Football
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Being Trialled in Canada
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cd9vqn81zxjo
For or Against?
For
- Should lead to more goals and easier interpretation. Can only be good imo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cd9vqn81zxjo
For or Against?
For
- Should lead to more goals and easier interpretation. Can only be good imo.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 18
|
By:
Can still be a toe nail offside.
Could lead to more goals until defenders just drop deeper as they can no longer play to get somebody offside. |
|
By:
How about evening games?
|
|
By:
I'll go for it, anything to give the momentum back to the attacker.
|
|
By:
Don't think this will take off or work. Gives far too much advantage to the attacker, won't solve hairline offsides or delays and will be a nightmare at grassroots level.
It's being introduced to make it a higher scoring sport imo, not to solve problems with offside. |
|
By:
Its the opposite lurka, it will be so much easier than the current system at every level.
Its 100 years since the offside rule was brought in, it was brought in to stop 'goal hangers' or goal 'mouchers' as they were called at the time, it was never meant to be that you were offside because your arm was in front or you had a bigger toe on your boot!! The current rule is negative and dumb, and spoils the enjoyment of the game for paying supporters. |
|
By:
There will still be a line, it's just moved, there
will still be a toe nail offside, so still confusion and people saying oh he's just a toenail offside. Doesn't help those in the stadium having to wait for them having to draw lines because somebody has got in way of camera at wrong time. Or waiting 30 secs for saot to confirm that his pedicure has kept him onside. It'll simply lead to more defensive tactics as low blocks will proliferate, and pace less effective. |
|
By:
For or Against?
Against Typically the attacker is facing the goal and his momentum is towards the goal. The defender faces outfield and has to tackle the attacker if close or turn and chase. If you give the attacker a bigger start on the defender each team will be scoring in double digits. |
|
By:
You will defend free kicks nearer the 6 yard line than the 18. Teams will defend even lower generally to reduce the massive advantage this will give to the attacker. It will likely result in more of the type of defending you see at corners in open play as teams will defend deep more of the time and blocking runners will become more important. You won't be able to mark an attacker tightly if you defend higher up, so you won't defend higher up.
Just remove the forensics from offside calls and keep the current rule. VAR was never meant to be about making exact offside calls. I don't see how a single official in grassroots will find it easier to determine from the angles he has to judge. He will have to determine whether the heel of the back foot of an attacker was ahead of the toe of the front foot of the last defender from behind the play. |
|
By:
in theory a clever forward can actually start in an offside position facing the goal againt a defender facing the wrong way and the attacker just reachs out cauing sort of contact with leg/arms,as posted everyone will just play a low block/defend deep
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
in theory off a set piece you could be 2 yd offside around the 6 yd box and be deemed onside under this change, attackers will just gamble epecially on set pieces and just hope that VAR favours them,the margin,s have just increased massively in their favour
|
|
By:
Especially when one of the centre backs gets pushed a yard closer
to goal and var spends 5 minutes if its enough of a push to be an actual foul or just a little push and he should have been stronger. |
|
By:
correct,they already pull defender towards them to make themelve on side under current rules,they can now stand further offide and dont have to pull them as far under the new rules, set pieces will be a farce
|
|
By:
We don't need to change what is an offside or not we just need to get rid of VAR, if we are saying that in effect the offside rule was never meant to be an exact science, then take away the process that is trying to make it so, changing what is an offside will not solve the problem, it just moves the goalposts so to speak and there will still be micro measurements.
You can argue whether or not it will increase attacking play or not but that's all very well and may or may not be true but that's not what we are discussing and the issue is that the lines and delay will still be a thing.!! Leave it to onfield team, no forensic analysis, no delay in play, a majority of decisions will be called correctly. Infinitely better than the current set up. |
|
By:
Most fans can see VAR's ruining the game.
|
|
By:
4.99cm offside is currently onside, never mind level.
In epl |
|
By:
it does not matter if you change the measurement position. there will still be a measurement to be made and that means errors in measurement, even with var. as duffy said it was never considered to be a perfect system and on that basis alone never mind binning var maybe its time to bin offsides as they are currently determined and find a different way to prevent goal hanging which is what the offside rule was invented for in the first place
|
|
By:
VAR needs VARVAR to rectify the clear and obvious errors VAR makes.
|