VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

[gingerprince]

What did Dermot Gallagher say this morning (I was at work, so didn't see it)?

Said current laws of game subjective/grey area but as on field decision was offside [although belatedly late], VAR would have first confirmed Robertson in offside position [YES as factual],and that he was in close proximity to GK [YES as factual] and that he made movement whilst in that close proximity [YES again as factual]. As overall call is a subjective decision, VAR would not have seen anything significant
different so would have confirmed the on field decision [referees call], as they have been instructed to follow moreso this season to not 'rereferee games". Sky for balance showed x3 interviews postmatch, now if I can only remember who they were.... of yes, I do remember now....Slot, Carragher and Robertson.

 

[gingerprince]

Reminded me of a Haaland goal chalked off for Handball. VAR initially said no evidence to prove Haaland played ball with hand before scoring so going to send Ref to monitor to advise him to allow the goal as no visible handball by Haaland.
However, Asst VAR stopped him & advised him
that equally no evidence to prove Haaland didn't handball it either, so therefore should confirm on field decision of handball [Refs Call], which they did and No Goal.

 

[southamptonblue]

Why, I think both decisions were totally correct and glad VAR was in place to ensure they were correct, Liverpool fans moaning and crying corruption just like all fans when it’s not the verdict they want.

As a VAR groupie.....you'd agree with every decision VAR was involved in......even if it relegated W Ham, and was the most contentious in the history of VAR ;)

 

[Bigga]

I have a question and I'm not sure how to analyse it; if the corner kick taker delivers the ball and is slow to get out, does some action like the furore that's happening over Robertson, become onside or offside?

I ask because in a normal delivered cross (not dead ball) the 'onside' is when the 'scorer' is in line or behind the delivery.

Can someone clear it up for me?

Cheers.

 

[Andy TheCatalyst Morrison]

I have a question and I'm not sure how to analyse it; if the corner kick taker delivers the ball and is slow to get out, does some action like the furore that's happening over Robertson, become onside or offside?

I ask because in a normal delivered cross (not dead ball) the 'onside' is when the 'scorer' is in line or behind the delivery.

Can someone clear it up for me?

Cheers.

Not sure what you’re asking? Are you asking if the corner taker can be offside? If so, yes if the ball is played back to them. Or whether the player heading the ball from the corner be offside? No because they are behind the ball when it is delivered. Or what?

 

[southamptonblue]

Not sure what you’re asking? Are you asking if the corner taker can be offside? If so, yes if the ball is played back to them. Or whether the player heading the ball from the corner be offside? No because they are behind the ball when it is delivered. Or what?

Exactly my thoughts....it's a bit confusing!

 

[pride in battle]

Goal should have stood, we would be fuming if that was not given.

 

[Bigga]

Not sure what you’re asking? Are you asking if the corner taker can be offside? If so, yes if the ball is played back to them. Or whether the player heading the ball from the corner be offside? No because they are behind the ball when it is delivered. Or what?

I'm asking if they've delivered the ball and, for example, ran down the goal line instead of back towards the main players, would Robertson still have been offside?

Does the question make sense?

 

[Andy TheCatalyst Morrison]

I'm asking if they've delivered the ball and, for example, ran down the goal line instead of back towards the main players, would Robertson still have been offside?

Does the question make sense?

Oh right. Yes Robertson is still offside. It’s the position of the last defender that is important, not another attacker (it’s actually the 2nd last defender that counts but you can generally just look at the last defender as the goalkeeper is usually behind them)

 

[Bigga]

Oh right. Yes Robertson is still offside. It’s the position of the last defender that is important, not another attacker (it’s actually the 2nd last defender that counts but you can generally just look at the last defender as the goalkeeper is usually behind them)

Makes it all the more confusing cos if there was a normal attacking along the flanks, 'onside' is based upon being played in behind the delivery of the ball. The defender doesn't matter.

This changes at corners. I just don't see why it should.

Anyway, cheers for the answer/ confirmation.

 

[Andy TheCatalyst Morrison]

Makes it all the more confusing cos if there was a normal attacking along the flanks, 'onside' is based upon being played in behind the delivery of the ball. The defender doesn't matter.

This changes at corners. I just don't see why it should.

Anyway, cheers for the answer/ confirmation.

The rules don’t change for a corner. Robertson is ahead of Van Dijk when he heads the ball. That’s why Robertson is offside. The position of the corner taker is absolutely irrelevant at that point

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The rules don’t change for a corner. Robertson is ahead of Van Dijk when he heads the ball. That’s why Robertson is offside. The position of the corner taker is absolutely irrelevant at that point

Quite, I have no idea what is being considered.

In open play (ignoring scenarios irrelevant to this like being in own half):
behind the ball when played = onside.
with 2+ players closer to the goalline = onside.

That's it. Either of the above make you onside.
Corners are a special case as you can never (by law) be offside directly from a corner kick.

 

[Bigga]

The rules don’t change for a corner. Robertson is ahead of Van Dijk when he heads the ball. That’s why Robertson is offside. The position of the corner taker is absolutely irrelevant at that point

I have more scenario questions, but I'll leave it.

 

[danielwood5]

it cant please everyone, there will always be outrage.
on a weekly basis i see VAR correctly ruling out a offside goal, awarding a penalty or a red card etc and vast majority of time its the correct outcome.
that sort of diving has reduced and when it happens we can now check. will it still get it wrong sometimes.. yes. but on the main its working and now Refs are communicating with the crowds on verdicts - which was demanded, i'd say its working well.

Do you honestly think diving, playacting and gamesmanship is better or worse compared to pre-VAR?
How many ridiculously, blatant offsides do you remember from the 7 years pre-VAR?

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Do you honestly think diving, playacting and gamesmanship is better or worse compared to pre-VAR?
How many ridiculously, blatant offsides do you remember from the 7 years pre-VAR?

A few marginal calls and the odd howler, but even with VAR they still just make shit up like they did with Rashford and Rat Face ine the Derby.

 

[Gray]

As one observant member on here pointed out our penalty should have been re-taken as their keeper flicked the crossbar immediately prior to Haaland taking the kick. That seems to have passed the experts by.