VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

halfcenturyup said:
Oh, FFS. They are at it again. Solving a problem that didn't exist until they introduced technology by changing the laws again. It's exhausting.

www.bbc.com

Arsene Wenger proposes change to offside rule

Arsene Wenger proposes a change to the offside rule that would mean attackers are onside if any part of their body is in line with the last outfield defender.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
Click to expand...

Go back to the original offside rule where if you’re on the pitch you’re interfering, makes it easier for linesman to judge & takes away subjectivity.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Oh, FFS. They are at it again. Solving a problem that didn't exist until they introduced technology by changing the laws again. It's exhausting.

www.bbc.com

Arsene Wenger proposes change to offside rule

Arsene Wenger proposes a change to the offside rule that would mean attackers are onside if any part of their body is in line with the last outfield defender.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
Click to expand...
I am positive level used to be onside in the English leagues a few decades ago.
 
Ithryn Luin said:
I am positive level used to be onside in the English leagues a few decades ago.
Click to expand...

Yep, that was a sort of eyesight tolerance to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker and, I suppose, the linesman. Worked for decades (helped by simpler rules).

People like Wenger are ruining the game.

Football is a simple game. Have simple rules and accept almost all decisions will be subjective and there will be some wrong ones. Simpler times ....
 
cheekybids said:
Go back to the original offside rule where if you’re on the pitch you’re interfering, makes it easier for linesman to judge & takes away subjectivity.
Click to expand...

That has never been the rule. Well not in living memory at least.

You really want a goal scored from the middle of the goal disallowed because there’s someone in an offside position out near the corner flag?
 
Not sure it was an actual rule - more of a referee interpretation I think. There were some bizarre interpretations as well such as when a player was injured on the opposite side of the pitch. Who would have thought that referees would have different interpretations of a rule? Thankfully we now have the mighty VAR to stop all that nonsense and controversy……….
 
Longdarnit Blue said:
Not sure it was an actual rule - more of a referee interpretation I think. There were some bizarre interpretations as well such as when a player was injured on the opposite side of the pitch. Who would have thought that referees would have different interpretations of a rule? Thankfully we now have the mighty VAR to stop all that nonsense and controversy……….
Click to expand...

The rule was offside unless not interfering with play which meant you would have to be lay in a heap injured.

If a player ran into an offside position even if the ball wasn’t played to them they were offside. Only a fool would think they aren’t interfering with play because the defender has to make a choice.
 
Changes to the offside rule (1866-1925):
  • 1873: The rule was modified to be judged when the ball was played, not received.

  • 1903: The concept of "interfering with play" was introduced, meaning a player could only be penalized if their offside position actually affected the game.

  • 1907: The rule was limited to the opponent's half of the field.

  • 1921: It was established that players cannot be offside from a throw-in.

  • 1925: The "two-player rule" was introduced, stating that a player was onside if they were level with the second-to-last opposing player, which significantly changed the style of play and increased goal scoring.
This seems to be the perceived historic position of offside. Not many of us are still around to confirm whether or not this was the case but it does suggest that ‘interference affecting the game’ was a thing for a referee to consider as far back as 1903. By the way the best team in the land and all the world finished in the Arsenal position 1903/4 (second) and the dippers were relegated!
 
Longdarnit Blue said:
Changes to the offside rule (1866-1925):
  • 1873: The rule was modified to be judged when the ball was played, not received.

  • 1903: The concept of "interfering with play" was introduced, meaning a player could only be penalized if their offside position actually affected the game.

  • 1907: The rule was limited to the opponent's half of the field.

  • 1921: It was established that players cannot be offside from a throw-in.

  • 1925: The "two-player rule" was introduced, stating that a player was onside if they were level with the second-to-last opposing player, which significantly changed the style of play and increased goal scoring.
This seems to be the perceived historic position of offside. Not many of us are still around to confirm whether or not this was the case but it does suggest that ‘interference affecting the game’ was a thing for a referee to consider as far back as 1903. By the way the best team in the land and all the world finished in the Arsenal position 1903/4 (second) and the dippers were relegated!
Click to expand...

It’s quite clear over the last 20 years what constitutes interfering has changed. Now a player can stand in the opposing half & ignore the ball for the player coming onside.

4:09 is a perfect example.

 
cheekybids said:
The rule was offside unless not interfering with play which meant you would have to be lay in a heap injured.

If a player ran into an offside position even if the ball wasn’t played to them they were offside. Only a fool would think they aren’t interfering with play because the defender has to make a choice.
Click to expand...

Here's what Google AI says about 'that' goal:


In a January 2023 match between Manchester United and Manchester City, Marcus Rashford was deemed not to be interfering with play when Bruno Fernandes scored a goal, despite Rashford being in an offside position. This decision allowed the goal to stand, even though the initial on-pitch call was offside.

Here's why:
  • Not interfering with play:
    Rashford did not touch the ball or touch any of the City defenders. The rule states that "interfering with play" applies to "playing or touching the ball" and is an automatic offside offense.
  • Clear vision for the goalkeeper:
    Ederson, City's goalkeeper, still had a clear vision of the ball, further supporting the idea that Rashford's presence didn't hinder the play.
    ​
Everyone knows full well that is absolute bullshit as Big Nose initially moved to play the ball, drawing Ederson across to make the save leaving Rat Face a free run on goal. How anyone can say that isn't interfering with play is beyond me.

Wenger can get stuffed.
 
Longdarnit Blue said:
Changes to the offside rule (1866-1925):
  • 1873: The rule was modified to be judged when the ball was played, not received.

  • 1903: The concept of "interfering with play" was introduced, meaning a player could only be penalized if their offside position actually affected the game.

  • 1907: The rule was limited to the opponent's half of the field.

  • 1921: It was established that players cannot be offside from a throw-in.

  • 1925: The "two-player rule" was introduced, stating that a player was onside if they were level with the second-to-last opposing player, which significantly changed the style of play and increased goal scoring.
This seems to be the perceived historic position of offside. Not many of us are still around to confirm whether or not this was the case but it does suggest that ‘interference affecting the game’ was a thing for a referee to consider as far back as 1903. By the way the best team in the land and all the world finished in the Arsenal position 1903/4 (second) and the dippers were relegated!
Click to expand...

The law when I started playing in the 70s was…

You are judged as offside if you are in an offside position and interfering with play or an opponent, at the MOMENT THE BALL IS LAST PLAYED by a teammate.

But… If the ball touches an opponent AFTER THE PASS, everyone is then played onside.

It totally contradicted itself and they dropped the second bit at some point in the 80s I’m guessing.
 
Stephen230 said:
The law when I started playing in the 70s was…

You are judged as offside if you are in an offside position and interfering with play or an opponent, at the MOMENT THE BALL IS LAST PLAYED by a teammate.

But… If the ball touches an opponent AFTER THE PASS, everyone is then played onside.

It totally contradicted itself and they dropped the second bit at some point in the 80s I’m guessing.
Click to expand...
Did have on my phone a few years ago that said “offside for girls explained”. It was so simple that even I understood it. :-)
 
Shouldn't laugh as its Stockport!! But hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha….
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9391.jpeg
    IMG_9391.jpeg
    424.1 KB · Views: 25
A ref overturned var in Fulham v Everton game today, refreshing to see.
Thought he was right also, then I would say that wouldn't I !.
 
BlueHammer85 said:
It’s a common occurrence without VAR sadly.
Click to expand...

"It's not clear if Beckles did manage to get a touch on the ball, but the officials seemed to think he didn't, as the goal was awarded and the game subsequently overshadowed by the decision.

Fans were convinced that Beckles did touch it and immediately took to social media to voice their opinions."

Thank God offsides are 100% a matter of fact, then.
 
richardtheref said:
Under the PL interpretation of handball he got it totally wrong. Arms were not alongside his body.
I don't agree with it but he got it wrong
Click to expand...
I was very surprised to see it over ruled, I'm of the opinion that handball needs to be deliberate, I think the player is pulling his arm away from the ball and very close to the cross which then in my eyes makes it accidental.
I guess it's all about interpretation ,like you state, the law is in ass !.
 
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