|
On March 07 2026 12:59 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2026 08:24 Liquid`Drone wrote:On March 07 2026 05:32 gTank wrote:
Wait, a nose?! You can score with the nose. 1 cm offside is offside (even if you changed the rules like 'there has to be space between the defender and attacker'), there'd still be 1 cm situations. These '1 cm' situations are way more subjective than your average call though. You are adding human judgements in there about things like which frame exactly do you use? The one where the foot makes contact with the ball, the one where the ball leaves the foot, or maybe you don't have a clear image of either and have to just guess because shockingly they don't use high speed cameras for VAR. So essentially at that point the VAR gets to choose whatever they feel whereas I would have the rule say that if its that close then you give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.
That was the old rule, in case of doubt benefit the attacker.
In the end, in case of doubt refs would decide in favour of the big team, at least in our league.
|
On March 07 2026 19:53 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2026 18:23 Charoisaur wrote:On March 07 2026 17:39 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 17:21 sharkie wrote:
Arsene Wenger rule is going to be tested next year Sure, and we'll have discussions about whether an attacker's trailing foot is at the same level as the nose of the last defender or whether there's "daylight". Wenger's rule doesn't change anything with regards to ambiguity, it just moves the offside ruling to the back of the body instead of the front. it makes a difference whether a goal gets cancelled because your toenail was 1 cm in offside or if it gets cancelled because your whole body is 1cm in offside. the latter clearly gives an advantage to the attacking player so it makes sense that it's not allowed. 1cm of a toenail doesn't really give an advantage. It's also more in line with previous handlings where offside was only called when the human eye could see it - usually when a large percentage or the whole body was in offside. There will also be less uncertainty for the fans because the whole body being offside is easier to recognize with the eye. How is the difference relevant. Instead of your toenail being offside, it'll now be the defenders complaining because it was their toenail that left the attacker onside. It's literally the same argument.
The difference is when comparing it to a pre-VAR scenario. your toenail being offside back then would never be considered offside, but your whole body being offside would. So the proposed rule would align more with the original purpose of the offside rule - preventing the attackers from having an advantage by being significantly in front of the last defender.
And I think the complaints would also be less. A goal being cancelled because of your whole body being offside doesn't seem as stupid as your goal being cancelled because your toenail is offside.
|
On March 08 2026 00:45 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2026 19:53 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 18:23 Charoisaur wrote:On March 07 2026 17:39 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 17:21 sharkie wrote:
Arsene Wenger rule is going to be tested next year Sure, and we'll have discussions about whether an attacker's trailing foot is at the same level as the nose of the last defender or whether there's "daylight". Wenger's rule doesn't change anything with regards to ambiguity, it just moves the offside ruling to the back of the body instead of the front. it makes a difference whether a goal gets cancelled because your toenail was 1 cm in offside or if it gets cancelled because your whole body is 1cm in offside. the latter clearly gives an advantage to the attacking player so it makes sense that it's not allowed. 1cm of a toenail doesn't really give an advantage. It's also more in line with previous handlings where offside was only called when the human eye could see it - usually when a large percentage or the whole body was in offside. There will also be less uncertainty for the fans because the whole body being offside is easier to recognize with the eye. How is the difference relevant. Instead of your toenail being offside, it'll now be the defenders complaining because it was their toenail that left the attacker onside. It's literally the same argument. The difference is when comparing it to a pre-VAR scenario. your toenail being offside back then would never be considered offside, but your whole body being offside would. So the proposed rule would align more with the original purpose of the offside rule - preventing the attackers from having an advantage by being significantly in front of the last defender. And I think the complaints would also be less. A goal being cancelled because of your whole body being offside doesn't seem as stupid as your goal being cancelled because your toenail is offside.
So what you're saying is that even if a toenail used to be offside, it never got called, so the rules were applied incorrectly before? If you want to make offside cover it's purpose better, you could redefine the rule. You can't blame VAR for following the rules to the letter/millimeter. This is professional sports, there should be as little leniency as technically possible. The more precise you can measure something, the better.
I don't think it's impossible that in 20 years, pro football kits are loaded with sensors that can measure how hard an impact from a challenge was, and where precisely (and also if it happened before or after contact with the ball). There will always be subjective decisions, but there is nothing wrong with limiting those as much as we can.
|
On March 09 2026 04:41 aseq wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2026 00:45 Charoisaur wrote:On March 07 2026 19:53 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 18:23 Charoisaur wrote:On March 07 2026 17:39 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 17:21 sharkie wrote:
Arsene Wenger rule is going to be tested next year Sure, and we'll have discussions about whether an attacker's trailing foot is at the same level as the nose of the last defender or whether there's "daylight". Wenger's rule doesn't change anything with regards to ambiguity, it just moves the offside ruling to the back of the body instead of the front. it makes a difference whether a goal gets cancelled because your toenail was 1 cm in offside or if it gets cancelled because your whole body is 1cm in offside. the latter clearly gives an advantage to the attacking player so it makes sense that it's not allowed. 1cm of a toenail doesn't really give an advantage. It's also more in line with previous handlings where offside was only called when the human eye could see it - usually when a large percentage or the whole body was in offside. There will also be less uncertainty for the fans because the whole body being offside is easier to recognize with the eye. How is the difference relevant. Instead of your toenail being offside, it'll now be the defenders complaining because it was their toenail that left the attacker onside. It's literally the same argument. The difference is when comparing it to a pre-VAR scenario. your toenail being offside back then would never be considered offside, but your whole body being offside would. So the proposed rule would align more with the original purpose of the offside rule - preventing the attackers from having an advantage by being significantly in front of the last defender. And I think the complaints would also be less. A goal being cancelled because of your whole body being offside doesn't seem as stupid as your goal being cancelled because your toenail is offside. So what you're saying is that even if a toenail used to be offside, it never got called, so the rules were applied incorrectly before? If you want to make offside cover it's purpose better, you could redefine the rule. You can't blame VAR for following the rules to the letter/millimeter. This is professional sports, there should be as little leniency as technically possible. The more precise you can measure something, the better. I don't think it's impossible that in 20 years, pro football kits are loaded with sensors that can measure how hard an impact from a challenge was, and where precisely (and also if it happened before or after contact with the ball). There will always be subjective decisions, but there is nothing wrong with limiting those as much as we can.
Your description of the future is horrifically dystopian and I hope it never comes to pass.
In other VAR-related news:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c0rj2kq978qo
In a German second tier game, a fan unplugged the VAR equipment. Brilliant.
|
I am sure more resources will be invested finding in that perpetrator than sniffing out racists :D
|
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
On March 09 2026 19:03 MJG wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2026 04:41 aseq wrote:On March 08 2026 00:45 Charoisaur wrote:On March 07 2026 19:53 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 18:23 Charoisaur wrote:On March 07 2026 17:39 Acrofales wrote:On March 07 2026 17:21 sharkie wrote:
Arsene Wenger rule is going to be tested next year Sure, and we'll have discussions about whether an attacker's trailing foot is at the same level as the nose of the last defender or whether there's "daylight". Wenger's rule doesn't change anything with regards to ambiguity, it just moves the offside ruling to the back of the body instead of the front. it makes a difference whether a goal gets cancelled because your toenail was 1 cm in offside or if it gets cancelled because your whole body is 1cm in offside. the latter clearly gives an advantage to the attacking player so it makes sense that it's not allowed. 1cm of a toenail doesn't really give an advantage. It's also more in line with previous handlings where offside was only called when the human eye could see it - usually when a large percentage or the whole body was in offside. There will also be less uncertainty for the fans because the whole body being offside is easier to recognize with the eye. How is the difference relevant. Instead of your toenail being offside, it'll now be the defenders complaining because it was their toenail that left the attacker onside. It's literally the same argument. The difference is when comparing it to a pre-VAR scenario. your toenail being offside back then would never be considered offside, but your whole body being offside would. So the proposed rule would align more with the original purpose of the offside rule - preventing the attackers from having an advantage by being significantly in front of the last defender. And I think the complaints would also be less. A goal being cancelled because of your whole body being offside doesn't seem as stupid as your goal being cancelled because your toenail is offside. So what you're saying is that even if a toenail used to be offside, it never got called, so the rules were applied incorrectly before? If you want to make offside cover it's purpose better, you could redefine the rule. You can't blame VAR for following the rules to the letter/millimeter. This is professional sports, there should be as little leniency as technically possible. The more precise you can measure something, the better. I don't think it's impossible that in 20 years, pro football kits are loaded with sensors that can measure how hard an impact from a challenge was, and where precisely (and also if it happened before or after contact with the ball). There will always be subjective decisions, but there is nothing wrong with limiting those as much as we can. Your description of the future is horrifically dystopian and I hope it never comes to pass. In other VAR-related news: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c0rj2kq978qoIn a German second tier game, a fan unplugged the VAR equipment. Brilliant.
If we could basically automate offside that could be pretty nifty. Sensor detects when a pass is played, others run the line, done. In theory. The goal-line technology is definitely one addition I don’t think I’ve ever heard any complaints about, so if a system could perform similarly I’d be down for it.
VAR specifically frustrates me with handball, and general inconsistency and especially in how much it breaks the flow when it’s 5+ minutes for a call.
I think on balance it probably does catch more big mistakes than it makes, albeit I’m not sure it’s worth the trade in interrupting the flow.
On the flip side, fans absolutely love a moan. If we get rid of VAR the aftermath of games isn’t going to suddenly be ‘hey you win some calls, you lose some’ sanguinity, it’s just going to be endless moaning about ref or linesman mistakes again.
|
Basically everything needs to be automated anyway because nobody wants to be Ref anymore and rightfully so
|
I guess the cool bits of this UCL round are mostly on Wendesday. Today you can pretty much tell the favorite in each one, but on Wednesday it's Real - City, PSG - Chelsea and Bodo - Sporting.
|
On March 10 2026 15:30 Bacillus wrote:
I guess the cool bits of this UCL round are mostly on Wendesday. Today you can pretty much tell the favorite in each one, but on Wednesday it's Real - City, PSG - Chelsea and Bodo - Sporting.
I do expect at least one upset today
Gala vs Pool 2:2 cause Pool can't defend for shit right now
Newcastle vs Barca 2:1 dunno why but I think Newcastle is going to win the first leg
Atleti vs Spurs 3:0 yeah Spurs lol
Atalanta vs Bayern 0:3 Bayern too good right now
|
Barca is really weird currently as far as I can tell. They have excellent games where they look like they can beat anyone, but then they also have days where midtable La Liga teams outplay them and it's up to some Yamal brilliance to maybe bail them out with a shaky 1-0 or so.
|
51667 Posts
spurs letting in 4 goals after 20 minutes lol
|
Norway28875 Posts
That's literally the worst goalkeeping/defending I have ever seen at anywhere close to this level of competition (spurs first 16 minutes).
|
man thats gotta be some traumatising shit for the keeper.
|
Northern Ireland27236 Posts
On March 11 2026 13:14 evilfatsh1t wrote:
man thats gotta be some traumatising shit for the keeper.
Yeah, I’ve seen plenty of football in my time, I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything quite like that!
|
On March 10 2026 17:47 Harris1st wrote:Show nested quote +On March 10 2026 15:30 Bacillus wrote:
I guess the cool bits of this UCL round are mostly on Wendesday. Today you can pretty much tell the favorite in each one, but on Wednesday it's Real - City, PSG - Chelsea and Bodo - Sporting. I do expect at least one upset today Gala vs Pool 2:2 cause Pool can't defend for shit right now Newcastle vs Barca 2:1 dunno why but I think Newcastle is going to win the first leg Atleti vs Spurs 3:0 yeah Spurs lol Atalanta vs Bayern 0:3 Bayern too good right now
Ah man so close. General direction was spot on though.
Pool really can't defend for shit and should have lost 2:0
Barca played shit and Newcastle should have won and made the upset real
"yeah Spurs lol" was spot on
"Bayern too good right now" spot on as well
|
I guess I could give a shot on today's round:
Leverkusen - Arsenal 0-1. From a corner. I have no idea if the UCL reffing makes a difference in the set piece meta, we'll see.
Bodo/Glimt - Sporting 3-1. The magic is still working. It's getting a bit warmer in the Nordic, but should still be a bit of an extra challenge for the Portuguese. Also Bodo/Glimt passing game is actually genuinely damn good at times.
PSG - Chelsea 1-1. Neither seems to be in that great form. Probably a bit underwhelming given the stature of the clubs.
Real Madrid - City. 0 - 2. We'll see how pragmatic Pep is this time, but the way Real plays especially without Mbabbe looks very exploitable. I could see City controlling this quite easily. Real's scoring chances depend quite a bit on Vini or Valverde generating something out of nothing.
|
Something in Madrid makes the pitches really slippery. Yesterday it was the Atletico match, now there's been quite a few slips in the Real - City too.
|
Norway28875 Posts
Gooo Bodø-Glimt
and good job Harris!
|
On March 12 2026 00:38 Bacillus wrote:
Real Madrid - City. 0 - 2. We'll see how pragmatic Pep is this time, but the way Real plays especially without Mbabbe looks very exploitable. I could see City controlling this quite easily. Real's scoring chances depend quite a bit on Vini or Valverde generating something out of nothing.
Well... This aged less than ideally.
|
Norway28875 Posts
Bodø-Glimt however is crushing it! 2-0 and they've clearly been the better team!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
