cricketfieldclarets wrote:Live now. Two disallowed goals, one howling miss from Icardi and the rest a typical old school Serie A 0-0er!

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Live now. Two disallowed goals, one howling miss from Icardi and the rest a typical old school Serie A 0-0er!

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Apparently he may have been 1mm offside. Which is still offside... Great just what we want. No strikers taking gambles etc.

This will have the reverse effect on goals as what the passback rule had.

dsr wrote:And here are some numbers.

1. The fastest Premier League sprint was Sane this season, 35.480 km/hour.
2. This, when divided down, is 9.855 m/s. or 388 inches per second.
3. Ordinary TV has, I believe, 26 frames per second; HD has 64 frames per second. So in ordinary TV, a running player is travelling at up to 15 inches per frame. On HD TV, 6 inches per frame. But remember too that one of his feet is moving a lot faster than the other, so say 24 inches per frame / 10 inches per frame. And the defender may be going the other way.

So when a freeze frame shows a man an offside by a foot or less, then it can't be trusted. Half a frame earlier or later - which may very well be a more accurate image based on the millisecond the ball was kicked - he could have been onside.

In short, we do not have the technology to judge offside to the inch.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:rules out a perfect Icardi goal in The Milan derby.

Imploding Turtle wrote:It was offside. Are offside goals "perfect" goals now?

tim_noone wrote:Couple of dodgy offsides? For city tonight.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:It wasn't.

Imploding Turtle wrote:Says who/what?

Imploding Turtle wrote:Looks offside to me

dsr wrote:It's what I said earlier. Llook at the ball. That picture isn't taken at the moment the ball was kicked. It's probably at least a fiftieth of a second late. You need to go back to the frame that doesn't exist a fiftieth of a second earlier if you want to accurately judge whether he was offside.

Or alternatively, trust your own eyes. He was level.

dsr wrote:It's what I said earlier. Llook at the ball. That picture isn't taken at the moment the ball was kicked. It's probably at least a fiftieth of a second late. You need to go back to the frame that doesn't exist a fiftieth of a second earlier if you want to accurately judge whether he was offside.

Or alternatively, trust your own eyes. He was level.

Imploding Turtle wrote:His foot might be level, but his head and right shoulder is ahead of his foot. and the only player who could be playing him onside would be doing so with his foot. so if his foot is level with the defenders' foot, then his head and shoulder is offside.

Maybe the rule should be changed to only a players' feet can be offside instead of just any body part that can play the ball. But as the rule is written currently then he was offside and VAR got it right.

In conclusion Gagliardini was asked about Icardi’s goal which was ruled offside after VAR was consulted to which he replied: “It was a correct decision, now we have to score a goal after the break.”

In the 38th minute Icardi scored a goal which was disallowed as the Inter captain was fractionally offside and thus prevented from scoring for the third consecutive derby in the Serie A after having scored a hattrick earlier this season and last season in the 2-2 draw.

Imploding Turtle wrote:His foot might be level, but his head and right shoulder is ahead of his foot. and the only player who could be playing him onside would be doing so with his foot. so if his foot is level with the defenders' foot, then his head and shoulder is offside.

Maybe the rule should be changed to only a players' feet can be offside instead of just any body part that can play the ball. But as the rule is written currently then he was offside and VAR got it right.

UpTheBeehole wrote:Inter's own player said this: