What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official 2022 World Cup Thread*** (1 Viewer)


My thoughts exactly. This is not what VAR should be used for. That is litterally a finger length offside (never mind that he can't even use the finger in the sport)
It would be so easy to use feet on the ground as where to measure. And it makes sense.

How do they continually get this simple stuff wrong when trying to improve the rules?
 

My thoughts exactly. This is not what VAR should be used for. That is litterally a finger length offside (never mind that he can't even use the finger in the sport)
It would be so easy to use feet on the ground as where to measure. And it makes sense.

How do they continually get this simple stuff wrong when trying to improve the rules?

They took Weah's goal away against Iran because his shoulder was 5 millimeters ahead but his feet were behind. This drives me nuts.

The one today is really causing an uproar from all over. Maybe some day FIFA will fix this obvious error in the rule.
 

My thoughts exactly. This is not what VAR should be used for. That is litterally a finger length offside (never mind that he can't even use the finger in the sport)
It would be so easy to use feet on the ground as where to measure. And it makes sense.

How do they continually get this simple stuff wrong when trying to improve the rules?

They took Weah's goal away against Iran because his shoulder was 5 millimeters ahead but his feet were behind. This drives me nuts.

The one today is really causing an uproar from all over. Maybe some day FIFA will fix this obvious error in the rule.

Only when the wrong team is impacted.
-QG
 

My thoughts exactly. This is not what VAR should be used for. That is litterally a finger length offside (never mind that he can't even use the finger in the sport)
VAR shouldn't be used for getting calls correct under the rules?? If yes, that makes no sense.

The entire original premise of VAR was to only be used for clear and obvious errors. It was never intended to go back into plays and nit pick down to a grain of sand of granularity using a 3d rendered video. It has been slowly but surely working its way into what we have today which was never the intent of using VAR.
 

My thoughts exactly. This is not what VAR should be used for. That is litterally a finger length offside (never mind that he can't even use the finger in the sport)
VAR shouldn't be used for getting calls correct under the rules?? If yes, that makes no sense.
The standard for changing any other call through VAR is that the call on the field must be clearly and obviously erroneous. I think that standard should also be applied to the use of VAR in offside calls in that I don't think VAR should be used to determine offside if the margin of the infraction is indetectable to the human eye in the run of play.

And this technology goes beyond VAR. I would wager that less than 50% of VAR officials, using only video replay, would call off that play for offside. The margin is really only determinible by the computer.

I've always argued for a more gestalt measure of offside position. In my opinion, if the center of gravity of the attacker (the hips) is horizontal with the center of gravity of the defender, the player should be onside. I don't care about heads and shoulders and legs. I don't think a defender should be able to spring an offside trap by just leaning toward the ball as it's passed.
 
Canada’s D can’t move the ball, but at least they are really, really slow.

Also, wasn’t announced as an own goal here for some reason. Obviously it was.
 

My thoughts exactly. This is not what VAR should be used for. That is litterally a finger length offside (never mind that he can't even use the finger in the sport)
VAR shouldn't be used for getting calls correct under the rules?? If yes, that makes no sense.

The entire original premise of VAR was to only be used for clear and obvious errors. It was never intended to go back into plays and nit pick down to a grain of sand of granularity using a 3d rendered video. It has been slowly but surely working its way into what we have today which was never the intent of using VAR.
I think that's a poor intent. I think an objectively better intent for the use of VAR is to get calls correct - especially in a sport where one score is massive.
 
The goal of the rules, and the enforcement of such, should be to provide the best game experience. Soccer is a low-scoring game, in part because of the evolution of high defensive lines and the offside trap. Consequently, the enforcement of offside has consistently been a subject of debate and tinkering among FIFA for the last 50 years. It's a delicate balance to make the tactic one with big rewards, but also significant risks. When players can be reliably ruled offside by microns, that risk/reward calculus is drastically shifted in favor of defenses, leading to lower scoring. Because goals literally change games, that leads to more static games.

We could use video replay in football to ensure that the refs on the field get every call right. Make sure there isn't a hold or a block in the back on every first down. But that would result in a remarkably crappy experience for fans.
 
Or to put it another way. Obviously, I was rooting fervently for the US against Iran. But try this thought experiment. Imagine that Weah's goal in first-half stoppage time was actually scored by Taremi for Iran in second-half stoppage time to send Iran through to the knockouts and send the US home. Even with all the motivation in the world to want that call to go the US's way, I simply can't imagine that I would be bemoaning the refs "screwing" the US if that goal were to be given.

Because in my 45 years of watching soccer, that goal has never been clearly and obviously offside. I've seen close calls like that called offside, but only because at the finest margins it's always been a judgment call (although the guidance has stated for a while that the offensive player gets the benefit of the doubt on judgment calls).
 
Lukaku is lucky that ball was likely out else he would be tagged with the old version of goat with that second miss which was even worse.
 
Or to put it another way. Obviously, I was rooting fervently for the US against Iran. But try this thought experiment. Imagine that Weah's goal in first-half stoppage time was actually scored by Taremi for Iran in second-half stoppage time to send Iran through to the knockouts and send the US home. Even with all the motivation in the world to want that call to go the US's way, I simply can't imagine that I would be bemoaning the refs "screwing" the US if that goal were to be given.

Because in my 45 years of watching soccer, that goal has never been clearly and obviously offside. I've seen close calls like that called offside, but only because at the finest margins it's always been a judgment call (although the guidance has stated for a while that the offensive player gets the benefit of the doubt on judgment calls).
No.
 
Or to put it another way. Obviously, I was rooting fervently for the US against Iran. But try this thought experiment. Imagine that Weah's goal in first-half stoppage time was actually scored by Taremi for Iran in second-half stoppage time to send Iran through to the knockouts and send the US home. Even with all the motivation in the world to want that call to go the US's way, I simply can't imagine that I would be bemoaning the refs "screwing" the US if that goal were to be given.

Because in my 45 years of watching soccer, that goal has never been clearly and obviously offside. I've seen close calls like that called offside, but only because at the finest margins it's always been a judgment call (although the guidance has stated for a while that the offensive player gets the benefit of the doubt on judgment calls).

All of you are forgetting just how many crappy experiences we had with offsides before they changed the rules to the current ones.

Yes the rule should be feet instead of any part of the body, but a technical ruling that is sometimes annoyingly accurate is way better than having it be some subjective thing where certain referees decide to blow their whistles in certain situations and other referees don't. Losing a game because you technically did something illegal but only by an amount that a referee might previously have subjectively and arbitrarily allowed to go uncalled is much better than losing a game because this week's ref decided that the shoulder isn't offsides and his margin of error was different than the ref in the last game who arbitrarily decided that exact same situation should be blown dead.

It was a MESS before. A bunch of guys standing 60 yards from the play deciding whether something was offsides based on their own subjective opinion for the amount a guy could be offsides before it mattered to their personal tolerances.

And even with VAR only being "clear and obvious", then you're back with the issue of refs blowing the play dead when a guy was onsides prematurely. Because if only "clear and obvious" counts then they can't let play go on as the default because that trends results towards allowing more offsides plays to count. And then you get stuck on what tolerance level is clear and obvious via VAR? An inch? A foot? Or are we back to the ref's personal tolerances of what is "clear and obvious"? If a computer can determine that a guy is offsides using science, isn't that clear and obvious?

Yes, it slows the game down, ruins celebrations, and creates less scoring. But it's either that or we acknowledge that to avoid those things we're just going to knowingly allow the wrong teams to win games in this gajillion dollar tournament, and we accept that there is going to be massive controversy several times every world cup where goals get incorrectly allowed/disallowed when we know, scientifically, that the wrong call was made. And in a low scoring game like soccer, one known illegal goal that we know should/shouldn't have counted can be the difference between a team going out in the group stage and them going all the way to the finals.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top