Marco Van Basten

[Greenbeard]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Footage below of Hibs v Celtic in the Dryborough Cup Final with a modified offside rule. You can see the extended line at the edge of the penalty box.

https://youtu.be/fX9n4156lsU

That strip is just beautiful.

[Greenbeard]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There is a reason the off side rule came into football.

Enlighten us. Seriously. Not ripping you. Interested to know how, when, who.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Enlighten us. Seriously. Not ripping you. Interested to know how, when, who.

It's because the game was played in the 2 penalty boxes. Everyone was either a striker or a defender.

Remember primary school football? Kick and rush.

[Greenbeard]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's frustrating, to say the least, but it'll be difficult to resolve.

Personally, I think that offside should measured from where a player's feet are, regardless of where his shoulder or head are.

It might not stop the intricate measuring, but it would bring it into line with how a referee decides if a foul was committed in or out of the penalty box.

You would still have the same ridic decisions depending on where the player's big toe is and where his stride is at the point the ball is played forward. I'd go with the player's trunk like in athletics photo finishes. Take the flapping arms and legs out of the equation. Anyone ever heard of a controversial photo finish in athletics? They get it right 100% of the time. Ok, they have a camera right in line with the finish line so VAR decisions might not be quite so dependable but it would take out a good proportion of the marginal and dubious decisions.

[Pretty Boy]

With VAR the criteria for overturning an offside call should be strictly only if the error is clear and obvious. A players shoulder being 2cm in front of the defenders body is not clear and obvious. Measuring these minute distances is not what I envisaged technology being used for.

It different from goal line technology in that a cm could be the difference between a goal or not a goal. The difference is there in black and white. With the offside rule it's impossible to determine if the end of your nose being offside offered any material advantage.

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

With VAR the criteria for overturning an offside call should be strictly only if the error is clear and obvious. A players shoulder being 2cm in front of the defenders body is not clear and obvious. Measuring these minute distances is not what I envisaged technology being used for.

It different from goal line technology in that a cm could be the difference between a goal or not a goal. The difference is there in black and white. With the offside rule it's impossible to determine if the end of your nose being offside offered any material advantage.

A margin for error for players to essentially be "level" needs to be built in and all managers, players etc to agree to it.

The 2cm offside when players are, to all intents and purposes "level", is a nonsense.

And if the players are "level" then the advantage should lie with the attacking side.

Less hanging around waiting for decisions, more likelihood that already-celebrated goals will stand.

Clear rules that should be understood by all.

VAR should be a huge asset and still has the potential to be so. It just needs to be used properly, for lessons to be learned and for players and managers not to be twats about it.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

With VAR the criteria for overturning an offside call should be strictly only if the error is clear and obvious. A players shoulder being 2cm in front of the defenders body is not clear and obvious. Measuring these minute distances is not what I envisaged technology being used for.

It different from goal line technology in that a cm could be the difference between a goal or not a goal. The difference is there in black and white. With the offside rule it's impossible to determine if the end of your nose being offside offered any material advantage.

I used to think that, but it wouldn't work.

Unlike fouls, dives or deliberate handball etc, offside, once technology is applied, is pretty much always clear and obvious, even if the margin is tiny.

If the information is available to the referees, they would have to use it. If it's obvious to the TV cameras that the player is 2 inches offside, the ref can't then say it's not obvious, if you follow.

Offside is offside. Over the line is over the line.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A margin for error for players to essentially be "level" needs to be built in and all managers, players etc to agree to it.

The 2cm offside when players are, to all intents and purposes "level", is a nonsense.

And if the players are "level" then the advantage should lie with the attacking side.

Less hanging around waiting for decisions, more likelihood that already-celebrated goals will stand.

Clear rules that should be understood by all.

VAR should be a huge asset and still has the potential to be so. It just needs to be used properly, for lessons to be learned and for players and managers not to be twats about it.

Level is currently onside.

The words "Ach, it's ok, he was only 2 inches offside" will never be spoken by a manager or player. Unless their team has benefitted, of course.

Can you imagine the furore if the World Cup was decided by a goal which everyone, including the referee, knew was offside at the time?

I don't think there's ever going to be the tolerance in football to allow that.

[nonshinyfinish]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I used to think that, but it wouldn't work.

Unlike fouls, dives or deliberate handball etc, offside, once technology is applied, is pretty much always clear and obvious, even if the margin is tiny.

If the information is available to the referees, they would have to use it. If it's obvious to the TV cameras that the player is 2 inches offside, the ref can't then say it's not obvious, if you follow.

I don't think that's true for the kind of tiny margins being picked up by VAR at times. What's the error margin? Consider the thickness of the lines drawn and which exact frame is chosen to pause on for the ball leaving the player's foot.

(On the original topic – current offside is a bit of a mess, at least where VAR is used, but getting rid of it entirely is a truly terrible idea.)

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think that's true for the kind of tiny margins being picked up by VAR at times. What's the error margin? Consider the thickness of the lines drawn and which exact frame is chosen to pause on for the ball leaving the player's foot.

(On the original topic – current offside is a bit of a mess, at least where VAR is used, but getting rid of it entirely is a truly terrible idea.)

I did say "pretty much" but the vast majority can be made obvious by the technology. The TV companies will always do that so there's really no reason for the refs to ignore it.

[mal]

If offside was scrapped altogether teams would put big forwards right up against the goalkeeper and try to get the ball to them as quickly as possible and as often as possible, something you could do from your own keeper's kickout without troubling the midfield in any way. Defences would be need to be organised to counteract that tactic. Trialing the rule change now would only tell you so much since games would have to be played with existing squads. Establish the new rule and clubs would start recruiting players who could operate that system - big, good in the air and able to get quickly from one box to the other as defence changes to attack and vice versa. Midfielders as we currently know them would cease to exist; actual ball skills would become much less important; the game would deteriorate into hoofball, set pieces, and shooting from distance, even more than it is now.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If offside was scrapped altogether teams would put big forwards right up against the goalkeeper and try to get the ball to them as quickly as possible and as often as possible, something you could do from your own keeper's kickout without troubling the midfield in any way. Defences would be need to be organised to counteract that tactic. Trialing the rule change now would only tell you so much since games would have to be played with existing squads. Establish the new rule and clubs would start recruiting players who could operate that system - big, good in the air and able to get quickly from one box to the other as defence changes to attack and vice versa. Midfielders as we currently know them would cease to exist; actual ball skills would become much less important; the game would deteriorate into hoofball, set pieces, and shooting from distance, even more than it is now.

Messi no more...

[Keith_M]

I think this is a good time to show the Worst Offside Trap Ever....


https://streamable.com/3ymo0

[worcesterhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I did say "pretty much" but the vast majority can be made obvious by the technology. The TV companies will always do that so there's really no reason for the refs to ignore it.

personally I think the rule should be that there has to be clear daylight, between the forward and the defender for them to be offside. There would be far less contentious decisions and far more of the really close calls would result in a goal. It gives the slight advantage to attacking players and would lead to more goals which surely has to be a good thing ?

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

personally I think the rule should be that there has to be clear daylight, between the forward and the defender for them to be offside. There would be far less contentious decisions and far more of the really close calls would result in a goal. It gives the slight advantage to attacking players and would lead to more goals which surely has to be a good thing ?

How would that work for floodlit matches?

[worcesterhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Footage below of Hibs v Celtic in the Dryborough Cup Final with a modified offside rule. You can see the extended line at the edge of the penalty box.

https://youtu.be/fX9n4156lsU

If they don't re-instate that music as the music for Sportscene next season I will attack the BBC Studios with a trained group of earwigs !

[worcesterhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How would that work for floodlit matches?

You know what I meant

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You know what I meant

Sorry - I've had folk asking me stupid questions all morning at work so I'd thought I'd get my own back.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sorry - I've had folk asking me stupid questions all morning at work so I'd thought I'd get my own back.

All morning?

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

All morning?

I'm not biting.

[worcesterhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think this is a good time to show the Worst Offside Trap Ever....


https://streamable.com/3ymo0

While that video is hilarious, surely Kent IS offside when Morelos plays him in as the ball goes forward ?

[nonshinyfinish]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

While that video is hilarious, surely Kent IS offside when Morelos plays him in as the ball goes forward ?

Kent is behind the ball when it's played, so not offside.

(Also, while in 99% of offside cases the ball does go forward, that's not part of the law and it's entirely possible to have an offside offence where the ball goes backward.)

[Northernhibee]

I'd like to see it trialled that the line from offsides not counting gets moved from the halfway line to about 25 yards out - enough for the keeper to come out and hoover up a long ball if it gets punted up the pitch to a poacher.

[worcesterhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Kent is behind the ball when it's played, so not offside.

(Also, while in 99% of offside cases the ball does go forward, that's not part of the law and it's entirely possible to have an offside offence where the ball goes backward.)

Apologies your right, at first watch it looks like it's passed forward to him, but he is behind the ball when it's passed. Thanks for clearing it up !

[Sammy7nil]

It was tried in the Drybrough cup with no offside unless you were within 18 yds of the goal not deemed a success and dumped.

[Eyrie]

VAR should be restricted to the "clear and obvious" errors, so simply put a very short time limit on the review and restrict the number of times a given angle can be viewed.

If it's clear and obvious, it will be picked up quickly. If it's about whether the wind blew the attacker's nasal hair too far forward then it's not clear and obvious.

[StirlingHibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you actually being serious? If so I'm guessing that you haven't played the game at any level?
The offside rule is one of the most fundamental things that make fitbaw the greatest game ever played. You would end up with players just hanging around the 18 yard box looking for a long punt up the park and would end up with the game looking more like basket ball than football

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

Not entirely serious mate and you'll be reassured that, no, I haven't played the game beyond Youth level. I do think though that something needs to change with the current rule.

[wookie70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I used to think that, but it wouldn't work.

Unlike fouls, dives or deliberate handball etc, offside, once technology is applied, is pretty much always clear and obvious, even if the margin is tiny.

If the information is available to the referees, they would have to use it. If it's obvious to the TV cameras that the player is 2 inches offside, the ref can't then say it's not obvious, if you follow.

Offside is offside. Over the line is over the line.

Technology is applied in terms of speeding fines but a margin of error is built in to make sure the calls are correct. I'm not sure what speed they shoot film at but say it is 60 frames a second. If you can even see the exact frame the ball is struck that still means there is a 1/60th of a second worth of debate and with players crossing at speed there is no way that it will be that accurate imo. It is presented as fact but I suspect there is quite a decent margin for error and that should go to the attacking team. I shoot loads of sports photography, or did when we had freedom. My camera shoots 20 frames a second and the difference between frames is huge. Normal UK TV is 24fps I think. Here are two images taken 1/20th second apart, lockdown means I have no shots of sports so apologies for the Dog images but they serve to show what I mean. Look at the position of her legs and how far she has travelled in relation to the background while I panned the camera and now think about how quickly a players legs and arms are moving combine with another player going the other way. I don't think technology is accurate enough yet and would like to know the specs of the equipment. If it is extremely high speed slow motion cameras then perhaps it is accurate enough. IF it is typical 60/120 fps then there is a margin and it should be able to be calculated in terms of time and then translated into how far a part of a player could travel in that time and doubled as there are two players. Hope that makes some sense as it is how I see it.

I agree with you when it comes to over the line in goal line decisions as that is a static situation with only one moving object and unless we can see the ball over the line it shouldn't be a goal.

_CDB6843_1 by Simon Wootton, on Flickr
_CDB6844_1 by Simon Wootton, on Flickr