Changes, if any, to football?

[salford city]

I'm sure that 5cm bollox was made up on the spot to cover what was blatent cheating that was highlighted. Funny no one had heard of it before - and the ragtop media have brushed it under the carpet since...

As it ever was & unless everyone non-cartel screams and shouts and demands answers, so shall it always be.
More of the same to come at the swamp on Saturday we've had subjective there before

[Mase]

Feet and only feet is what should decide offside - not heads or elbows .
Would take a fraction of the time to decide offside or not - end of.

Exactly. I also like the "clear daylight" rule as well.

The McCallister family is preparing to spend Christmas in Paris, gathering at Peter and Kate's home in a Chicago suburb on the night before their departure. Peter and Kate's youngest son, Kevin, is the subject of ridicule by his older siblings. Later, Kevin accidentally ruins the family dinner and their flight tickets to Paris after a scuffle with his older brother Buzz, resulting in him getting sent to the attic of the house as a punishment, where he berates Kate and wishes that his family would disappear. During the night, heavy winds damage the power lines, which causes a power outage and resets the alarm clocks, causing the family to oversleep. In the confusion and rush to get to the airport, Kevin is accidentally left behind.

Kevin wakes to find the house empty and, thinking that his wish has come true, is overjoyed with his newfound freedom. However, he soon becomes frightened by his next door neighbor, Old Man Marley, who is rumored to be a serial killer who murdered his own family, as well as the "Wet Bandits", Harry and Marv, a pair of burglars who have been breaking into other vacant houses in the neighborhood and have targeted the McCallisters' house. Kevin tricks them into thinking that his family is still home, forcing them to put their plans on hold.

The attacker used to get the advantage, now it's the teams in red that get the advantage.

Fuck me Mase are we back on high brow salmon at breakfast

made me laugh mate

[Im_Spartacus]

Thought i'd bump this in light of the Newcastle situation

Just seen the offside, and assuming the view was that he was 1cm offside, then I can live with it if it's black and white.

The issue as usual comes with how subjectivity is applied.......

The 'interfering with play' argument requires that the attacking team gained a sporting advantage. The natural assumption of that argument is that had Haaland not been offside, the defender would have had a different opportunity to get to the ball.

Yet the problem with this subjective interpretation of the rules, is that for the defender to get to the ball would have required Haaland to have been in a completely different position on the pitch in that phase of play - wheras to be 'onside' in fact he would only have required him to be placed 2cm differently.

If Haaland is stood 2cm back and onside, or 2cm forward and offside - the outcome (a goal) would have been identical, ergo there was no sporting advantage gained from his position.

The assumption that he gained a sporting advantage only stands up if we assume the alternative is that he wasn't stood anywhere near the defender, which is patently bullshit.

And this is the problem with subjective decisions vs black and white 'is he offside'

Now, the next question if we're making 'what if' statements about Haaland, surely would be whether the ball would have even gone in that direction had Semenyo not been rugby tackled - this is ignored, because the question VAR is required to answer is whether Haaland was offside. My interpretation of all this would be that the correct outcome would have actually been to disallow the goal and award a penalty.

It's a fucking shambles all round, and while I don't buy into any conspiracy against us, what I do buy is that the pressure put on referees here is fucking nonsense, VAR needs to go.

Really good post.
I would have loved the ref to have said: "After review, Manchester City number 9 was trying to get back onside but was being held in an offside position by Newcastle number 12. Goal awarded!"

Because that's actually what happened.
Well, sort of!!!!!!!

Agreed both of you

But the line of if he is 1cm offside then that’s ok as offside is offside has just been blown out of the water with Wirtzs goal recently where it turned out there is a secret 5CM leeway if the circumstances permit.

Funny how certain circumstances benefit certain clubs in their favour and some clubs get fucked over

The problem it's created, is that now we can now clearly see what the ref saw - the defence of different angles etc has gone, which makes certain decisions look extremely suspicious and raises questions not so much about bias towards certain clubs, but about whether referees are being influenced by betting syndicates etc.

[nottsblue]

Thought i'd bump this in light of the Newcastle situation

Just seen the offside, and assuming the view was that he was 1cm offside, then I can live with it if it's black and white.

The issue as usual comes with how subjectivity is applied.......

The 'interfering with play' argument requires that the attacking team gained a sporting advantage. The natural assumption of that argument is that had Haaland not been offside, the defender would have had a different opportunity to get to the ball.

Yet the problem with this subjective interpretation of the rules, is that for the defender to get to the ball would have required Haaland to have been in a completely different position on the pitch in that phase of play - wheras to be 'onside' in fact he would only have required him to be placed 2cm differently.

If Haaland is stood 2cm back and onside, or 2cm forward and offside - the outcome (a goal) would have been identical, ergo there was no sporting advantage gained from his position.

The assumption that he gained a sporting advantage only stands up if we assume the alternative is that he wasn't stood anywhere near the defender, which is patently bullshit.

And this is the problem with subjective decisions vs black and white 'is he offside'

Now, the next question if we're making 'what if' statements about Haaland, surely would be whether the ball would have even gone in that direction had Semenyo not been rugby tackled - this is ignored, because the question VAR is required to answer is whether Haaland was offside. My interpretation of all this would be that the correct outcome would have actually been to disallow the goal and award a penalty.

It's a fucking shambles all round, and while I don't buy into any conspiracy against us, what I do buy is that the pressure put on referees here is fucking nonsense, VAR needs to go.

Really good post.
I would have loved the ref to have said: "After review, Manchester City number 9 was trying to get back onside but was being held in an offside position by Newcastle number 12. Goal awarded!"

Because that's actually what happened.
Well, sort of!!!!!!!

Agreed both of you

But the line of if he is 1cm offside then that’s ok as offside is offside has just been blown out of the water with Wirtzs goal recently where it turned out there is a secret 5CM leeway if the circumstances permit.

Funny how certain circumstances benefit certain clubs in their favour and some clubs get fucked over

The problem it's created, is that now we can now clearly see what the ref saw - the defence of different angles etc has gone, which makes certain decisions look extremely suspicious and raises questions not so much about bias towards certain clubs, but about whether referees are being influenced by betting syndicates etc.

Said for years referees are either corrupt or simply incompetent. VAR has proven this. There simply should NOT be anywhere near the number of incorrect decisions that have historically been made and are consistently still being made

Honestly doubt a club has paid off a referee. I really do. But whilst football is a serious multi billion pound industry there will be people or organisations who stand to benefit from decisions going a certain way and when something as easily got at as a single individual who is officiating a match then that’s where corruption comes into play

[carl_feedthegoat]

Thought i'd bump this in light of the Newcastle situation

Just seen the offside, and assuming the view was that he was 1cm offside, then I can live with it if it's black and white.

The issue as usual comes with how subjectivity is applied.......

The 'interfering with play' argument requires that the attacking team gained a sporting advantage. The natural assumption of that argument is that had Haaland not been offside, the defender would have had a different opportunity to get to the ball.

Yet the problem with this subjective interpretation of the rules, is that for the defender to get to the ball would have required Haaland to have been in a completely different position on the pitch in that phase of play - wheras to be 'onside' in fact he would only have required him to be placed 2cm differently.

If Haaland is stood 2cm back and onside, or 2cm forward and offside - the outcome (a goal) would have been identical, ergo there was no sporting advantage gained from his position.

The assumption that he gained a sporting advantage only stands up if we assume the alternative is that he wasn't stood anywhere near the defender, which is patently bullshit.

And this is the problem with subjective decisions vs black and white 'is he offside'

Now, the next question if we're making 'what if' statements about Haaland, surely would be whether the ball would have even gone in that direction had Semenyo not been rugby tackled - this is ignored, because the question VAR is required to answer is whether Haaland was offside. My interpretation of all this would be that the correct outcome would have actually been to disallow the goal and award a penalty.

It's a fucking shambles all round, and while I don't buy into any conspiracy against us, what I do buy is that the pressure put on referees here is fucking nonsense, VAR needs to go.

Really good post.
I would have loved the ref to have said: "After review, Manchester City number 9 was trying to get back onside but was being held in an offside position by Newcastle number 12. Goal awarded!"

Because that's actually what happened.
Well, sort of!!!!!!!

Agreed both of you

But the line of if he is 1cm offside then that’s ok as offside is offside has just been blown out of the water with Wirtzs goal recently where it turned out there is a secret 5CM leeway if the circumstances permit.

Funny how certain circumstances benefit certain clubs in their favour and some clubs get fucked over

The problem it's created, is that now we can now clearly see what the ref saw - the defence of different angles etc has gone, which makes certain decisions look extremely suspicious and raises questions not so much about bias towards certain clubs, but about whether referees are being influenced by betting syndicates etc.

Spanish, German and Italian clubs have all been found guilty of corrupting officials and its well documented - are there really any of us who really believe our refs/VAR officals have never been or are currently not being corrupted ?

Seriously - you would have to believe in the perfect world to believe otherwise.

[Im_Spartacus]

Thought i'd bump this in light of the Newcastle situation

Just seen the offside, and assuming the view was that he was 1cm offside, then I can live with it if it's black and white.

The issue as usual comes with how subjectivity is applied.......

The 'interfering with play' argument requires that the attacking team gained a sporting advantage. The natural assumption of that argument is that had Haaland not been offside, the defender would have had a different opportunity to get to the ball.

Yet the problem with this subjective interpretation of the rules, is that for the defender to get to the ball would have required Haaland to have been in a completely different position on the pitch in that phase of play - wheras to be 'onside' in fact he would only have required him to be placed 2cm differently.

If Haaland is stood 2cm back and onside, or 2cm forward and offside - the outcome (a goal) would have been identical, ergo there was no sporting advantage gained from his position.

The assumption that he gained a sporting advantage only stands up if we assume the alternative is that he wasn't stood anywhere near the defender, which is patently bullshit.

And this is the problem with subjective decisions vs black and white 'is he offside'

Now, the next question if we're making 'what if' statements about Haaland, surely would be whether the ball would have even gone in that direction had Semenyo not been rugby tackled - this is ignored, because the question VAR is required to answer is whether Haaland was offside. My interpretation of all this would be that the correct outcome would have actually been to disallow the goal and award a penalty.

It's a fucking shambles all round, and while I don't buy into any conspiracy against us, what I do buy is that the pressure put on referees here is fucking nonsense, VAR needs to go.

Really good post.
I would have loved the ref to have said: "After review, Manchester City number 9 was trying to get back onside but was being held in an offside position by Newcastle number 12. Goal awarded!"

Because that's actually what happened.
Well, sort of!!!!!!!

Agreed both of you

But the line of if he is 1cm offside then that’s ok as offside is offside has just been blown out of the water with Wirtzs goal recently where it turned out there is a secret 5CM leeway if the circumstances permit.

Funny how certain circumstances benefit certain clubs in their favour and some clubs get fucked over

The problem it's created, is that now we can now clearly see what the ref saw - the defence of different angles etc has gone, which makes certain decisions look extremely suspicious and raises questions not so much about bias towards certain clubs, but about whether referees are being influenced by betting syndicates etc.

Spanish, German and Italian clubs have all been found guilty of corrupting officials and its well documented - are there really any of us who really believe our refs/VAR officals have never been or are currently not being corrupted ?

Seriously - you would have to believe in the perfect world to believe otherwise.

Yeah it's interesting to think that some of the things we see week in week out with our own eyes, can't necessarily be explained by the imperfections of the system.

I definitely don't buy that there's systemic favouritism or influence on decisions. It's clear it does happen in isolated pockets at a club level as refs will have natural biases based on who they like/don't like per Coote and Klopp, which may filter through on occasion to poor decisions.

While they should step above personal likes/dislikes, sometimes the mask will slip, professionalism should minimise it. But I definitely see the enemy here as the gambling side of things and there can be no doubt that it is in play in some of the strange things we see.

It makes you wonder whether the persistence with VAR, however imperfect it may be, comes from an official perspective, seen as a way of mitigating the potential risk of corruption given it would be incredibly difficult to hide when the decision has to be explained.

[Slim]

1. 30 minute halves, clock pauses whenever the ball isn't in play.
2. VAR have two minutes on play stoppage to provide an answer to the ref, failure to get a clear answer in that time results in the on-pitch decision to stand.
3. Long throw-ins to be punished for time wasting. Right back taking a long throw from the left wing is not a yellow, but Rico hesitation is?
4. If the game is being drawn in the 85th minute, multiball until a goal is scored.
5. Linesmen calling obvious offsides at the time.

I realise one of these is for fun, but we can dream about linesmen doing their job, can't we?

[bigblue]

Having the clock on run when the game is actively being played is probably a big improvement. Eliminating offside would be disastrous and turn this into a completely different sport. 100% agree with linesmen putting their flag up immediately when it's obvious. And a time limit on VAR would be a great improvement.

1. Refs should be paid at a similar level to the players. Not the current crop of officials, but set a date, such as 2030 and say that the top refs from then on will make 50k/week + bonuses for lack of errors (reviewed after the game). Create actual competition for the positions so that more qualified people enter the profession. And incentivise their pay to not fuck up so often.

2. Officials should give post match interviews to explain their decisions and admit mistakes. Most of the negativity around officiating is because they act infallible and never own up to being human.

3. Only your main torso should count for offside. Feet, legs, shoulders/arms, head should not matter

4. Under cutting a player who is jumping in the air or pushing a player into the boards should be an instant red cad

5. A 7 a-side cup, played by the existing clubs/teams once a year would be fantastic. Scrap the international friendlies & league cup to make room.

[Mase]

If a team has less than 3 shots in a game they get points taken off them.

[bigblue]

If a team has less than 3 shots in a game they get points taken off them.

I like this idea if only for the random 3 shots from halfway in the last 5 minutes that some teams who park the bus would start doing

[Mase]

If a team has less than 3 shots in a game they get points taken off them.

I like this idea if only for the random 3 shots from halfway in the last 5 minutes that some teams who park the bus would start doing

Would hopefully stop teams rocking up and not bothering.

[bigblue]

If a team has less than 3 shots in a game they get points taken off them.

I like this idea if only for the random 3 shots from halfway in the last 5 minutes that some teams who park the bus would start doing

Would hopefully stop teams rocking up and not bothering.

Maybe every 10 minutes that you don't have a touch in the opposition half you get a player removed for the next 10

[nottsblue]

Having the clock on run when the game is actively being played is probably a big improvement. Eliminating offside would be disastrous and turn this into a completely different sport. 100% agree with linesmen putting their flag up immediately when it's obvious. And a time limit on VAR would be a great improvement.

1. Refs should be paid at a similar level to the players. Not the current crop of officials, but set a date, such as 2030 and say that the top refs from then on will make 50k/week + bonuses for lack of errors (reviewed after the game). Create actual competition for the positions so that more qualified people enter the profession. And incentivise their pay to not fuck up so often.

2. Officials should give post match interviews to explain their decisions and admit mistakes. Most of the negativity around officiating is because they act infallible and never own up to being human.

3. Only your main torso should count for offside. Feet, legs, shoulders/arms, head should not matter

4. Under cutting a player who is jumping in the air or pushing a player into the boards should be an instant red cad

5. A 7 a-side cup, played by the existing clubs/teams once a year would be fantastic. Scrap the international friendlies & league cup to make room.

Totally in agreement with number 2.

And love the idea of 5

And yes to 4 as well

[Sparklehorse]

If the linesmen put up their flag immediately, and then the replay show onside, what do we do then, especially if it’s a goal scoring chance ?

[Slim]

If the linesmen put up their flag immediately, and then the replay show onside, what do we do then, especially if it’s a goal scoring chance ?

When it's obvious, both bigblue and I said this. Why don't people know how read good do?