Laws Of The Game

FootyLovin said:
This.

But not this.

It all does the same thing. We will argue about millimeters no matter what. Personally, I accept this and don't really care. It's part of the game.

The rule change will just mean a pendulum swing to more advantage for offense. I like that.

Next up. Please give 1 delay of game and then yellow cards for disrupting the ball (picking up, tossing onto field, holding away from other players, etc) after foul calls or out of bounds. Would also advantage more offense and just make the game better, more entertaining.
Click to expand...

I don't think so -- if the line is thick to a certain point, the only way you're looking at millimeters is if the AR made a ridiculously bad call. And if the AR makes a ridiculously bad call, it won't get to the VAR for millimeter review -- the Referee can overturn it from the sideline.

RIght now the ARs are making no calls, so anything that is really close on a quick review goes to VAR. If the line is thicker, anything that is close to the millimeter won't be overturned and anything that would be close to the edge of a thick line will not need to go to VAR because it will be obvious in the quick review.

I originally thought what you think. but that would only be the case if the ARs are still told not to make calls.
 
FredMertz said:
I don't think so -- if the line is thick to a certain point, the only way you're looking at millimeters is if the AR made a ridiculously bad call. And if the AR makes a ridiculously bad call, it won't get to the VAR for millimeter review -- the Referee can overturn it from the sideline.

RIght now the ARs are making no calls, so anything that is really close on a quick review goes to VAR. If the line is thicker, anything that is close to the millimeter won't be overturned and anything that would be close to the edge of a thick line will not need to go to VAR because it will be obvious in the quick review.

I originally thought what you think. but that would only be the case if the ARs are still told not to make calls.
Click to expand...
I don't think I understand what you mean by a thick line. The rule still has to say where the edge of that line is. In the end that edge will be what is judged. And that will turn into a game of millimeters. No?
 
FootyLovin said:
I don't think I understand what you mean by a thick line. The rule still has to say where the edge of that line is. In the end that edge will be what is judged. And that will turn into a game of millimeters. No?
Click to expand...

Based on my understanding, the thicker line will allow for greater margin for what is "offsides". The way the EPL, for example, uses it, once the VAR draws the lines, the computer determines if there's offsides.

The thicker line will increase that margin used to be considered as offsides since mere millimeters isn't exactly clear and obvious to a human eye, but it is to the computer doing the calculations.

With a thin line, a toe could result in offsides (and it has) while with a thicker line, you'd need an entire foot (as an example) to be offsides. yes, it still comes down to where the VAR draws the initial line, but once that initial line for the defender is drawn, the attacker will need to be a distance greater than the width of the thicker line past the defender to be offsides.
 
moogoo said:
With a thin line, a toe could result in offsides (and it has) while with a thicker line, you'd need an entire foot (as an example) to be offsides. yes, it still comes down to where the VAR draws the initial line, but once that initial line for the defender is drawn, the attacker will need to be a distance greater than the width of the thicker line past the defender to be offsides.
Click to expand...
This seems to me to be the same thing. At some point a person or a computer draws a line (thin or thick). If the offensive player has a body part on the wrong side of the edge of that line, then it is offsides. It still comes down to millimeters on the edge of that line.

If I am missing something I am not trying to be intentionally obtuse. I truly don't understand the distinction being made.
 
FootyLovin said:
This seems to me to be the same thing. At some point a person or a computer draws a line (thin or thick). If the offensive player has a body part on the wrong side of the edge of that line, then it is offsides. It still comes down to millimeters on the edge of that line.

If I am missing something I am not trying to be intentionally obtuse. I truly don't understand the distinction being made.
Click to expand...

Let's say Team A is attacking right to left.

In a VAR review, a line will be drawn at the left most edge of defender on team B. For example:

A
|B

The same is true for attacker on team A. But since the line here is THIN, the right edge of the line against the defender is nearly identical to the left edge of the line toward the goal. Therefore, judging whether attacker A is offsides is a matter of millimeters that only a computer can really see. Let's say the line on the screen is 1mm and a toe of an attacker corresponds to 1mm on a VAR screen. So, if an attacker's toe exceeds the left edge of the thin line, even if by 1mm, he is still offsides.

Drawing the lines the same way, but using a thicker 10mm line. If the attacker's toe goes into the 10mm from the right edge (since he's attacking right to left), there is still 9mm left of margin left in the line. So, the computer will judge him to be onsides. Take it further, if the attacker's foot corresponds to 5mm on the VAR screen and his foot is past the right edge of the thick 10mm line (which is lined up with the left most part of the defender), then there is still 5mm left of margin and he'd still be onsides.

A
| |B

Of course this is an example based on my understanding of why to use the thicker lines. I don't know how thick they will draw the lines either.

Hope this makes sense and if I am totally wrong, someone please correct me and sorry for the incorrect explanation. lol.
 
The point is, in order for a thick line to be so close, the player would have to be significantly offside, so the assumption is it would never get to VAR.

Take it to the extreme — if the line started at the last defender and went out 5 yards, would you still think there would be millimeter decisions?
 
moogoo said:
Let's say Team A is attacking right to left.

In a VAR review, a line will be drawn at the left most edge of defender on team B. For example:

A
|B

The same is true for attacker on team A. But since the line here is THIN, the right edge of the line against the defender is nearly identical to the left edge of the line toward the goal. Therefore, judging whether attacker A is offsides is a matter of millimeters that only a computer can really see. Let's say the line on the screen is 1mm and a toe of an attacker corresponds to 1mm on a VAR screen. So, if an attacker's toe exceeds the left edge of the thin line, even if by 1mm, he is still offsides.

Drawing the lines the same way, but using a thicker 10mm line. If the attacker's toe goes into the 10mm from the right edge (since he's attacking right to left), there is still 9mm left of margin left in the line. So, the computer will judge him to be onsides. Take it further, if the attacker's foot corresponds to 5mm on the VAR screen and his foot is past the right edge of the thick 10mm line (which is lined up with the left most part of the defender), then there is still 5mm left of margin and he'd still be onsides.

A
| |B

Of course this is an example based on my understanding of why to use the thicker lines. I don't know how thick they will draw the lines either.

Hope this makes sense and if I am totally wrong, someone please correct me and sorry for the incorrect explanation. lol.
Click to expand...
FredMertz said:
The point is, in order for a thick line to be so close, the player would have to be significantly offside, so the assumption is it would never get to VAR.

Take it to the extreme — if the line started at the last defender and went out 5 yards, would you still think there would be millimeter decisions?
Click to expand...
So what you are saying is that the line judge calls the offside based on one side of the thick line and the VAR only overrules if it crosses the other side of the thick line. So it is still a question of millimeters, but the line judge would have to make a really bad call to get to that.

But then you are basically saying for all intents and purposes let's go back to the age without VAR. The reason VAR came about was because previously there were egregiously high levels of variability in calls.

I think I understand what you both are advocating. I just don't like it. Personally, I think VAR and computer modeling on calls works pretty well. The technology will only get more precise and faster with time. Same way the refs now get pretty much instantaneous wrist buzz for goal line crossing. I'm all for the tech.
 
I'm not on the rules committee or anything but I think it'd be just like the goal line. If any part of the ball is touching the line it's still on the field and in play, and only if every part of the ball has gone past the line is it a goal. The offside "line" would be the same. So instead of being a millimeter in front of the defender, which is a ludicrous way to be called offside, you'd get a few inches where you'd still be onside until you went past the threshold and became offside. It's sort of like an offside grace period, in a sense.

The point is that a lot fewer offside calls would have to go to VAR because you wouldn't have to compare knee positions to the millimeter. If the attacker's knee is 1mm in front of the defender they'd still be onside, and only if they were noticeably in front would it actually be offside. 1mm or 4mm, it doesn't matter, they're both onside. But once you hit, say, 10cm ahead of the defender it's easy enough to raise the flag. No VAR needed. Or if it does go to VAR it'd take two seconds to make a decision as 1cm in front would be onside and you wouldn't have to measure so precisely.

So a simple offside rule change would be to just add the word "noticeably" to "ahead of the defender" and you could eliminate VAR for offside calls and the game could be played with far fewer interruptions.

FootyLovin said:
But then you are basically saying for all intents and purposes let's go back to the age without VAR. The reason VAR came about was because previously there were egregiously high levels of variability in calls.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. What I'm saying the wider line would do would be to add that variability into the rules. Offside should be for someone who's three feet ahead of the defender, not for someone who's untrimmed toenail is ahead of the defender's closely trimmed toenail. The rule should be that if you need VAR to tell you whether or not someone's offside then they're not offside.
 
Seth said:
only if they were noticeably in front would it actually be offside
Click to expand...
I think it comes down to this. I (and I think FIFA, MLS, et al) want a precise measure. "Noticeably" basically says that line judges use their own discretion. It's what they want it to be. You get rid of pauses in the action for VAR and delayed flag raises. But you bring back wide variability and uncertainty about what exactly will and won't be called.

I'm good pushing forward with more and more precision.

We just disagree on this. It's all good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Falastur
[Essay] The evolving strategy of CFG
2
Replies
34
Views
5,601
Fake Jew
Fake Jew
M
What Is A Free Country / Freedom Of Speech.
Replies
4
Views
1,395
MrE
M
Back
Top