Jump to content

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, cubaricho said:


Because it’s where the ball is, it has nothing to do with Emerson’s body?

 

Yep, but it is where Kane's concerned, i just think that decision is finding a reason to disallow a goal, and i guess that the issue with the way VAR officials are implementing decisions. There's zero margin of error, there's always a fraction of second for a ball to move, at the same time a player is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tgarve said:

image.png.235a29d60e621788f0bf2bcc477f8037.png

 

I see what you mean. I didn't see that dotted blue line at first. But have they measured the position of the ball in the air correctly in relation to the pitch? Normally with VAR, they only have to measure the attacker with the last defender.

 

When I saw it live, he looked clearly behind the ball, but yeah, perhaps that's wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, tgarve said:

image.png.235a29d60e621788f0bf2bcc477f8037.png

 

I know, but i think you're not following my point. Most of Emerson is ahead of Kane, the only parts of Kane offside are his knee, head and left shoulder, and he scores with his right foot. I just think that's a margin call that should go with the attacking team.

 

Basically Kane is measured by his farthest forward scoring body part, Emerson is measured by where the ball strikes him, that's kind skewed imo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cronky said:

 

I see what you mean. I didn't see that dotted blue line at first. But have they measured the position of the ball in the air correctly in relation to the pitch? Normally with VAR, they only have to measure the attacker with the last defender.

 

When I saw it live, he looked clearly behind the ball, but yeah, perhaps that's wrong.

It’s fucking ridiculous nonetheless like

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bimpy474 said:

 

I know, but i think you're not following my point. Most of Emerson is ahead of Kane, the only parts of Kane offside are his knee, head and left shoulder, and he scores with his right foot. I just think that's a margin call that should go with the attacking team.

 

Basically Kane is measured by his farthest forward scoring body part, Emerson is measured by where the ball strikes him, that's kind skewed imo.

Agree for a rule change but it’s right in the current rules 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Bimpy474 said:

I know, but i think you're not following my point. Most of Emerson is ahead of Kane

 

You keep missing the point that this has nothing to do with the decision. :lol:

 

The offside rule is where the ball is when passed and then the furthest forward part of the body that can be used to score a goal of the person receiving the ball. It has nothing to do with how much of the passer's body is behind or ahead of the ball.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Cronky said:

 

I see what you mean. I didn't see that dotted blue line at first. But have they measured the position of the ball in the air correctly in relation to the pitch? Normally with VAR, they only have to measure the attacker with the last defender.

 

When I saw it live, he looked clearly behind the ball, but yeah, perhaps that's wrong.

 

I have to admit i think the decision technically is right, but imo it's wrong for the reasons i've explained. It's not a system being implemented for goals, it's a system being implemented to stop them, which i don't think was the way it was meant to be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bimpy474 said:

 

I know, but i think you're not following my point. Most of Emerson is ahead of Kane, the only parts of Kane offside are his knee, head and left shoulder, and he scores with his right foot. I just think that's a margin call that should go with the attacking team.

 

Basically Kane is measured by his farthest forward scoring body part, Emerson is measured by where the ball strikes him, that's kind skewed imo.

 

I still think it either has to be onside or offside and keep anything subjective out of it. Rules are like this now and it would only be more complicated if you would allow some limbs to be in an offside position in some decisions.

 

I'm all for only drawing lines from the furthest feet to make it more simple but those are not the rules now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cubaricho said:

 

You keep missing the point that this has nothing to do with the decision. :lol:

 

The offside rule is where the ball is when passed and then the furthest forward part of the body that can be used to score a goal of the person receiving the ball. It has nothing to do with how much of the passer's body is behind or ahead of the ball.

 

I know the laws, my opinion of that kind of decision is that the law is wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Pata said:

 

I still think it either has to be onside or offside and keep anything subjective out of it. Rules are like this now and it would only be more complicated if you would allow some limbs to be in an offside position in some decisions.

 

I'm all for only drawing lines from the furthest feet to make it more simple but those are not the rules now.

 

Yeah i get you're point, i do this a lot but my two work colleagues who still ref (i don't because of my knee) who get the hump with me if i say rules, it's laws of the game, they get really humpy about it [emoji38]

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bimpy474 said:

 

I know the laws, my opinion of that kind of decision is that the law is wrong.

 

Didn't mean to imply you didn't know the laws, sorry. It's just impossible to give the striker 'fair' advantage as then the line would just be in a different spot but the arguments would be the same. Like striker gets 10cm leeway but the same conversations would be had if a striker is offside by 11cm.

 

Edit. Thought the earlier was a reply to my post, sorry again. :lol:

 

 

Edited by Pata

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pata said:

 

Didn't mean to imply you didn't know the laws, sorry. It's just impossible to give the striker 'fair' advantage as then the line would just be in a different spot but the arguments would be the same. Like striker gets 10cm leeway but the same conversations would be had if a striker is offside by 11cm.

 

I didn't take offence mate, apologises if you thought i had a dig back, that wasn't on purpose.

 

I just look at decision and think measure things differently, as tgrave said it's a moot point, they won't change the laws anyway.

 

 

Edited by Bimpy474

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Turnbull2000 said:

Champs League failures still dropping into Europa? Thought that was going to end ffs. It's fucking absurd.

It’s not too bad in some circumstances , 

 

say we got drawn with Real Madrid and Napoli next season -

 

We could be out by the 4th game but it’s something to still play for and keeps it interesting whilst also I’m sure us as fans would be happy to give the europa a crack 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Turnbull2000 said:

Champs League failures still dropping into Europa? Thought that was going to end ffs. It's fucking absurd.

 

Aye, it's so the bigger clubs who drop in get protection, i mean protection and second chance after being shite, seems fair.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, tgarve said:

It’s not too bad in some circumstances , 

 

say we got drawn with Real Madrid and Napoli next season -

 

We could be out by the 4th game but it’s something to still play for and keeps it interesting whilst also I’m sure us as fans would be happy to give the europa a crack 

 

Surely though if you don't qualify you should just drop out, I get we could get drawn against some big clubs, but it just seems so unfair a team who fail get a second chance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tgarve said:

It’s not too bad in some circumstances , 

 

say we got drawn with Real Madrid and Napoli next season -

 

We could be out by the 4th game but it’s something to still play for and keeps it interesting whilst also I’m sure us as fans would be happy to give the europa a crack 

 

I'm not even thinking about CL qualification. Europa League alone would be incredible. I'd be mightily pissed if we manage to qualify but get knocked out by a Champs League failure whose fans and players don't really want to be there.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...