Ref Watch

[TinFoilHat]

Looking like Marriner next up. Not had him for a while.

Blind pew Marriner and no VAR.


Should be interesting....

 

[cheekybids]

That's not the greatest endorsment, given that it was meant to make things better, for me it's clearly given the corruption another level.

I know what you mean but I think they’ve managed to use it to the same effect as previously. Before we had refs seeing non existent handballs & liners flagging offside when it’s not. Corruption finds a way but how can they explain it as an honest mistake when they have a video.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Blind pew Marriner and no VAR.


Should be interesting....

The vindictive Villa fan.

 

[Silva2021]

What?
I've been playing football for most of my life, I'm 58 and have played football at some decent levels for over 50 of those years...
In all that time Luke Shaw would be given 2 feet offside.
Did the laws of the game change recently and I missed it. I'm serious.
Or is just bent?

The offside would not have been on Shaw the ball never made it that far,

It was on Casemiro who looked just off to me, my point is that it is one of these off’s which VAR gives and we have come accustomed to.

The fact they showed one line shows that it was within the tolerance, so such fractionally off that they no longer give it after feedback from how these couple of cm offside was not what was wanted.

I’m ok with that as a concept, in fact I prefer it.

However, I’m not convinced we or Newcastle in that situation get the tolerance and instead would have the 2 lines and it be off.

To answer is it bent? A lot of evidence since the WC is indicating that for me.

 

[ShedDweller]

The offside would not have been on Shaw the ball never made it that far,

It was on Casemiro who looked just off to me, my point is that it is one of these off’s which VAR gives and we have come accustomed to.

The fact they showed one line shows that it was within the tolerance, so such fractionally off that they no longer give it after feedback from how these couple of cm offside was not what was wanted.

I’m ok with that as a concept, in fact I prefer it.

However, I’m not convinced we or Newcastle in that situation get the tolerance and instead would have the 2 lines and it be off.

To answer is it bent? A lot of evidence since the WC is indicating that for me.

You're offside when the ball leaves the passers foot, not when it arrives.
Shaw was offside when the cross was delivered, how is the defence to know which player it ends up with?
Did the laws get changed? cos thats how offside has worked as long as I can remember?

If the laws have changed then basically multiple players can stand in offside positions drawing defenders and making space for late runners. How do you defend the line these days?

Might as well abolish offside alltogether.

 

[the-ecstacy-of-eight]

I do believe that is the vertical line as drawn by the VAR officials ? It just doesn't show that well when I took the picture of my TV screen.

I can add the line appeared for only a few seconds after quite a long period of time. Weirdly.

I think you're correct in your beliefs, it looks like it IS the vertical "pixel width" line for the furthest back point on the defender, and like you said in your earlier post, there IS a definite gap between boot end and line.

Weirdly there's no corresponding vertical line for chubby-chops, is there? ;)

The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

That's two "minute tolerance"/"benefit of doubt goes to the attacker" decisions they've had now (that I know of) - the first one effectively put them into an unassailable 2-0 lead against the scousers and secured TenBob's first win of the season; the second gives them the opening goal in a frantic cup final, which up until that point was a proper, old-school end to end, "anyone can win this" match.

Hmmmmm, dubious to say the least.

Add the derby fiasco into the mix and the plot gets so thick it can't get much thicker, IMO.

Well spotted!

 

[PistonBlue]

The offside would not have been on Shaw the ball never made it that far,

It was on Casemiro who looked just off to me, my point is that it is one of these off’s which VAR gives and we have come accustomed to.

The fact they showed one line shows that it was within the tolerance, so such fractionally off that they no longer give it after feedback from how these couple of cm offside was not what was wanted.

I’m ok with that as a concept, in fact I prefer it.

However, I’m not convinced we or Newcastle in that situation get the tolerance and instead would have the 2 lines and it be off.

To answer is it bent? A lot of evidence since the WC is indicating that for me.

I think that's the point isn't it? Different teams are refereed differently, I have absolutely no doubt about that, and if anything it's getting more obvious.

 

[Milesvk]

I was watching MOTD the other night and I think it was the west ham game for one of their goals, they froze the screen at the moment the pass, quick glance and said looks onside. I think that's how offsides should be reviewed. Before VAR I don't believe there was much call to check offsides, maybe just the blatant ones. I think most except that it's hard to call a tight offside/onside and except it can go for you or against you. I always thought linesman in general got most of them right. Most people wanted VAR to check for dives in the penalty area. I think they should scrap the lines, have a look with the naked eye. I think rules are far too subjective, they need rewritten to determine what is a foul or not, what is handball or not etc. But I am also in the corruption camp, I think the rules are purposely subjective to apply when the ref sees fit to his instructions.

 

[Wardley Blue]

I was watching MOTD the other night and I think it was the west ham game for one of their goals, they froze the screen at the moment the pass, quick glance and said looks onside. I think that's how offsides should be reviewed. Before VAR I don't believe there was much call to check offsides, maybe just the blatant ones. I think most except that it's hard to call a tight offside/onside and except it can go for you or against you. I always thought linesman in general got most of them right. Most people wanted VAR to check for dives in the penalty area. I think they should scrap the lines, have a look with the naked eye. I think rules are far too subjective, they need rewritten to determine what is a foul or not, what is handball or not etc. But I am also in the corruption camp, I think the rules are purposely subjective to apply when the ref sees fit to his instructions.

It's a cheats charter.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Have PiGMOL set up a new rule that should a player score from a deflection it's called the Rashford goal?



If that's the case then Julien gets his second goal at Bournemouth credited to him.