The Offside Rule is stupid !

blueparrot said:
The rule is fine ,interpretation is wrong, I thought though after lat season the VAR was changed to thicker lines and if the lines overlapped it wasn't offside. Did I imagine that ?
Click to expand...
No. Just like I didn't imagine the "We'll give the benefit of doubt to the attacking player in tight decisions' ruling.
 
jaiguruKun said:
VAR was not introduced for decisions like that. Surely some margin for error has to be introduced to give the advantage to the striker?
Click to expand...
The 'margin of error' can be applied subjectively which leaves it wide open to corruption, manipulation and unconscious bias.

VAR for offside decisions is NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE. Unless they improve the technology (more cameras, higher frame rates and tighter calibration of the timing signals) then it never will be fit for purpose, unless of course that purpose is corrupt intent.
 
I don’t think the rule is stupid, but it’s implementation with VAR definitely needs improving. I also think it’s being manipulated to get the outcome that the refs/PL favour.

For me, it’s all about the frame they use for the offside image. It’s needs to be consistent but it rarely is.

Some use the frame when the ball first hits the attackers foot when playing a pass and others use the frame when the ball has just left the foot. It might not seem like a big difference but it is the difference between a goal like Sterling’s yesterday.

If it was up to me, the image when the ball first hits the attackers foot is when the pass has started. That frame should be used and will give the benefit to the attacker like it should be.
 
daztrueblue91 said:
I don’t think the rule is stupid, but it’s implementation with VAR definitely needs improving. I also think it’s being manipulated to get the outcome that the refs/PL favour.

For me, it’s all about the frame they use for the offside image. It’s needs to be consistent but it rarely is.

Some use the frame when the ball first hits the attackers foot when playing a pass and others use the frame when the ball has just left the foot. It might not seem like a big difference but it is the difference between a goal like Sterling’s yesterday.

If it was up to me, the image when the ball first hits the attackers foot is when the pass has started. That frame should be used and will give the benefit to the attacker like it should be.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
blueish swede said:
The rules are inconsistent at present. If the whole of the ball has to be over the line for a goal, out of play or not in the corner quadrant then the whole of the attacker should have to be in front of the defender to be offside.
Click to expand...
Ive always thought this....if we want more goals in football then the whole player has to be off, ie a gap between the line of the players.
 
The attacking player has to lean forward in a sprint towards goal. Are you supposed to run with a straight back. )Might have to get Michael Johnson in to train them ffs!)

Also didnt celebrate Jesus's or Sterling's goals.

It's shit and I will never take to it.(was on about var)
 
blueish swede said:
The rules are inconsistent at present. If the whole of the ball has to be over the line for a goal, out of play or not in the corner quadrant then the whole of the attacker should have to be in front of the defender to be offside.
Click to expand...
I’d go as far and say that even if one whole foot is beyond the last defender or the whole head of the attacking player then fine, but mm’s of a shoulder? That’s crazy and not at all what VAR was for. The linesman will second guess himself now as that’s impossible to see with the naked eye and VAR should not of overturned the linesman’s decision. There wasn’t any conclusive proof that was offside. There are too many variables in the technology to be completely accurate.
 
Any rule where a "goal" can be ruled out because it is deemed the attacker is getting an advantage, potentially over a defender 50 yards away, and by a toenail, needs looking at. The game is about goals and stopping them, not about a fortuitous movement by a defender that then leads to a goal being ruled out. Clear daylight would indicate a "meaningful" advantage, anything less is guess work.
 
blueish swede said:
The rules are inconsistent at present. If the whole of the ball has to be over the line for a goal, out of play or not in the corner quadrant then the whole of the attacker should have to be in front of the defender to be offside.
Click to expand...
Good point.
I mean what if the attacking player has size 11 boots and the defender takes size 8?
Their heels could be level but the attackers toes would be off as it is currently...
( only slightly tongue in cheek this).
 
"Apparently" (I have no evidence, it's just what we've been told, just like I have no evidence for VAR "checking all contentious events") they do now use thicker lines for the attackers compared to the defenders, but the defender's line is just ONE PIXEL wide compared to FIVE PIXELS for the attacker.

What is the real life distance of ONE PIXEL?

So....

1 - a guess-timated arbitrary point in time is chosen when the ball is played
(very, very rarely the FIRST point of contact as it should be)

2 - a guess-timated vertical line for the furthest back part of the defender
3 - a guess-timated vertical line for the furthest forward part of the attaker

...and they then conclude that they can measure and confidently pronounce that an attacker is definitively offside by 2cm. The whole thing is an absolute farce, it's been introduced far too quickly without any proper statistical analysis completed, and its "down to the mm" implementation by PiGMoL is laughable.

As others have said, where's the benefit of the doubt for the attacker?

The software they use CAN do the job and the frame rate IS sufficient, but the VAR gives the impression that the most important part of the calculation is rushed (When the ball was played) and then attempt to be too accurate.

The real problem, however, is that PiGMoL don't want it to work definitively (ala goal-line tech) they want it manipulatable so that they can create "drama"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top