Offside judgement (Laporte v Wolves)

[oddfellows]

Rugby is always held up as the pinnacle and it boils my piss. England lost a six nations match because the ref absolutely buggered them senseless the weekend just gone

he actually came out in public and said he fucked up

and they only play about 10 games a fucking year.

There is premier league nearly 24/7 now - always on tv, always scrutinized.

I concur on that because I texted my Welsh mate saying that decision was a joke, but, that's the human error side for you.

Macron was probably in on it.

 

[oddfellows]

That clearly shows it’s offside (this seasons). It would have be onside last season when the point was the arm pit. It’s now the “t short sleeve line”.

It doesn't though because there is no datum from when the ball leaves Bernies head, there are no sensors in the ball or Bernies head to prove a fixed point as to when the ball was played.

There is no tolerance either to account for the variance in frame to frame which is a factor.

So.its farmer's guess.

Too close to call either way.

 

[SWP's back]

It doesn't though because there is no datum from when the ball leaves Bernies head, there are no sensors in the ball or Bernies head to prove a fixed point as to when the ball was played.

There is no tolerance either to account for the variance in frame to frame which is a factor.

So.its farmer's guess.

Too close to call either way.

If it’s too close to call either way then surely you’d say you should go with the linesman?

(I’ve already made the point about frame rate etc, but assuming that’s the correct frame, then it’s offside by the laws of the game with the upper arm not now being classed as a handball - they aren’t out to get City, Liverpool have had at least 3 chalked off for the same this season as have most clubs.)

 

[oddfellows]

If it’s too close to call either way then surely you’d say you should go with the linesman?

(I’ve already made the point about frame rate etc, but assuming that’s the correct frame, then it’s offside by the laws of the game with the upper arm not now being classed as a handball - they aren’t out to get City, Liverpool have had at least 3 chalked off for the same this season as have most clubs.)

Spot on.

Yes you would have to go with the lino.

VAR was brought in to reverse clear and obvious errors and this clearly wasn't a clear and obvious error.

 

[give it to gordon]

Why was a five year old doing the VAR lines last night ? He should have been asleep in bed at that time of night.

 

[SWP's back]

Spot on.

Yes you would have to go with the lino.

VAR was brought in to reverse clear and obvious errors and this clearly wasn't a clear and obvious error.

And people keep forgetting var overruled Sian Massey-Ellis for the second time in two games with her so it’s not all one way traffic.

 

[ID70]

If he scores using the part of the arm used for the line then you can guarantee it'd be disallowed for handball

 

[Mike Cledford]

I believe the lines are parallel. What I don't like with VAR is two things:

1. You can't freeze the frame at the exact time when the ball is kicked forward on any VAR offside decision.

2. A hairs length is not a "clear and obvious" error, so why check using VAR, never mind accepting their decision.

I've looked at the lines in the cold light of day before and after reading your post and l still think the goal line and the drawn line. But l wouldn't get onto an argument over it on here or in a pub.
The fact that l cannot be passionate about it shows the resignation and acceptance that all this fannying about has put into me. After a lifetime of watching l do not understand the selective rules brought in to support the original rules and make them fit.

 

[Tommy_Catons_Perm]

If it’s too close to call either way then surely you’d say you should go with the linesman?

(I’ve already made the point about frame rate etc, but assuming that’s the correct frame, then it’s offside by the laws of the game with the upper arm not now being classed as a handball - they aren’t out to get City, Liverpool have had at least 3 chalked off for the same this season as have most clubs.)

Too close to call means it level and not offside. Unless level means offside now?

Too close to call means give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker. Unless the benefit of the doubt is given to the defender now?

I don't know what the rule is now if the defender and attacker are level. What is is it?

 

[manimanc]

What would have happened if Laporte had long sleeves on?

 

[Anonymous #9]

The ref gave it offside so it should stay as offside. The issue would be if he gave the goal and then it was ruled out by VAR using this line/still shot technology.

 

[East Level 2]

Its quite easy to solve this problem with offsides and var. . The line should be drawn on both defenders and attackers feet, so arguments about armpits or bulging bellies and arses are no longer.. The parameters is the feet like it was so many years ago.

Or base it on the bit that played the ball. Was that offside when the ball was played in?
OK, I agree feet makes more sense.

 

[Bluetuner]

Once the players have all had the vaccine, it will be easy for Bill Gates' microchip technology to constantly monitor all body parts in a vartual reality holographic mock up. Instant notification to the ref through mind control and the linesfolk can take a well-earned rest.

Don’t, some tin foil hat wearers believe that shit

 

[manchester blue]

What would have happened if Laporte had long sleeves on?

haha

 

[Dubai Blue]

They shouldn't be allowed to use the lines at all. They should look with their eyes and if it's not immediately obvious, then the goal should stand.

You have to use lines unless the camera happens to be dead level with play. There's been plenty of instances where the camera angle has made players look comfortably onside/offside when they're not.

I do agree it's become far too forensic though. Once the initial line shows the players are essentially level, it should be left at that and the goal allowed to stand.

There's far too much emphasis on finding reasons to disallow goals rather than allow them, and it's definitely a backwards step for the game considering we spent the previous 30 years trying to find ways to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacking team.

 

[SWP's back]

If he scores using the part of the arm used for the line then you can guarantee it'd be disallowed for handball

That would be an incorrect decision then.

 

[Franny's toilet roll]

These decisions are so marginal we could be here all year debating this and not get an answer. Once you start discussing frame speeds angle of line position on the arm etc , we are in the realms of doubt and therefore the attacking should benefit, it's a goal. However it made a game of it, kept us all enthralled right to the end of the game and we can sit on our high horse and say we've been fucked over as well. Be interesting to see if our fucked over is greater than Utd's fucked over against Chelsea and who will carry the ref's sympathy in the derby

 

[SWP's back]

Too close to call means it level and not offside. Unless level means offside now?

Too close to call means give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker. Unless the benefit of the doubt is given to the defender now?

I don't know what the rule is now if the defender and attacker are level. What is is it?

There’s no such thing as level now.

And too close to call means that, as before var and if var wasn’t there, it’s offside as the linesman flagged it offside. He disallowed the goal, not var. var just didn’t overturn that decision.

 

[Rammy Blue]

And people keep forgetting var overruled Sian Massey-Ellis for the second time in two games with her so it’s not all one way traffic.

My opinion, they should all be goals. If you go back to giving the Lino the benefit of doubt then it can be far more corrupt, it needs to be margin of error to attacker if too close to call.

Until they can just whack it in a computer and let AI make the call, then we should be fine too.

 

[SWP's back]

What would have happened if Laporte had long sleeves on?

That’s where it gets stupid and the var official does a “best guess” as to where it should be. It’s moronic as it’s subjective for what they claim is a ‘factual’ decision.

Puma next season should make minute sleeves on our shirts.