Izzy was offside

[Muttley]

But if it was offside and was given incorrectly then VAR would have done its job. You are putting the feelings of the supporters celebrating an illegitimate goal immediately above the feelings of the team and supporters of the opposition that have to just accept that the decision is wrong.

Ah a true believer

If the goal is not ruled out, it is a "legitimate" goal.

You are obviously entranced with the line drawing and the millimetre accurate decision making. The fans in the stadium should be grateful that they can stare in fascinated rapture at a black screen, it is enhancing their "experience" at the game.

What fun!

 

[Nano]

Ah a true believer

If the goal is not ruled out, it is a "legitimate" goal.

You are obviously entranced with the line drawing and the millimetre accurate decision making. The fans in the stadium should be grateful that they can stare in fascinated rapture at a black screen, it is enhancing their "experience" at the game.

What fun!

Much more fun than getting beaten due to incorrect decisions and incompetent refereeing.

 

[Muttley]

Much more fun than getting beaten due to incorrect decisions and incompetent refereeing.

You do recall that it was one of our players scoring this "disputed" goal?

You would rather that goal was chalked off (after a period of silent penance whilst we awaited the verdict) than what we experienced last night? (I'm assuming you were at the game)

Fun.

Fun.

Fun.

 

[Nano]

You do recall that it was one of our players scoring this "disputed" goal?

You would rather that goal was chalked off (after a period of silent penance whilst we awaited the verdict) than what we experienced last night? (I'm assuming you were at the game)

Fun.

Fun.

Fun.

It's not about me and I recognise that fact. I'm talking about football in general. Obviously if you boil an argument down to a specific emotive incident the answer changes but as a whole I can be objective enough to realise that what is right is more important than what benefits me. Cardiff fans had travelled hours on a weekday evening to see their team fall behind to an offside goal. I'm sure they would have preferred the laws of the game to have been applied correctly. They would have 100% preferred the delay while the correct decision was reached and then given a moment for their own celebration. If he had been onside then we would have been able to celebrate twice so you're actually losing out on celebrations by not having VAR.

 

[Muttley]

I can be objective enough to realise that what is right is more important than what benefits me.

You see that is where you are so so wrong.

Fundamentally we go to a football match to be ENTERTAINED to enjoy the skill, the tactics, the drama, the controversy and the goals. We cheer for our team, we boo (or worse) the opposition and berate the officials. It is all part of the theatre of sport. VAR, in its present form, is an impediment to entertainment. Last night is an excellent example. As the ball hit the back of the net we celebrated (perhaps we glanced at the lino, perhaps not). What we did not do is wait staring at a blank screen for unseen adjudication from the arbiters of the drawn line. What fun that would have been when it was (perhaps) ruled out.

If he had been onside then we would have been able to celebrate twice so you're actually losing out on celebrations by not having VAR.

Spoken like a true believer.

 

[Scrote]

I don't get why refs aren't on mic and the videos played on the big screen

After hearing the utter mess on the Liverpool audio I know exactly why the ref and VAR aren't being relayed to the fans.

Rugby & Cricket manage to do this on a professional and competent manner. Why is football so enamoured with secrecy when all it hides is incompetence?

Or is that its own answer?

 

[Nano]

You see that is where you are so so wrong.

Fundamentally we go to a football match to be ENTERTAINED to enjoy the skill, the tactics, the drama, the controversy and the goals. We cheer for our team, we boo (or worse) the opposition and berate the officials. It is all part of the theatre of sport. VAR, in its present form, is an impediment to entertainment. Last night is an excellent example. As the ball hit the back of the net we celebrated (perhaps we glanced at the lino, perhaps not). What we did not do is wait staring at a blank screen for unseen adjudication from the arbiters of the drawn line. What fun that would have been when it was (perhaps) ruled out.


Spoken like a true believer.

Football isn't entertainment. It is entertaining and there is a very clear distinction between the two. It's not wrestling or some other preordained, scripted, contrived form of entertainment. It is a sport. It's a competition. We go to see a contest and we go as fans because we want a particular outcome from that contest. The laws of the game and the application of them contribute to the entertainment. Without them it would be a free-for all and it would be rubbish.

You keep talking about being "a believer". You are being a moron. It is nothing to do with believing in anything. Why do we have linesmen instead of just letting the referee do it all? It would be more entertaining if we just got on with things and it doesn't matter if the laws are applied, as long as it's quick. We don't want the risk of a linesman flagging and disallowing a goal now, do we? I don't "believe" in anything. I think if we have tools and processes to apply the laws of the game better then we should use them. I don't claim that VAR is perfect but I also know it can and will get better. Technology will make this situation moot in the not too distant future. the semi-automated systems and AI will make these decisions in seconds. We're just a step or two along the way. Progress needs the first steps to be taken. If we listened to people like you we'd still have one referee doing it all themselves.

I do agree with you that minimal disruption would be better and for 99% of the game there is no disruption. Over time that will improve and things will get quicker. The 1% where it really matters whether or not the decision is correct is worth the occasional slight delay. Most goals don't need any intervention and you don't even notice VAR. Even the ones that are checked end up in the goal still being awarded. The only impact to anyone is the odd ones that do end up being ruled out. There are goals that are awarded that never would have been without VAR so this nonsense that you might not get to celebrate one goal that you shouldn't have been celebrating anyway is such a weak argument.

 

[Muttley]

Football isn't entertainment.

Of course it is. Any activity that is not a requirement of "survival" is by any definition "entertainment"

7 Human needs, in no particular order: Water, Air, Sleep. Food, Clothing, Safety and Shelter

It's an entertainment, a frippery, a diversion just like (and interchangeable with) a trip to the cinema, playing golf or attending a poetry recital.

Oh and you would be well advised to lose the "m word"

 

[Humpty]

...Coburn looks like he's in an offside position too.

 

[BobUpnDown]

I thought it was off in real time, though that screen grab the ball has already been played so Jones may have been a meter or so back..

 

[Nano]

Of course it is. Any activity that is not a requirement of "survival" is by any definition "entertainment"

7 Human needs, in no particular order: Water, Air, Sleep. Food, Clothing, Safety and Shelter

It's an entertainment, a frippery, a diversion just like (and interchangeable with) a trip to the cinema, playing golf or attending a poetry recital.

Oh and you would be well advised to lose the "m word"

That's not the definition of an entertainment. You can't just make stuff up. Football is sport, it's a competition. The purpose being to decide a winner. Being entertaining is a byproduct, not the purpose. The purpose is to win the game, not to entertain.

 

[Muttley]

The purpose is to win the game, not to entertain.

That is why the team is there - to win the game.

You, I and 25,000 other customers/supporters/fanatics are there to be entertained, to enjoy the competition. I go to watch football because I enjoy it, I take pleasure in the experience exactly the same reasons I do anything else that is not required to fulfil those needs I listed above. I don't go to watch rugby because I don't enjoy it, I don't find it entertaining. I don't go to watch ballet, etc. I have a choice, do I want to go to watch a game of football or do something else. I will occasionally go to watch a team I do not support because it is entertaining. Tonight I may well watch a game on the telly which is pretty much a perfect example of my argument, I can choose any number of channels, streams or broadcasts I can watch a film or perhaps start a boxset. If I find no pleasure in watching the football it is easily changed at the press of a button to something that is entertaining.

And that is my point. VAR reduces the entertainment experience in a stadium, watched at home on the TV not so much (also helps if you are not personally attached to one team or the other).

 

[Rofesleg]

That is why the team is there - to win the game.

You, I and 25,000 other customers/supporters/fanatics are there to be entertained, to enjoy the competition. I go to watch football because I enjoy it, I take pleasure in the experience exactly the same reasons I do anything else that is not required to fulfil those needs I listed above. I don't go to watch rugby because I don't enjoy it, I don't find it entertaining. I don't go to watch ballet, etc. I have a choice, do I want to go to watch a game of football or do something else. I will occasionally go to watch a team I do not support because it is entertaining. Tonight I may well watch a game on the telly which is pretty much a perfect example of my argument, I can choose any number of channels, streams or broadcasts I can watch a film or perhaps start a boxset. If I find no pleasure in watching the football it is easily changed at the press of a button to something that is entertaining.

And that is my point. VAR reduces the entertainment experience in a stadium, watched at home on the TV not so much (also helps if you are not personally attached to one team or the other).

I'm not sure I do go to be entertained. Not in the same way as the cinema or a concert anyway.

If a game doesn't involve Boro or maybe England, I doubt I would watch it.

I get enthused when watching Boro. Emotional, nervous, excited, angry, proud, frustrated, ecstatic, upset. All of these things (usually in the first 10 minutes ). But not necessarily entertained.

I'd prefer a point from a drab 0-0 draw than to witness a world class hatrrick from someone like Bergkamp in a 3-0 defeat. Or a Thierry Henry masterclass in a 7-0 drubbing.

 

[FishofContemplation]

Or if the pass was in any way played back over or level to the scorer he can't be offside regardless of where the defenders are.

No that bit is wrong. If the player is in front of the ball (and the second last defender) when the ball is played and comes back to play it (or interferes with an opponent or otherwise becomes active) that’s offside even if the ball was played backwards. The test is whether you were ahead of the ball when it was played, not which direction it was played.

Edit: actually rereading I’m not exactly sure previous poster meant what I said was wrong so apols if I misunderstood.