DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 1302--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: ajb95
Date: September 28, 2018, 3:20 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: bmb link ---
>
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
#Post#: 1303--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: QuoCob
Date: September 28, 2018, 6:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
#Post#: 1306--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: bmb
Date: September 28, 2018, 7:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: QuoCob link ---
>
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=165.msg1302#msg1302
date=1538122827]
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
[/quote]
Good point - neither scenario is right when you look at them in
these contexts really.
It's also not right that Barkley (#8 I am told) was the one who
headed the ball for the goal is offside in the above images -
look at where his left foot is but was not penalised for it & a
goal stood. I understand "clear and obvious error" but the VAR
can see from that still what the AR has absolutely zero chance
of seeing in real time and if we are to go down that route,
which is now obvious that we are, then shouldn't a wrong be
righted? Either VAR has to right the wrongs, where an official
in real time has zero chance of seeing something or what is the
point in it? Too tight for the naked eye & I am not criticising
the AR at all, just the system that has been set up to
supposedly help them with decisions that simply due to the
nature and speed of the game they cannot be expected to make in
real time. How is that a help? A wrong decision, albeit a 100%
understandable one, was not righted by the very technology
provided to do so!
#Post#: 1307--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: September 28, 2018, 7:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: bmb link ---
>
> [quote author=QuoCob link=topic=165.msg1303#msg1303
date=1538132985]
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=165.msg1302#msg1302
date=1538122827]
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
[/quote]
Good point - neither scenario is right when you look at them in
these contexts really.
It's also not right that Barkley (#8 I am told) was the one who
headed the ball for the goal is offside in the above images -
look at where his left foot is but was not penalised for it & a
goal stood. I understand "clear and obvious error" but the VAR
can see from that still what the AR has absolutely zero chance
of seeing in real time and if we are to go down that route,
which is now obvious that we are, then shouldn't a wrong be
righted? Either VAR has to right the wrongs, where an official
in real time has zero chance of seeing something or what is the
point in it? Too tight for the naked eye & I am not criticising
the AR at all, just the system that has been set up to
supposedly help them with decisions that simply due to the
nature and speed of the game they cannot be expected to make in
real time. How is that a help? A wrong decision, albeit a 100%
understandable one, was not righted by the very technology
provided to do so!
[/quote]
I haven't seen any conclusive image to indicate for certain that
he was offside - you can't see completely where the Liverpool
defender is positioned.
#Post#: 1308--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: bmb
Date: September 28, 2018, 10:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> I haven't seen any conclusive image to indicate for certain
that he was offside - you can't see completely where the
Liverpool defender is positioned.
>
--- End Quote ---
You can see in the enlarged still that his left foot (red sock,
white boot) is on the blue VAR line whereas the #8 foot (white
sock, red boot seen just under #29's thigh & knee) is goalside
of that line & therefore goalside of the defender. Like I said
above, absolutely zero chance of the AR ever being able to see
that in real time but the technology can certainly pick it up.
Granted from that angle you can't see his knee - you need the
same still from the mirror image view for that & it may well be
the case that his knee was about 1mm or so nearer the goaline.
These guys need help out there & I don't think the powers that
be are using the technology now available to do so effectively.
#Post#: 1352--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: Matt
Date: September 30, 2018, 3:22 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
If I could remember the whole play I'd be able to be specific
but
If an attacker is in an offside position to which the defender
has to play the ball or risk a goal being scored, then it would
be a fair review that the offside attacker is indeed affecting
the game. Think Kane and Lovren (LIV V THU 03/02/18.)
#Post#: 1400--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: October 1, 2018, 4:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: QuoCob link ---
>
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=165.msg1302#msg1302
date=1538122827]
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
[/quote]
I think you sometimes have to consider the spirit behind the
law.
The principle of the offside law seems to be to prevent a player
from simply 'goal-hanging' for the entire match - I don't think
it's to disallow goals because an attacking player on the
opposite side of the pitch was slightly ahead of the second-lest
defender.
This doesn't really work the other way round - i.e. no one would
object to a goal being allowed because a defender was too deep
but not in a position to affect the game.
The defensive equivalent in this is probably when a player has
to leave the pitch due to injury etc. and in the spirit of the
game it feels wrong for him to count as playing anyone onside,
which I think comes into play once the ball is cleared towards
the halfway line.
#Post#: 1402--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: QuoCob
Date: October 2, 2018, 2:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> [quote author=QuoCob link=topic=165.msg1303#msg1303
date=1538132985]
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=165.msg1302#msg1302
date=1538122827]
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
[/quote]
I think you sometimes have to consider the spirit behind the
law.
The principle of the offside law seems to be to prevent a player
from simply 'goal-hanging' for the entire match - I don't think
it's to disallow goals because an attacking player on the
opposite side of the pitch was slightly ahead of the second-lest
defender.
This doesn't really work the other way round - i.e. no one would
object to a goal being allowed because a defender was too deep
but not in a position to affect the game. Why not, one Law for
the attackers and one for the defenders?
The defensive equivalent in this is probably when a player has
to leave the pitch due to injury etc. and in the spirit of the
game it feels wrong for him to count as playing anyone onside,
which I think comes into play once the ball is cleared towards
the halfway line.
[/quote]
#Post#: 1410--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: October 2, 2018, 9:30 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: QuoCob link ---
>
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=165.msg1400#msg1400
date=1538429300]
> [quote author=QuoCob link=topic=165.msg1303#msg1303
date=1538132985]
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=165.msg1302#msg1302
date=1538122827]
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
[/quote]
I think you sometimes have to consider the spirit behind the
law.
The principle of the offside law seems to be to prevent a player
from simply 'goal-hanging' for the entire match - I don't think
it's to disallow goals because an attacking player on the
opposite side of the pitch was slightly ahead of the second-lest
defender.
This doesn't really work the other way round - i.e. no one would
object to a goal being allowed because a defender was too deep
but not in a position to affect the game. Why not, one Law for
the attackers and one for the defenders?
The defensive equivalent in this is probably when a player has
to leave the pitch due to injury etc. and in the spirit of the
game it feels wrong for him to count as playing anyone onside,
which I think comes into play once the ball is cleared towards
the halfway line.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Most spectators want to see goals scored and chances created.
The offside law prevents an attacker being able to simply goal
hang for 90 minutes and gain profit from it. An attacking player
who is on the opposite side of the pitch to where the ball is
doesn't gain any profit.
The question of whether or not a defender's position can affect
the game isn't really of relevance.
#Post#: 1412--------------------------------------------------
Re: Liverpool v Chelsea - Kevin Friend
DIR By: QuoCob
Date: October 2, 2018, 10:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> [quote author=QuoCob link=topic=165.msg1402#msg1402
date=1538464591]
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=165.msg1400#msg1400
date=1538429300]
> [quote author=QuoCob link=topic=165.msg1303#msg1303
date=1538132985]
> [quote author=ajb95 link=topic=165.msg1302#msg1302
date=1538122827]
> [quote author=bmb link=topic=165.msg1290#msg1290
date=1538077029]
> [quote author=bruntyboy link=topic=165.msg1288#msg1288
date=1538072264]
> Is it now time we went back to the "daylight" reference for
offsides? Plus as has been mentioned we have in this instance 2
Chelsea players definitely in "offside" positions and another
VAR will decide they are interfering with the defenders.
>
--- End Quote ---
I'm pretty sure the Law on offside was always much clearer than
it is now, it's about as clear as mud these days! Far too many
permutations, imo, for an AR to have to consider, in the split
second they have to make a decision, beyond the simple is he is
an offside position, yes or no, especially given the speed the
game is played at these days!
[/quote]
I didn’t like the old system much. People being in offside
positions that were having no impact on the game were being
unfairly penalised. I remember the 1999 fa cup semi final when
Roy Keane’s goal was ruled out because Dwight Yorke was in an
offside position but had had no impact on the game. Could have
cost United the treble that year!
[/quote]
Similar to something I said on this board in it's previous guise
that is current:
That defenders on the opposite side of the field of play being
deemed to have played the attacker onside when they also have
had no impact on the game?
Should that also be allowed/disallowed?
[/quote]
I think you sometimes have to consider the spirit behind the
law.
The principle of the offside law seems to be to prevent a player
from simply 'goal-hanging' for the entire match - I don't think
it's to disallow goals because an attacking player on the
opposite side of the pitch was slightly ahead of the second-lest
defender.
This doesn't really work the other way round - i.e. no one would
object to a goal being allowed because a defender was too deep
but not in a position to affect the game. Why not, one Law for
the attackers and one for the defenders?
The defensive equivalent in this is probably when a player has
to leave the pitch due to injury etc. and in the spirit of the
game it feels wrong for him to count as playing anyone onside,
which I think comes into play once the ball is cleared towards
the halfway line.
[/quote]
[/quote]
Most spectators want to see goals scored and chances created.
The offside law prevents an attacker being able to simply goal
hang for 90 minutes and gain profit from it. An attacking player
who is on the opposite side of the pitch to where the ball is
doesn't gain any profit.
The question of whether or not a defender's position can affect
the game isn't really of relevance.
[/quote]
You obviously weren't a defender.
If the attackers position/involvement in play has relevance then
the defenders position/involvement should be treated likewise.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 3
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page