Before VAR, the attacking team got the benefit of the doubt on wafer thin offsides like that

Season changing decision maybe

VAR is spoiling all enjoyment I used to have watching football.

This is what VAR is there for. Part of the point of VAR is to correct referees' mistakes, but part of it is to ensure that goals like that one are disallowed. Thirty years ago the offside law was changed so that "level" was onside, and it was specifically brought in to give the forward a bit more room to play and to encourage more goals. Through the medium of VAR, the lawmakers have been able to reverse that ruling and disallow lots of goals like this one.

The people who make the laws will be pleased. They positively want goals like this to be disallowed. They positively want it to be impossible for the linesman to get it right so we can have a delay. They are pleased that that goal would have been allowed in the Championship, it would have been allowed in the World Cup qualifying, but they have been able to disallow it in this game.

That is VAR's triumph. VAR has been able to disallow a goal that would normally be legal. VAR is happy.

Bigvince wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 8:52 pm

Before VAR, the attacking team got the benefit of the doubt on wafer thin offsides like that

No - before VAR, there was no doubt. Before VAR, the two players were level and level means onside. when the change of law was brought in so that level meant onside, referees were specifically told that "level" meant as judged by the human eye, not to the inch.

That is a disgrace of a decision, an absolute disgrace.

Bigvince wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 8:52 pm

Before VAR, the attacking team got the benefit of the doubt on wafer thin offsides like that

' Before VAR the 'BIG SIX' teams got the benefit on water thin offsides like that. '

Sorry. Couldn't resist changing that just a bit.

I can really see the courts becoming involved to question VAR decisions with so much money at stake. That was a wrong call, the Fulham defenders arm looked to be playing Podence on IMHO. Diabolical.

How the feck is that offside

How can VAR be 100% he's offside. Two others in the VAR room could have easily decided that he's not offside. It's become ridiculous to the point of laughable.

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 7:51 pm

just have a curry and let the rest of us rest easy !

How I see it, if we can't stay ahead of the bottom 3 or 4 through our own efforts then we deserve to go down.

Please, let's start measuring offside from the position of the players' feet. The game is called "football." Not "t-shirt line" or any other deviation.

A perfectly good goal has been disallowed by a badly written law. Before VAR all relevant parties the lino, the ref, the attackers, the defenders and all the fans would have watched the players' feet and all would have agreed that was a "good goal."

Must admit I thought VAR would be a good thing after decisions like the no pen at Huddersfield for example, or Arsenals ability to score goals with the hand......

But.............

Simply, there is no way to be sure that the exact point on a player’s arm (with different muscle sizes, different shirts etc) is measured each time by VAR.

It is totally subjective, and thus, a total farce.

This kind of thing is ruining football. Factual decisions, fine. But that isn’t factual. It is a judgement call as to where the score-able part of the arm starts.

That at best is level, yet another pathetic armpit offside call by VAR, hope it doesn't have the same effect Sheff Utd's disallowed goal at Villa had last season.

CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:06 pm

Simply, there is no way to be sure that the exact point on a player’s arm (with different muscle sizes, different shirts etc) is measured each time by VAR.

It is totally subjective, and thus, a total farce.

This kind of thing is ruining football. Factual decisions, fine. But that isn’t factual. It is a judgement call as to where the score-able part of the arm starts.

The offside law was already a joke. But the person who brought the entirely ambiguous ‘t-shirt line’ to the table must have been wetting themselves when the powers that be actually implemented it.

Nobody ever mentions how VAR Decide when the ball is kicked. If we are measuring in millimeters then 1 hundredth of a second either way on when the ball is kicked is vital. This is beyond insane

People blaming VAR again, it's the ruling, and the officials that are the mistake, not VAR.
If we had VAR and common sense, that goal would have stood.

It's clearly offside, I don't know what all the fuss is about.

Looking at the BBC live reporting text and Jacqui Oatley says 'no first goal for Willian Jose' I've doubled checked the line ups but can't find a Willian Jose, just have a look.

LordBob wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:15 pm

Looking at the BBC live reporting text and Jacqui Oatley says 'no first goal for Willian Jose' I've doubled checked the line ups but can't find a Willian Jose, just have a look.

No 12, Willian Jose da Silva

LordBob wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:15 pm

Looking at the BBC live reporting text and Jacqui Oatley says 'no first goal for Willian Jose' I've doubled checked the line ups but can't find a Willian Jose, just have a look.

Look at the players shirt ... its Willian J

For me the rule should be:

- If you scored with your head, then and only then is the head part of the active review
- If you scored with your shoulder, same
- If you scored with your chest, same
- if you scored with any other body part that isn’t a foot, same
- Offside regardless of what you scored with if your feet are offside as they physically got you to the ball whether you put it in with them or not.

jedi_master wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:20 pm

For me the rule should be:

- If you scored with your head, then and only then is the head part of the active review
- If you scored with your shoulder, same
- If you scored with your chest, same
- if you scored with any other body part that isn’t a foot, same
- Offside regardless of what you scored with if your feet are offside as they physically got you to the ball whether you put it in with them or not.

Yeah, that should simplify it.

I feel that’s very, very simple!

It doesn't even need to be that complicated, Jedi, just do feet. If someone has a jump on a defender and their head would be offside then tough for the defender. The days of midget defenders (Super Cannavaro!) have gone and the days of giant attackers are numbered as every 'forward thinking' coach insists on playing to feet.
Just do feet. It's so silly otherwise.

Tall Paul wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:18 pm

No 12, Willian Jose da Silva

Thank you, it's good to know I have you fellas to help out.

Makes the two coloured lines twice a thick. If they touch (no daylight) when making a VAR decision, then it’s attacker’s advantage: goal.

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:24 pm

Makes the two coloured lines twice a thick. If they touch (no daylight) when making a VAR decision, then it’s attacker’s advantage: goal.

The lines used by the VAR are just 1 pixel in width. The lines displayed for tv are for the benefit of the viewer.

Bosscat wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:18 pm

Look at the players shirt ... its Willian J

I'm reading not watching the little picture on my screen is beyond my eyesight

Phrases like daylight, and advantage, are utterly against the spirit of the game as they bring subjectivity into an objectively simple task. The offside law is fine, the only thing that needs to change is the parameters of the law. Instead of any part of the body by which you can score a goal, just make it feet. Footballers aren't going to cut their toes off to make their boots smaller.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:25 pm

The lines used by the VAR are just 1 pixel in width. The lines displayed for tv are for the benefit of the viewer.

I know that. Hence why I’d double them to allow a degree of error.

duncandisorderly wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:23 pm

It doesn't even need to be that complicated, Jedi, just do feet. If someone has a jump on a defender and their head would be offside then tough for the defender. The days of midget defenders (Super Cannavaro!) have gone and the days of giant attackers are numbered as every 'forward thinking' coach insists on playing to feet.
Just do feet. It's so silly otherwise.

I don’t disagree at all mate, that makes most sense for sure.

I just don’t think the other body parts being looked at is going to go away so with that in mind they need an alternative in my eyes to only review those body parts when they’ve actively contributed to the goal.

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:29 pm

I know that. Hence why I’d double them to allow a degree of error.

My point was that having a line that is 2 pixels in width isn’t going to make a difference as I doubt there has been an offside call that was decided by such a small margin.

Have wolves suddenly headed for the beach?

If Fulham somehow win this it will be a disgrace to the PL

Robinson would be a great signing for us

Jimmymaccer wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:34 pm

Have wolves suddenly headed for the beach?

Poor side are Wolves along with championship bound Fulham

Wish Wolves would run the clock down and take a point

Boom

Bosh!

FCBurnley wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 09, 2021 9:47 pm

Wish Wolves would run the clock down and take a point

I don't, they might score

Get in!!!!!

GET IN

Wow!
Cracker!

Bye bye, Fulham.

There is a GOD

That ones not offside!

Fulham are done they won't reach 33pts

Parker got what his negativity deserved

What a lovely start to the weekend