology in the ball and boot.

Until then, we need a change in the laws with a margin of advantage given to the attacking player and stop this daft rule with the should and arm ? it should only be head or foot

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

The margin of error with the VAR system used in offside decisions is centimetres (up to 20 for a player running at full speed), not millimetres.

The (subjective and open to corruption) system used for making offside decisions that can and do effect the results of fixtures in a £multi-billion entertainments industry IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.

Interesting thread about this here

 

[stonerblue]

Seems designed to rule out any goal.

 

[BlueTG]

Just want to again reiterate how the fuck they chose to measure Sterling’s foot against Matip’s shoulder ffs.

 

[eversince 76]

I prefer to accept a human error on the pitch rather than from a VAR.
So far imho VAR has not contributed to the game and certainly not to the paying customers.

Simply get rid and let me celebrate a goal when it’s actually scored.

 

[trumpton]

The margin of error with the VAR system used in offside decisions is centimetres (up to 20 for a player running at full speed), not millimetres.

The (subjective and open to corruption) system used for making offside decisions that can and do effect the results of fixtures in a £multi-billion entertainments industry IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE.

Don't forget it's actually worse than that for an offside call.

Player sprinting towards goal can say cover 20cm in one frame. You then need to look at the gap created in that frame by the defender moving forward. Using your 20cm data, the potential is there for a 40cm gap from one frame to another. Added to the point where the ball actually leaves the players foot with the pass forward it's one monumental fuck up of a system.

I'd just scrap offside altogether. If the opposition want to stick someone in our box all game, go for it. Would make a change having to only break down 10 opponents in the 18 yard box rather than 11!

 

[Pingu the Penguin]

Don't forget it's actually worse than that for an offside call.

Player sprinting towards goal can say cover 20cm in one frame. You then need to look at the gap created in that frame by the defender moving forward. Using your 20cm data, the potential is there for a 40cm gap from one frame to another. Added to the point where the ball actually leaves the players foot with the pass forward it's one monumental fuck up of a system.

I'd just scrap offside altogether. If the opposition want to stick someone in our box all game, go for it. Would make a change having to only break down 10 opponents in the 18 yard box rather than 11!

The Dutch (lines don’t collide so go with ref’s call) version appears to be preferable. Would get rid of the farce of linos not putting their flags up for obvious offsides too

get the best of both worlds then (technical help to overturn real howlers) but something realistic that reinforces the ref’s role as lead arbiter of games

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Don't forget it's actually worse than that for an offside call.

Player sprinting towards goal can say cover 20cm in one frame. You then need to look at the gap created in that frame by the defender moving forward. Using your 20cm data, the potential is there for a 40cm gap from one frame to another. Added to the point where the ball actually leaves the players foot with the pass forward it's one monumental fuck up of a system.

I'd just scrap offside altogether. If the opposition want to stick someone in our box all game, go for it. Would make a change having to only break down 10 opponents in the 18 yard box rather than 11!

Considering the passing players foot is only in contact with the ball for approximately 0.01s or 1/100th of a second and the frame rate of the camera is 1/50th of a second per frame the system isn't even accurate enough to be able to calculate the exact moment the pass left the foot.

There is potential for a 40cm gap between attacker and last outfield opposition player, but the defender would be having to run at 10m/s in the opposite direction to the direction of play, so unlikely.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

This highlights A MAJOR problem with the current tech in that there aren't enough camera angles covered, so it's not always possible see an angle that shows clear daylight between the ball and the player making the pass. In this instance it is is literally just guesswork as to which is the correct time frame to use for the pass being made.

Another problem is camera frame rate. If we consider Phil Foden at a top speed of 37.12km/h, or 10.331 m/s then at a frame rate of 50 fps then there is a 20.6cm difference from 1 frame to the next. Even if you consider him running at half that speed it's still over 10cm, and they draw lines that show people offside by A TOENAIL.

For reference the cameras used for sprint race photo finishes are 10,000 fps, albeit scanning a smaller area.

The BIGGEST problem is the twats that operate it.

Great post. If the technology was as good as that used in athletics fine but it isn't so it has become a farce. The decision when to freeze the frame is open to abuse and no allowance is made for the equipment. None of this has been properly discussed in the media. We really do have a shite football press in this country. They don't challenge anything. The equipment can't measure offisde by a few centimetres yet we see these given week after week.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Great post. If the technology was as good as that used in athletics fine but it isn't so it has become a farce. The decision when to freeze the frame is open to abuse and no allowance is made for the equipment. None of this has been properly discussed in the media. We really do have a shite football press in this country. They don't challenge anything. The equipment can't measure offisde by a few centimetres yet we see these given week after week.

It doesn't surprise me that no major media outlet are regularly challenging it. Sky/BT/BBC probably have it in their contract for the rights to show live games and highlights that they aren't allowed to. That probably explains why those bent tw@ts Walton and Gallagher very rarely (if ever) go against the decisions made by the officials, or use the standard get out "I can see why it was/wasn't given".

 

[Deleted member 77198]

It’s awful. It’s ruining football. It’s too easy to manipulate any way you want it to go.

Offside is a rule that is simply to stop players just standing in and around the opposition’s 18 yard box all game, “goal hanging”, and having balls played up to them with no defensive contest.

It shouldn’t be there to rule out goals from players stood in these positions:



(^these^ are just a very small selection of ridiculous goals that have been ruled out for offside).

What is easy to manipulate is that the dotted like drawn down can be dotted further down from the defenders line and it creates a digital offside. Also where a defenders further back body parts can be chosen at random and is skated over whether it is actually their furthest back body part. Also I very often see clips of offsides where the ball has already left the foot of the player playing the ball, so the wrong frame is used and I’ve never heard anyone pick up on that.

VAR should be used for offside, just to check. However, it should check whether someone is clearly and obviously offside and a clear and obvious error has been made by the on-pitch officials by not picking up that someone is offside.

If you can’t tell with the naked eye, if you need to draw a line, then you’re onside!

 

[halfcenturyup]

Until we have the technology with the ball leaving the foot then offside under VAR will struggle
video technology is not the way because the ball takes a impact and changes shape before leaving the foot

the KDB pass to sterling is clearly guessing by the officials and VAR because the video replay shows a blurred ball already left the foot ? We need data technology in the ball and boot.

Until then, we need a change in the laws with a margin of advantage given to the attacking player and stop this daft rule with the should and arm ? it should only be head or foot

I always said it should be based on the head. The skill in keeping on side is in looking across the line. Last time I checked, the eyes are in the head. There is absolutely no advantage in having a foot offisde unless the guy is going to hop to the penalty area, and there should be no punishment for a natural running movement that leads to a foot being in front of the other for half a second.

Doesn't change the frame choice or marginal decisions, of course.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

A goal being awarded or chalked off for a marginal offside decision could potentially be worth £Millions in prize money and gambling revenue, yet the system used to decide it is wide open to manipulation and corruption. And football governance across the board just stick their fingers in their ears and ignore the problem like it doesn't exist.

It tells you £VERYTHING you need to know about the state of the game at the highest level.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

This is what VAR should be there to give offside for:

Missed by, inconclusive or impossible to tell to, the on-pitch officials at full speed. VAR clears it up.

This is not:

Inconclusive or impossible to tell to the on-pitch officials at full speed. VAR can also not tell so had to draw lines that still begs questions.

 

[ancoats]

I always said it should be based on the head. The skill in keeping on side is in looking across the line. Last time I checked, the eyes are in the head. There is absolutely no advantage in having a foot offisde unless the guy is going to hop to the penalty area, and there should be no punishment for a natural running movement that leads to a foot being in front of the other for half a second.

Doesn't change the frame choice or marginal decisions, of course.

head or feet should only be used for offside because all players are build different
if you think about the rules for a pen. its the foot on the line or inside the box that counts not any part of your body that you can score with ?

 

[ancoats]

It’s awful. It’s ruining football. It’s too easy to manipulate any way you want it to go.

Offside is a rule that is simply to stop players just standing in and around the opposition’s 18 yard box all game, “goal hanging”, and having balls played up to them with no defensive contest.

It shouldn’t be there to rule out goals from players stood in these positions:
View attachment 40154
View attachment 40155
View attachment 40156
(^these^ are just a very small selection of ridiculous goals that have been ruled out for offside).

What is easy to manipulate is that the dotted like drawn down can be dotted further down from the defenders line and it creates a digital offside. Also where a defenders further back body parts can be chosen at random and is skated over whether it is actually their furthest back body part. Also I very often see clips of offsides where the ball has already left the foot of the player playing the ball, so the wrong frame is used and I’ve never heard anyone pick up on that.

VAR should be used for offside, just to check. However, it should check whether someone is clearly and obviously offside and a clear and obvious error has been made by the on-pitch officials by not picking up that someone is offside.

If you can’t tell with the naked eye, if you need to draw a line, then you’re onside!

if it was head only how many would have been offside ?

 

[Fiftyyearsandcounting]

Why not abandon the lines? Let VAR look at a still frame and if they can't tell "just by looking at it" then it can't be a clear an obvious error, let it go.