BlueHammer85
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 41,018
up to a foot.
and when a player is a foot and one centimetre offside. The same arguments will happen
up to a foot.
A foot is about right if the equipment has a margin of error of around 30cms. That is probably about where you can see "clear daylight" If they did this most decisions would be correct. The line-drawing farce is subject to human error. Another way would be just to take the position on the line of the front foot. This debate about shirt sleeves and arm position is just absurd.up to a foot.
No they wouldn’t. I foot and one inch is clear and obvious. An inch isn’t.and when a player is a foot and one centimetre offside. The same arguments will happen
Agree it should only be any part of the leg, the toe to the kneeA foot is about right if the equipment has a margin of error of around 30cms. That is probably about where you can see "clear daylight" If they did this most decisions would be correct. The line-drawing farce is subject to human error. Another way would be just to take the position on the line of the front foot. This debate about shirt sleeves and arm position is just absurd.
No they wouldn’t. I foot and one inch is clear and obvious. An inch isn’t.
I've got no solutions that involve offside and VAR pal; people point to changing the rule for offside but whatever this new interpretation is (level/clear daylight/etc) we'll simple be in exactly the same position as we are now with PiGMOL pointing to examples where an attacker's trailing bootlace is still level with the stud on the outstretched leg of the defender so he's onside (exactly the same arguments as now just shunted forward a bit); the issue is, as somebody else has already said, the technology simply isn't up to the task (frame rate of camera vs speed of players run) to be accurate to the degree that they're implementing.how many inches should they allow a player to be offside ?
it was that close a call that all them daft lines proved nothing, they simply guessed in the end....Tonight was an absolute farce. How else is a player supposed to run?
Over thinking yet again. Keep it simple, just go off the feet. Forget ear lobes, nostril hair and toe nails, keep it to one part of the body, years ago it went off your feet, you could lean forward and lever yourself as long as your feet wasn't offside.
Then you are only looking at one part of the body instead of looking at elbows and hands. It's ridiculous saying your arm is offside as you can't score with your arm, just have it where the attackers feet are planted, job done, simple enough, you score with your feet, end of story.
No need to get the crayons out and have different thickness of lines.
The obvious errors are still being covered up, even with the help of VAR (TAA handball for one). In the case of offside, the human eye is more accurate (100fps equivalent) than the technology (50fps).I've got no solutions that involve offside and VAR pal; people point to changing the rule for offside but whatever this new interpretation is (level/clear daylight/etc) we'll simple be in exactly the same position as we are now with PiGMOL pointing to examples where an attacker's trailing bootlace is still level with the stud on the outstretched leg of the defender so he's onside (exactly the same arguments as now just shunted forward a bit); the issue is, as somebody else has already said, the technology simply isn't up to the task (frame rate of camera vs speed of players run) to be accurate to the degree that they're implementing.
There is NO solution for offsides as far as "accurate to the mm" and VAR are concerned.
I'd say, leave the officials to do their jobs as they did before, let them officiate the match (both the refs and the linesmen), give them back full responsibility for decisions BUT with the additional tool of Video replays for all goals to check to see if an obvious error has been made.
If it takes longer than one or two replays,
if they need to zoom in,
if they need to draw silly little lines,
then it's ONSIDE,
if you can see without these elements,
then it's OFFSIDE.
It's not perfect and it's still open to debate but sport can't really be perfect, it's not maths.
We were sold a pup. We were sold "clear and obvious" but that's apparently open to interpretation now too.
Was Jesus clearly and obviously offside when he got our 6th on Saturday?
Was Salah clearly and obviously offside at the weekend?
Did Jesus clearly and obviously handle it when we "equalised" against Spurs?
(These are rhetorical questions and I don't really care for your interpretation of each of these cases.)
These "errors" that VAR are now finding are NOT what the game was being ruined by. NOBODY was moaning about these sorts of decisions. What people wanted were the blatant handball goals, the "he was yards offside" goals, the off the ball elbows, the diving for pens, the feigning of injuries when there was little or no contact, the keepers handling the ball outside the area, the ball going out of play but play continues, ...etc...etc...
...the OBVIOUS errors that the officials missed, but these things are still occurring, regularly, whilst some cock in a box looks to see if a bloke's nostril hairs are offside. It's bollocks, it's being implemented to check to see if the wrong rules have been broken.
I havent once seen a VAR off-side picture of when there is a gap between the foot and ball. All I have seen is a white blurred egg shape 'ball' , I cant see if the ball has left the foot or if the ball is still in contact with the boot. VAR at best is a guess at worse a mechanism to fix games.