VAR

[6ft Kerplunk]

have the FA marked what part of the body you can score with?

Was this part closer to the goal than two defenders?

Yes, you cannot score with any part of your arm therefore it is impossible for him to be offside

You might want to update your FA powerpoint presentation, they've changed that so top of arm is ok.

[Pepe the Horseman]

have the FA marked what part of the body you can score with?

Was this part closer to the goal than two defenders?

Yes, you cannot score with any part of your arm therefore it is impossible for him to be offside

You can score with the top of your arm/shoulder.

[windermereROYAL]

The offside law is so outdated, bring it into the modern world FFS, instead of any part of your body being offside change it to any part of your body is onside then you are ok, then its clear daylight for you to be off.

[Franchise FC]

The offside law is so outdated, bring it into the modern world FFS, instead of any part of your body being offside change it to any part of your body is onside then you are ok, then its clear daylight for you to be off.

Sadly, that’ll simply change the positioning of the ridiculous lines.

[Snowflake Royal]

Was trying to think of a solution earlier and had a few false attempts like, go with centre of mass, 'umpire's call', maximum precision level etc.

Decided it would just be simpler to scrap the computer generated lines and have a couple of people look at a still. If it looks clearly off, it's off, otherwise give it to the attacker. Basically exactly the same as linesmen do now, but with the benefit of looking at a freeze frame.

Gets rid of all of the nanometre of toe or shoulder or moob or lock of hair seeing you offside bullshit, but retain a second better look to spot the bad decisions.

[Simmops]

Was trying to think of a solution earlier and had a few false attempts like, go with centre of mass, 'umpire's call', maximum precision level etc.

Decided it would just be simpler to scrap the computer generated lines and have a couple of people look at a still. If it looks clearly off, it's off, otherwise give it to the attacker. Basically exactly the same as linesmen do now, but with the benefit of looking at a freeze frame.

Gets rid of all of the nanometre of toe or shoulder or moob or lock of hair seeing you offside bullshit, but retain a second better look to spot the bad decisions.

Omfg that is literally what we said to the fa! No lines NO LINES but did they listen? Hell no. And no dots

[AthleticoSpizz]

Or just maybe we had less controversy without it in the first place?

Some f11kkas are getting rich on this failure

[URZZZZ]

Or just maybe we had less controversy without it in the first place?

Some f11kkas are getting rich on this failure

See it from both sides

Too much money in it for blatant mistakes to cost teams. To some football is a “game”. To others, it’s a business, one where a wrong refereeing mistake can cost millions upon millions

Agree with what Ian said, keep it simplistic. Reduces the error margin without wasting time drawing meaningless lines

Glad DD mentioned he did a presentation on VAR, haven’t heard that one for a while

[Sanguine]

Whatever the solution, it is clearly wholly stupid that an attacker can have a goal chalked off because his pointing arm is offside when the rest of his body is onside, and by some distance. I said this earlier in the season where offside was given where the attacker was leaning towards the goal, and the defender was leaning away, their feet in line. It's all becoming a bit silly.

And that's before you start on this weekend's 'handballs'.

[BR0B0T]

Was trying to think of a solution earlier and had a few false attempts like, go with centre of mass, 'umpire's call', maximum precision level etc.

Decided it would just be simpler to scrap the computer generated lines and have a couple of people look at a still. If it looks clearly off, it's off, otherwise give it to the attacker. Basically exactly the same as linesmen do now, but with the benefit of looking at a freeze frame.

Gets rid of all of the nanometre of toe or shoulder or moob or lock of hair seeing you offside bullshit, but retain a second better look to spot the bad decisions.

as long as the media don't then put the lines back on and scrutinize every decision

[Snowflake Royal]

Was trying to think of a solution earlier and had a few false attempts like, go with centre of mass, 'umpire's call', maximum precision level etc.

Decided it would just be simpler to scrap the computer generated lines and have a couple of people look at a still. If it looks clearly off, it's off, otherwise give it to the attacker. Basically exactly the same as linesmen do now, but with the benefit of looking at a freeze frame.

Gets rid of all of the nanometre of toe or shoulder or moob or lock of hair seeing you offside bullshit, but retain a second better look to spot the bad decisions.

as long as the media don't then put the lines back on and scrutinize every decision

Can't control what the media do.

Just be clear, it has to be clear and obvious with the naked eye, if you need to draw lines to prove us wrong it isn't clear so we don't give a shite.

[6ft Kerplunk]

Just make the decision based on the players feet, ignore players leaning, outstretched arms etc. Still have the lines if needs be but if there's less than 5cm in it give the benefit to the attacker if it wasn't flagged as offside in real time.

[Sutekh]

Was trying to think of a solution earlier and had a few false attempts like, go with centre of mass, 'umpire's call', maximum precision level etc.

Decided it would just be simpler to scrap the computer generated lines and have a couple of people look at a still. If it looks clearly off, it's off, otherwise give it to the attacker. Basically exactly the same as linesmen do now, but with the benefit of looking at a freeze frame.

Gets rid of all of the nanometre of toe or shoulder or moob or lock of hair seeing you offside bullshit, but retain a second better look to spot the bad decisions.

How about, a player is onside so long as there are at least 2 opposition players ahead of him. Seemed to work pretty well for 60+ years before the idiots started fiddling.

Oh and dump VAR as well and leave any issues to understandable human error because of the speed of the moment rather than human error because I’ve got 5 different camera angles and now have got confused by the width of all the lines being drawn everywhere so I’ll reach the most stupid conclusion possible.

[BR0B0T]

Just make the decision based on the players feet, ignore players leaning, outstretched arms etc. Still have the lines if needs be but if there's less than 5cm in it give the benefit to the attacker if it wasn't flagged as offside in real time.

will either come down to where the 5cm line is drawn or the decision is subjective

[Sanguine]

How about, a player is onside so long as there are at least 2 opposition players ahead of him. Seemed to work pretty well for 60+ years before the idiots started fiddling.

That still is the rule. All that has changed is that players can now be 'inactive', and that's been a huge improvement in the rules. We don't want to see attacking moves halted because someone not involved in the game 30 yards away has been tardy getting back in line.

I'd agree with it being determined by feet. That is, to me, in line. Attackers will naturally be leaning forward towards goal. Defenders will naturally look to move the other way. Which means that with a 'lean', attackers actually need their feet to be a few inches onside to stay within the rules.

We just can't have a situation where a player is pointing where he wants the ball played, and that arm sees him called offside, when the rest of him is not.

[BR0B0T]

How about, a player is onside so long as there are at least 2 opposition players ahead of him. Seemed to work pretty well for 60+ years before the idiots started fiddling.

That still is the rule. All that has changed is that players can now be 'inactive', and that's been a huge improvement in the rules. We don't want to see attacking moves halted because someone not involved in the game 30 yards away has been tardy getting back in line.

I'd agree with it being determined by feet. That is, to me, in line. Attackers will naturally be leaning forward towards goal. Defenders will naturally look to move the other way. Which means that with a 'lean', attackers actually need their feet to be a few inches onside to stay within the rules.

We just can't have a situation where a player is pointing where he wants the ball played, and that arm sees him called offside, when the rest of him is not.

feet could be in line head could be 6foot closer to the goal

[Sanguine]

Well that's unlikely to be a representation of when the ball is kicked, anyway. But it's a case in point, attacker is going for the header, defender has chosen to slide the tackle the grass. I don't think the attacker should be penalised for leaning towards the goal if his feet started in line with his defender.

[Snowflake Royal]

Well that's unlikely to be a representation of when the ball is kicked, anyway. But it's a case in point, attacker is going for the header, defender has chosen to slide the tackle the grass. I don't think the attacker should be penalised for leaning towards the goal if his feet started in line with his defender.

Doesn't solve the basic problem. Which is lines being drawn on the pitch by a computer to show people offside by a fraction of a mm.

It's the same issue whether it's the tip or heel of a boot or a lock of hair, knee, armpit or bit of upper arm.

[From Despair To Where?]

Instead of feet, how about hips or torso?

And FFS, introduce a "Referee's call". If its not obvious after 20 seconds with a freeze frame then its within the realms of human error. If its not obvious, its not wrong. If cricket can make a decision in a minute with a no ball camera, snickometer, hot spot, ball tracker and cameras tracking the flight of the ball, why the fcuk can't football with just a side on freeze frame?

[Franchise FC]

Instead of feet, how about hips or torso?

And FFS, introduce a "Referee's call". If its not obvious after 20 seconds with a freeze frame then its within the realms of human error. If its not obvious, its not wrong. If cricket can make a decision in a minute with a no ball camera, snickometer, hot spot, ball tracker and cameras tracking the flight of the ball, why the fcuk can't football with just a side on freeze frame?

I think you, me and OMA have said pretty much the same thing over a number of months, with just a slight difference in the number of seconds (I'd limit to 15, OMA suggested 30).
To be honest, I'd be happy with any of them and, as you've said, if it's not obvious then it's onside.