VAR - West Ham v City

[Yankee_Jack]

There are two key events that revolve around VAR in this match.

First, the offside decision. City player was ruled offside because his shoulder was "offside". The rule ... standing offside ... says nothing about a player’s shoulder, elbow, finger, nose, hair, arse, dick, or any other part of the body. Standing implies where the feet are planted. If the player is standing offside, then it has to be driven by where his feet are planted not where some arbitrary part of his body happens to hang with respect to some line drawn by a computer graphic generator. Please let's have some common sense on the offside rule and not turn it into utter nonsense driven by technology.

Second, penalty encroachment. Finally, the ref was forced to enforce the rule that has been in existence for decades. There is a reason that there is a semi-circle drawn outside the penalty box, which is in combination with the rest of the box prevents players of both sides from encroaching within 10 yards of the penalty spot BEFORE the ball is kicked. All players have to remain outside this boundary (arc + box), except for the keeper and penalty taker, until the ball is kicked. Easy to follow. Used to be called. Refs and linesmen got lazy.

Your thoughts?

 

[CroJack]

Agreed.

 

[ivoralljack]

Your thoughts?

Totally in accord with yours.

 

[CroJack]

City player was ruled offside because his shoulder was "offside".

I don't know why everybody is talking about the shoulder, and even the referee pointed at his shoulder as an explanation for the VAR decision. But, Sterling WAS offside, his foot was offside and I highlighted it in this picture below (the yellow line is mine):

​

Another thing I don't understand. Nobody is complaining about the Goal line technology when the ball (doesn't) crosses the goal line by less than an inch, but everybody is complaining about the VAR when a player is offside by an inch. You can't make it up.

​

 

[Yankee_Jack]

Great analysis @CroJack. Everybody is looking at the wrong thing. And, also reading the rule wrong.

To be onside, a player has to be behind the ball when it is played, be passed the ball by an opponent, or have two opposition players between him and the goal line when the ball is played. Between does not mean beside or in-line with, it means between. In the photo, however you look at it, the West Ham player is not between the City player and the goal line but is in-line with the City player .... for all practical purposes. Therefore, City player is offside. I think the concept of “practical purposes” is the art that is going to be obliterated by the technology, which is going to make a nonsense out of this rule.

 

[Jackflash]

Like any system, it's only as good as those who operate it. The system is there to ensure fair play, whereas wrong officials decisions has cost clubs £M's and promotions, but as good as the system is, if the FA allow operating personnel who are not fully aware of the rules of the game, then they are allowing things to go back to square one by the inept judgement of these (experts) which is no different to bad match officials decisions. A simple clarification rule (as Yankee pointed out) is, where your feet are when the ball leaves the player would alleviate any arguments.

 

[CroJack]

A simple clarification rule (as Yankee pointed out) is, where your feet are when the ball leaves the player would alleviate any arguments.

Apparently, the new rules say that, apart from arms, any part of a player's body can be offside if it crosses the offside line. That's because you are allowed to score with your belly, shoulder, head, chest, knee...but not with your arms. In Sterling's case it was his shoulder.

 

[Jackflash]

Apparently, the new rules say that, apart from arms, any part of a player's body can be offside if it crosses the offside line. That's because you are allowed to score with your belly, shoulder, head, chest, knee...but not with your arms. In Sterling's case it was his shoulder.

Agreed, but it needs to be simplified, there have been numerous times with long delays due to different opinions by the panel. Goal line technology is black and white, and VAR needs to be brought into line with that, i really don't see a need for it if the off side decision is made by a panel, it may just as well be left to the match officials in the first place. Are we to assume the decision is correct because the majority of a panel says so.

 

[ivoralljack]

I prefer the foot rule. Only one thing to consider, which makes it more clear cut and, as it's the same for both sides, there should be no gripes about it.