All about rules ... changes, enforcement, VAR etc

Bazshuayi

:hmm:

Pearces_Left_Foot

Goal hangers would be the new vogue

Bazshuayi

The boy 'Line acre' would surely come out of retirement :whome:

Cuz1

Var would have a fuels day with them ears

Cuz1

Field day I meant lol

buffybegood

Hockey used to have a very similar offside rule to football, but they did away with it completely without it having any particularly detrimental affect to the game. If someone wants to goal hang, you just have to leave a defender there to mark him.

Moojor

Offside should just be anyone in an offside position. Get rid of the whole are they aren't they involved in the play.
Defenders have to be aware of where all players around them are, so everyone is in someway involved in the play.

Moojor

MrsGrey said:

Then the bloke lying on the floor after being fouled is judged offside?

Well the "foul" would be judged before the offside. So a free kick would be given. If its not a foul then hes offside.

MrsGrey

I was imagining a non-foul (in the sense of the ref stopping play) scenario :ok:

Brother_Sledge

Only defenders should be able to play attackers onside - 'helpful' midfielders such as Yarmo and Felipe should be excused :biggrin:

chicagohammer

Who can forget when the ball parted Sammy Lees hair during the league cup final - I am still mad about that

claretandbluesky

I think the issue with VAR is our own expectation of it. I think we feel it must be perfect but it's actually a method of getting things nearly perfect, so the question must be are we happier, for arguments sake, getting 95 calls correct instead of 75? I think most of us would say we would like as many as possible to be correct and it seems clear that VAR helps that. There is of course the view of Danny Baker who just says it takes away all the thrill of it all and he is happy for wrong decisions and sees them as part of the game.

Brother_Sledge

I have got a ticket for the Bar codes game, so my first live match of the season - when we score, I want to be able to jump around like a madman without having to wait for VAR so I guess Danny Baker has a point. :goal:

IronHerb

No, you jump up and down and when VAR confirms you jump up and down again. If VAR goes against then at least you have jumped up and down.

Danny Baker has his opinion, doesn't make it right.

MrsGrey

Another issue with VAR is seen today...

The 2nd City goal v Villa.

VAR reviewed it, decided that it was scored by KDB because they couldn't get a clear shot/angle to show if David Silva touched it or not.

Because Sterling was not offside when KDB struck the ball (they checked) then his obstruction of the keeper was acceptable.

BUT, the dubious goals panel (independent of everybody) later awarded the goal to Silva. Which means that Sterling WAS offside when Silva struck the ball .... but now the goal can't be disallowed.

IronHerb

Silva was shown telling the ref he got a touch. :doh:

MrsGrey

Although the refs never believe a player when they tell him they did/didn't touch the ball.

Remember Kane pleading that it touched his head, in order to claim the goal? Or any defender (every defender) claiming they got the ball in order to avoid a booking?

SuzanneClaret

For me, the problem with VAR is that the footage is reviewed by the same referees who ref the games.

So the same errors are made.

MrsGrey

I just saw this on the Beeb, and found some things quite interesting...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641

This, for example: Swarbrick said the one-pixel lines used by VAR were magnified for TV broadcast which could make decisions seem more marginal than they are. So what we see at home isn't as 'accurate' as what the VAR sees.

Could fans watch or listen to VAR decisions, as in rugby or cricket? "You cannot use any referee communications like that because IFAB (football's lawmakers) protocols don't allow us to." Personaly, I'm OK with this. I just think info could be a bit more comprehensive when put up on the big screen: not 'checking goal' but 'checking foul by Liverpool player in build up to goal' (say)

BBC Match of the Day presenter Gary Lineker has suggested there should be a time limit of between 30 seconds and a minute for VAR decisions - otherwise, the time taken would indicate it is not a clear and obvious error which needs correcting. "I can understand what he is saying but I don't think you can go down that line and say anything over a minute, we can't look at," [Swarbrick] said.

I agree with Swarbrick (sorry, Gary!) The point is to get it right, otherwise there's no point having VAR. imo, the problem is being caused by the 'clear and obvious' requirement which in itself is open to interpretation and can (and obviously does - hence some of the frustration) mean different things to different people. I think that wording should be abolished.

thornburyiron

It doesn’t help that the PL don’t seem to understand the rules they're trying to apply in some instances. At least 3 ex referees have said the decision not to award the penalty was correct because the ball came off Silva’s hand and hit TAA’s hand and was unavoidable and his arm was in a natural position etc etc.
The PL spokesman said it was not given by the VAR official because it wasn’t deliberate. Whether you agree with the outcome or not the PL should know that deliberate doesn’t appear in the new law.
At least Riley has now instructed referees to look at the monitors on occasion.

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

The PL spokesman said it was not given by the VAR official because it wasn’t deliberate. Whether you agree with the outcome or not the PL should know that deliberate doesn’t appear in the new law.

Sorry, thorn, I think you have got that wrong.


In some circs, the handball HAS to be deliberate to be an offence. In only some other other circs does 'intent' playno part in the decision. See here:

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1263332

Also note: Premier League players will be allowed extra leeway when it comes to ricocheted handballs.

It is often impossible to avoid contact with the ball if it has deflected off the body of an opponent, team-mate, or even another part of the own player.

So a handball will not be awarded if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or the head/body/foot of another player who is close/nearby.

alderz

IMO, the most annoying decision in the Liverpool City game was for the ref to let Salah take over a minute to cross the pitch slowly while being subbed off. That’s not the rule anymore and I’ve seen other players be forced off the far side

thornburyiron

I should have been a bit more explicit. Deliberate doesn’t appear in the new law as being a requirement as it used to be so not being deliberate doesn’t preclude the awarding of a penalty. The PL should not have used that as the reason as I presume the VAR ref gave a more detailed reason unless of course he just said “I agree with you” to the on field ref.

MrsGrey

alderz said:

IMO, the most annoying decision in the Liverpool City game was for the ref to let Salah take over a minute to cross the pitch slowly while being subbed off. That’s not the rule anymore and I’ve seen other players be forced off the far side

It is a rule that is sometimes applied and sometimes not. It's the whole 'consistency' thing again.

I see no reason whatsoever why the refs shouldn't, and can't, just stick to the rule.

thornburyiron

Swarbrick says he’d give VAR 7/10. Also he thinks the major decisions pre VAR had about 82% accuracy but now they’re about 90%. As they have the opportunity to review and take their time doing it that it should as close to 100% as is possible even though decisions are still subjective.

chicagohammer

The recent Blunts vs Spurs VAR decision took nearly 4 minutes to decide upon, clearly the offside was difficult to truly determine one way or another, in such instances would be considered heresy to suggest that the attacking side should get the benefit of the doubt.... :sofa:

Pearces_Left_Foot

Maybe they should have a. 1 minute var deadline if they are not sure after that the original onfield decision stands :hmm:

MunichHammer

Just saw the highlights of the match. How was Antonios goal a handball? It bounced off the post, short distance and his arm was close to his body, no unnatural position and certainly not making himself bigger or even moving his arm towards the ball.
Should have countrd imho

Lukerz

They changed the rule this season to state that you cannot score a goal, if in the build up/goal your hand touches the ball, unintentional/natural or not.

IronHerb

Tell that to Watford.