Other Matches - Saturday 2nd November, 2019

[Stan]

59 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Regarding offside and VAR why can’t it be a rule of thumb that unless a player is ahead by a ft then the attacker gets the benefit of doubt? It would lead to more goals 

I think they should bring back the 'daylight' rule.

If that can be incorporated in to the VAR rules then it's clear as day (pun intended) on what the officials can decipher. And that includes any part of the body. No daylight between players, it's offside. Whether it's a part of the body you can score with or not. 

Having said that, the current ruling about any part of the body you can score with is offside is set and that's what the rules are - whether it's a mm, a cm or a foot. Atkinson's decision to disallow Firmino's goal was wrong and the offside call should have been reversed - you can't score with your armpit (literally no-one ever has), so that goal should stand. If he is standing a few inches further forward you could argue another part of Firmino's body (chest) would be offside and it would legitimately be disallowed and I'd hope no-one would have had any qualms about that. 

[Harry]

59 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Regarding offside and VAR why can’t it be a rule of thumb that unless a player is ahead by a ft then the attacker gets the benefit of doubt? It would lead to more goals 

I agree... Anything that's just about on side of pay as a goal. VAR should just be there to intervene in case a massive fuck up call is made. It's being used ten times more often than it should be imo.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Harry said:

I agree... Anything that's just about on side of pay as a goal. VAR should just be there to intervene in case a massive fuck up call is made. It's being used ten times more often than it should be imo.

I'd be OK with this. VAR for emergency calls. 

Using it after every goal makes you question why we even have referees. Ruins the spectacle and allows the one at job to slack knowing he can just use a video replay to work.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Harry said:

You're strongly negative stance is unnecessarily polarising mate.

It's wrong for you to simplify it that anyone that doesn't agree with you is an idiot or is just hellbent on destroying the sport. 

I can't agree I'm afraid. I'll still get along with people like @Stan for example even though I can't understand what he sees in VAR. I can understand that harming the sport is not their intention, but they also need to realize what harm it's doing for the casual fan and most of all, match goers (like myself).

VAR has brought out the worst in fans. Agendas are usually made for third worlders and politicians, but with this topic, everyone seems to have an agenda. 

I'm only like this because I care for the sport, and being told that I'm self opinionated but respecting other anti-VAR who have the same views as me doesn't help.

[Stan]

3 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

I can't agree I'm afraid. I'll still get along with people like @Stan for example even though I can't understand what he sees in VAR. I can understand that harming the sport is not their intention, but they also need to realize what harm it's doing for the casual fan and most of all, match goers (like myself).

VAR has brought out the worst in fans. Agendas are usually made for third worlders and politicians, but with this topic, everyone seems to have an agenda. 

I'm only like this because I care for the sport, and being told that I'm self opinionated but respecting other anti-VAR who have the same views as me doesn't help.

Firstly, I'm guessing you don't actually take in to account my posts if you can't understand what I see in VAR. As in you read them, but you're so strong-minded in your own view you're blinded by it. Not meant to be too harsh a criticism as much as it may sound.

I'll criticise it and complain about it (especially this weekend with some of those decisions) but I'm not so blinded to see that it does still have its advantages. 

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

Firstly, I'm guessing you don't actually take in to account my posts if you can't understand what I see in VAR. As in you read them, but you're so strong-minded in your own view you're blinded by it. Not meant to be too harsh a criticism as much as it may sound.

 I'll criticise it and complain about it (especially this weekend with some of those decisions) but I'm not so blinded to see that it does still have its advantages. 

Well, I'm not blinded am I.

I literally just said I'm ok with it for emergency decisions. 

I don't hate VAR for being VAR. I hate it for being too overused and ruining the spectacle as a result. Again, I don't watch football because I love the rules.

If they plan on using it for big offside decisions, handball goals or missed red cards, I'd be OK with it. Otherwise the referee can just coast.

[Stan]

Just now, Grizzly21 said:

Well, I'm not blinded am I.

I literally just said I'm ok with it for emergency decisions. 

I don't hate VAR for being VAR. I hate it for being too overused and ruining the spectacle as a result. Again, I don't watch football because I love the rules.

If they plan on using it for big offside decisions, handball goals or missed red cards, I'd be OK with it. Otherwise the referee can just coast.

I meant blinded by your own view so that you can't understand what I personally see in VAR.

There's literally no point in continuing this if you are unable to do that. 

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

I meant blinded by your own view so that you can't understand what I personally see in VAR.

There's literally no point in continuing this if you are unable to do that. 

I read your posts, and I understand why you'd want a sport with regulation.

What I don't understand is why you'd prefer that over the spectacle. 

Like everything, a balance is needed. 

[Stan]

20 minutes ago, Grizzly21 said:

I read your posts, and I understand why you'd want a sport with regulation.

What I don't understand is why you'd prefer that over the spectacle. 

Like everything, a balance is needed. 

Who said I prefer it over the spectacle?

Of course I love the spectacle and entertainment of the game. You don't have to love one (the spectacle) and hate the other (VAR). I can be a fan of both. 

I think VAR can add to the spectacle when it's done right and when officials make good/perfect use of it - like it has in some cases. But I can accept there are significant flaws in the way it has been used so far in the Premier League though, as well.

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

Who said I prefer it over the spectacle?

Of course I love the spectacle and entertainment of the game. You don't have to love one (the spectacle) and hate the other (VAR). I can be a fan of both. 

I think VAR can add to the spectacle when it's done right and when officials make good/perfect use of it - like it has in some cases. But I can accept there are significant flaws in the way it has been used so far in the Premier League though, as well.

Fair enough.

I think we should honestly just use it for emergency calls, as I said.

[Guest]

The goal was offside. The premier League have come out and said the correct system was used. Any referee using it right would give the same decision.

Unless you are going to argue the maths is wrong.

[Harry]

3 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

The goal was offside. The premier League have come out and said the correct system was used. Any referee using it right would give the same decision.

Unless you are going to argue the maths is wrong.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2019/nov/04/premier-league-managers-mike-riley-referees-manager-var

[Mel81x+]

4 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

The goal was offside. The premier League have come out and said the correct system was used. Any referee using it right would give the same decision.

Unless you are going to argue the maths is wrong.

Kinda wish they'd just make the decision and its workings public then everyone could see what they are doing. instead they are just making blanket statements about it all. Give the public evidence and they'll stop complaining, but no, lets generate more ambiguity in the name of clear and obvious.

[LFCMike]

4 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

The goal was offside. The premier League have come out and said the correct system was used. Any referee using it right would give the same decision.

Unless you are going to argue the maths is wrong.

What have they said since the statement during the match on Saturday?

[LFCMadLad]

25 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

What have they said since the statement during the match on Saturday?

That his armpit was offside 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Harry said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2019/nov/04/premier-league-managers-mike-riley-referees-manager-var

That article doesn't say anything about the offside being wrong. It just says they having a meeting to try to improve var in general. They said on motd that the premier League has said the decision was right. It's black and white maths its not matter of opinion. 

[Guest]

Just now, LFCMadLad said:

That his armpit was offside 

He's still offside. In any part of your body is offside you are offside 

[LFCMadLad]

5 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

He's still offside. In any part of your body is offside you are offside 

Wrong, it's any part of the body that a player can score with. Arm isnt one of them. His armpit wasnt even offside 

Come on mate, I know you are big pro VAR but that decision is ridiculous, even you can admit that?

[Dr. Gonzo]

I maintain that the biggest mistake with VAR is that Mike Riley is in charge of its implementation for us.

How that man, one of the worst referees I’ve ever fucking seen in my life, is the the man in charge of officiating in the country... it just boggles the fucking mine.

Why is VAR in England shite? Because we’ve got one of the worst officials in the history of modern football with his fingerprints all over it.

The Firmino decision is a joke too. It took Atkinson adjusting the lines for minutes until he could manufacture an offside. Bet he was gutted he couldn’t chalk off our winner. He shouldn’t be allowed to officiate our matches in any capacity.

[LFCMadLad]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I maintain that the biggest mistake with VAR is that Mike Riley is in charge of its implementation for us.

How that man, one of the worst referees I’ve ever fucking seen in my life, is the the man in charge of officiating in the country... it just boggles the fucking mine.

Why is VAR in England shite? Because we’ve got one of the worst officials in the history of modern football with his fingerprints all over it.

The Firmino decision is a joke too. It took Atkinson adjusting the lines for minutes until he could manufacture an offside. Bet he was gutted he couldn’t chalk off our winner. He shouldn’t be allowed to officiate our matches in any capacity.

Read a stat yesterday that claimed we have won only 4 from about 12 games where he has been referee! He's a fucking gimp.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Wrong, it's any part of the body that a player can score with. Arm isnt one of them. His armpit wasnt even offside 

Come on mate, I know you are big pro VAR but that decision is ridiculous, even you can admit that?

Not what I've heard mate. I've heard it is any part of your body. If I'm wrong I'll admit it. His arm was offside mate it has been proven . I'm pro var but I don't have a fixed opinion. If var is still like this in 3 years I wouldn't support it. But they are looking into it and I think they will improve it.

[LFCMadLad]

2 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Not what I've heard mate. I've heard it is any part of your body. If I'm wrong I'll admit it. His arm was offside mate it has been proven . I'm pro var but I don't have a fixed opinion. If var is still like this in 3 years I wouldn't support it. But they are looking into it and I think they will improve it.

Theres only really you who thinks it was correct pal, everyone else thinks it was a pathetic decision.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Theres only really you who thinks it was correct pal, everyone else thinks it was a pathetic decision.

But what I'm saying is based on what the premier League has said. It's not a case of thinking it's offside. The premier League have said the system works and if they use the lines the way they do it proves it's offside. Doesn't matter what people think if it's a fact it's a fact. Maths doesn't lie.

[LFCMadLad]

6 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

But what I'm saying is based on what the premier League has said. It's not a case of thinking it's offside. The premier League have said the system works and if they use the lines the way they do it proves it's offside. Doesn't matter what people think if it's a fact it's a fact. Maths doesn't lie.

What the Premier league have said? They'd say anything to cover their balls. Millions of people have seen with their own eyes. It wasnt offside and no amount of maths will prove otherwise. 

[Stan]

34 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Not what I've heard mate. I've heard it is any part of your body. If I'm wrong I'll admit it. His arm was offside mate it has been proven . I'm pro var but I don't have a fixed opinion. If var is still like this in 3 years I wouldn't support it. But they are looking into it and I think they will improve it.

The rule is that if any part of your body that you can score with is offside then that's what officials should flag for. Not just any body part in general  

I don't get how an armpit counts as a body part you can score with.

So therefore it shouldn't have been called offside. 

That ruling isn't even anything to do with VAR. It's just the rules of the game, simple as.

VAR only comes in to it because we seemingly have an official here (Martin Atkinson) who incorrectly thinks the armpit is a part of the body you can score with.