• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

VAR: Sponsored by Chelsea

nayenezgani said:
The offside decision was incorrect (according to a former referee) but VAR's decision to uphold the original incorrect decision was correct... Clear as mud.
Click to expand...

Looking at all the replays, it was insanely close to call, and I was thinking "isnt the advantage meant to go to the attacker?"

The original decision was wrong. A close one, but wrong.

What is the point of VAR if they cant correct instances like this?
 
glasgowspur said:
But if he hadn't the goal could have stood.
Because they can't prove lino made error the will not overturn it.
There is no conclusive proof either way so do not stop play.
Click to expand...

nothing that happened there is the fault of VAR, the ref reacted to the flag then asked for VAR, without VAR it would have just been a FK to Swansea straight away
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Looking at all the replays, it was insanely close to call, and I was thinking "isnt the advantage meant to go to the attacker?"

The original decision was wrong. A close one, but wrong.

What is the point of VAR if they cant correct instances like this?
Click to expand...

Someone is making money out of it that is the point, its a joke and it will ruin the game.
 
Gutter Boy said:
They couldn't have retrospectively given the goal because the ref blew his whistle before the ball went in. So the Swansea GK could have claimed he had stopped playing. So the review was entirely pointless
Click to expand...
Did he blow his whistle? I thought he let play continue and then stopped Swansea from taking the free kick for the offside quickly so that the VAR review could take place?
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Looking at all the replays, it was insanely close to call, and I was thinking "isnt the advantage meant to go to the attacker?"

The original decision was wrong. A close one, but wrong.

What is the point of VAR if they cant correct instances like this?
Click to expand...
Is there actually any such thing as "The advantage going to the attacker".... Or is this something that is just trotted out by commentators?

I thought that the linesman's decision was correct at the time. It looked to me as though Son's knee at the very least was ahead of the back part of the defender's foot. I think the views later shown from a better angle on Match of the Day showed that Son was offside by a good yard or so.
 
For offsides it was a rule for about a year or so around 5 years back (clear day light)- it hasn't been around for an age but is often trotted out.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Is there actually any such thing as "The advantage going to the attacker".... Or is this something that is just trotted out by commentators?

I thought that the linesman's decision was correct at the time. It looked to me as though Son's knee at the very least was ahead of the back part of the defender's foot. I think the views later shown from a better angle on Match of the Day showed that Son was offside by a good yard or so.
Click to expand...

Maybe it comes from here:

"We were all brought up on [the principle] 'If in doubt, give the offside'. Fifa deemed not enough goals were being scored so they are now saying the attackers get the benefit," Hackett said. "If the assistant referee is in any doubt about the decision he does not flag. The instructions they are receiving are to 'wait, wait, wait and see'.

An article from 2004 when they changed offside rules
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
Maybe it comes from here:

"We were all brought up on [the principle] 'If in doubt, give the offside'. Fifa deemed not enough goals were being scored so they are now saying the attackers get the benefit," Hackett said. "If the assistant referee is in any doubt about the decision he does not flag. The instructions they are receiving are to 'wait, wait, wait and see'.

An article from 2004 when they changed offside rules
Click to expand...
The offside rule has been changed at least twice since then though hasn't it?
 
Finney Is Back said:
Is there actually any such thing as "The advantage going to the attacker".... Or is this something that is just trotted out by commentators?

I thought that the linesman's decision was correct at the time. It looked to me as though Son's knee at the very least was ahead of the back part of the defender's foot. I think the views later shown from a better angle on Match of the Day showed that Son was offside by a good yard or so.
Click to expand...
A yard offside? I didn’t see MotD so not seen those pictures, but the footage shown at the time of the game showed it virtually level, maybe a knee off. Would love to know how the two views differ.
 
Finney Is Back said:
The offside rule has been changed at least twice since then though hasn't it?
Click to expand...

Honestly I dont know, and annoyingly information on it isnt that easy to dig up.

As to that specific incident, I thought if he was off it was by millimetres, far to close to call, in which case the linesman shouldnt be certain and shouldnt raise his flag.

On the commentary, whatever ref reviewed it for BT said as much - not offiside.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back