Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

VAR

After that decision yesterday, that's me given up on watching Premier League anymore. It was a blatant handball and Oliver just decides to give it anyway. Before you had bad decisions, but you argue they were honest mistakes, now you just have blatant match fixing, in done with it.
Maybe because I watch Italian football I'm cynical but I think the PL has been corrupt for years.

I think the World Cup was an absolute fix bought by Qatar to make sure Neymar, Messi or Mbappe took the trophy. We know very well they bought the tournament.

How anyone can believe that refs aren't corrupt when at times there are tens of millions riding on games is beyond me.

Saying that it looked like Ashley Young was the person doing the most to get us relegated this season. Forget the handball. That pass straight to their attack was a much more suspect decision.
 
I'd literally just keep goal line technology and the AI offside decisions and bin the rest. Those two things are instantaneous (or near enough) and, because they are automated, don't have any built in bias.
Also forget this 1cm offside rubbish.

It's there to stop goal hanging.

If he's 20cm offside that is minimal enough that it shouldn't affect the goal.

Also handballs need to go back to before. Running into tackles with your hand behind your back is idiocy. Handballs should be given as a rarity and certainly not from a shot 2m away.
 
That key problem isn't actually true when For / Against VAR calls are tallied up. Unless the six clubs you're talking about are Villa, Chelsea, Everton and 3 from Brighton, Burnley, Fulham or Spurs.

The biggest issue with VAR for me is the stop /start nature and the way it kills the moment. Although there's an argument that sometimes a new 'moment' is created for the opposition fans in the event of a reversal.
Sounds like you're falling for the way they present the stats to us to try and pretend VAR is fair.

There are loads of decisions that VAR doesn't even make the referee go to the monitor for. They aren't included in the stats.

There are loads of blatant incidents throughout a season that would only go in favour of certain clubs. The Onana Challenge on the Wolves player at Old Trafford for example or that handball yesterday. No way Wolves or Everton get given those decisions in their favour like Man United & Arsenal do.
 
The biggest issue with VAR for me is the stop /start nature and the way it kills the moment. Although there's an argument that sometimes a new 'moment' is created for the opposition fans in the event of a reversal.
Red cards cause stop/start because everyone is whinging. Yellow cards cause stop/start because everyone is whinging. Big fouls cause stop/starts because everyone is whinging. Penalties cause stop/starts because everyone is whinging.

VAR isn't the culprit of that mate, the douchebag players are.
 
Also forget this 1cm offside rubbish.

It's there to stop goal hanging.

If he's 20cm offside that is minimal enough that it shouldn't affect the goal.

Also handballs need to go back to before. Running into tackles with your hand behind your back is idiocy. Handballs should be given as a rarity and certainly not from a shot 2m away.
I agree, some of the rules are very petty and are overanalysed by VAR which is why they need changing. It should be used for clear decision errors on field that have been missed or anything not picked up by the ref out of his line of sight.
 

VAR is not the problem , it is how it is being run is the issue.
Rugby use technology very well and very professionally whereas VAR sounds like a couple of lads in the pub discussing an incident in a game.
Also, the line for determining offside should be much thicker. Goals should not be disallowed because a players toe may be an inch offside.

Agree.. make the lines both 6 inches thick for example … put them on the pitch and if there is any overlap of the lines at all.. benefit of the doubt goes to the attacker.

Or… keep the lines as they are and if after 60 seconds they are still not 100% sure then that counts as “doubt” as it is given to the attacker
 
Also forget this 1cm offside rubbish.

It's there to stop goal hanging.

If he's 20cm offside that is minimal enough that it shouldn't affect the goal.

Also handballs need to go back to before. Running into tackles with your hand behind your back is idiocy. Handballs should be given as a rarity and certainly not from a shot 2m away.
Finally someone who understands the purpose of the offside rule and the way it should be officiated. VAR has made it a complete joke and a lottery.
 
Sounds like you're falling for the way they present the stats to us to try and pretend VAR is fair.

There are loads of decisions that VAR doesn't even make the referee go to the monitor for. They aren't included in the stats.

There are loads of blatant incidents throughout a season that would only go in favour of certain clubs. The Onana Challenge on the Wolves player at Old Trafford for example or that handball yesterday. No way Wolves or Everton get given those decisions in their favour like Man United & Arsenal do.
And without VAR they wouldn't be going to a monitor. The stats are when VAR actively intervenes.
 
And without VAR they wouldn't be going to a monitor. The stats are when VAR actively intervenes.
There are plenty of incidents that referees in our games choose to wrongly ignore, and VAR sometimes get involved. They are rightly overturned.

There are others that both the referee and VAR dismiss that aren't even counted in the stats.

I will never believe that Everton have had the upper hand related to VAR at the expense of any Sky 6 team. It's not even close.

We got favoured in that Forest game for the first time in years and that's because it was "little" Nottingham Forest and not one of the favoured 6 clubs. 2 or 3 penalties would have been awarded if that game had have been against any of them 6.
 

Possible change to the offside law.


Arsène Wenger is to press ahead with his proposal to bring in the most radical change to the offside law for more than 30 years after what he views as positive results from trials.

Wenger, the former Arsenal manager who is now Fifa’s chief of global football development, is set to propose the change — effectively meaning there has to be daylight between attacker and defender for an offside offence — to the International FA Board (Ifab), the game’s law-making body.

There were some concerns that the change would cause too big a tactical shift and give too much advantage to attackers, but Wenger is understood to have been convinced by the results of trials in Sweden, Italy and the Netherlands.

Wenger, 74, is keen on the game adopting the new law as swiftly as possible, but he is likely to face pressure for trials at a more senior level.

Under Wenger’s proposal, if any part of an attacker’s body that can score — head, torso or legs — is still in line with the defender then they should be judged onside. The existing law means that if any of those parts of the body are ahead of the defender then the attacker is offside.

David Dein, the former Arsenal and FA vice-chairman who remains close to Wenger, has backed the proposed law change.

Speaking in Bangkok last week when attending the Fifa Congress, Dein told The Times: “The offside rule has to change as it is too contentious and problematic. Arsène’s idea is refreshingly innovative.”

However it is understood that Luís Figo, the former Portugal forward who is the new head of Uefa’s Football Board, has some reservations about changing the offside law. Ifab board members are also likely to ask for the offside changes to be used in a competition where there is VAR to judge the impact before authorising a full-scale change to the law.

The last major change to the offside law came in 1990 when the Scottish Football Association successfully proposed that attackers could be level with defenders instead of behind them. That was credited with leading to more goals being scored, and Wenger’s proposal would almost certainly mean the same.

Wenger is in charge of overseeing the laws of the game for Fifa and has been working on the proposal for four years.

The move also aims to address one of the consequences of the introduction of VAR which has caused many goals to ruled out by marginal calls missed by match officials.

Wenger said in 2020: “There is room to change the rule and not say that a part of a player’s nose is offside, so you are offside because you can score with that. Instead, you will be not offside if any part of the body that can score a goal is in line with the last defender, even if other parts of the attacker’s body are in front.

“That will sort it out and you will no longer have decisions about millimetres and a fraction of the attacker being in front of the defensive line.”

It would be the most significant change to any of the Laws of the Game since 1992 when the goalkeeper was banned from being allowed to handle back passes.

A Fifa spokesman said: “The discussion around changing the offside law is not new and it is not something we will see introduced at higher levels imminently. The idea was first discussed in 2020 as we felt it was something worth exploring and testing to see the effect it could have on the game. Fifa committed to trialling the amended offside law, favouring the attacker, which has been applied in selected youth competitions across Europe. We will continue with these trials, assess the results and discuss with all relevant stakeholders.”
 
Possible change to the offside law.

Wenger said in 2020: “There is room to change the rule and not say that a part of a player’s nose is offside, so you are offside because you can score with that. Instead, you will be not offside if any part of the body that can score a goal is in line with the last defender, even if other parts of the attacker’s body are in front.

“That will sort it out and you will no longer have decisions about millimetres and a fraction of the attacker being in front of the defensive line.”
I get the principle, but it will just go the other way and they will be over scrutinising how much of an attackers trailing leg is in line with the defender surely?
 
I get the principle, but it will just go the other way and they will be over scrutinising how much of an attackers trailing leg is in line with the defender surely?
This.
It should be, if it's that obvious and it's just that the lino is probably still smashed from the night before, he's offside... anything else, he's on.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Back
Top