VAR

[Ian.]

Ollie must be fuming. Two perfectly good goals for him chalked off. That’s just not fair and not what VAR should be about.

[Nev]

It doesn't work.

[nigel]

VAR is fine, it’s the morons that operate it who are the problem

[purpletrousers]

I’m guessing it’s going nowhere. So...Just make it any part of the body in line with the defender and your are level, it’s a goal?
But then does it all have to square internationally??? As it is, doesn’t work.
I really feel for Ollie, great goals, nicked off him. 

[Steve67]

VAR is absolute shite.  The really really close ones should just be given, whether for us or against as I honestly don't think you can really tell the precise moment the ball is passed into the box.  Rule needs to be changed to clear daylight.

[purpletrousers]

VAR is fine, it’s the morons that operate it who are the problem

It’s not though is it, they are enforcing silly offside rules...

[Ad@m]

I’m guessing it’s going nowhere. So...Just make it any part of the body in line with the defender and your are level, it’s a goal?
But then does it all have to square internationally??? As it is, doesn’t work.
I really feel for Ollie, great goals, nicked off him. 

Nope, we don't have to be consistent with any other league. How VAR is applied to offside is down to each competition to decide for themselves.

The lines should just go. They give a false sense of accuracy to a system that's inherently inaccurate.

Plus, if you can't tell it's offside without silly lines then it's not offside.

[Des Little]

It should be feet that are the gauge, well the front foot. Plain and simple.

[paul_e]

VAR is fine, it’s the morons that operate it who are the problem

It’s not though is it, they are enforcing silly offside rules...

VAR didn't make them draw lines on a screen and spend 2 minutes deciding who's bicep is closest to the goal. As came up last time Watkins was robbed of one in the Dutch league they use much wider lines and if there's no daylight between them the goal stands because that allows for the inaccuracy of the timing. Things like the framerate of the cameras and the choice of what constitutes the completion of the passing action make it impossible to be as accurate with the timing as you'd need for the 1-2cm calls to be irrefutably correct.

[exigo]

Time to bring in the equivalent of 'umpire's call' in cricket.
Let the lino make an on-field decision – in this case, he'd have given the Watkins goal. Then, refer it if needs be, but with wider lines – not the hairline ones like now, that ignore the fact that the ball could be struck over the course of about five frames of footage. 10cm lines, which in this case would overlap; verdict is 'assistant's call', goal given.

[Ian.]

VAR is fine, it’s the morons that operate it who are the problem

It’s not though is it, they are enforcing silly offside rules...

VAR didn't make them draw lines on a screen and spend 2 minutes deciding who's bicep is closest to the goal. As came up last time Watkins was robbed of one in the Dutch league they use much wider lines and if there's no daylight between them the goal stands because that allows for the inaccuracy of the timing. Things like the framerate of the cameras and the choice of what constitutes the completion of the passing action make it impossible to be as accurate with the timing as you'd need for the 1-2cm calls to be irrefutably correct.

It’s not really that hard as other countries have shown. I think our rule makers are far to arrogant to listen to advice and watch other nations use it properly.

[Toronto Villa]

If VAR existed back when Owen or Lineker had played they would have lost 25-30% of their career goals.

[Ian.]

Just seen Maddison’s rules out goal, again a ridiculous goal ruled out for a fingertip. Do you remember when back in the day if it was uncertain the linesman was advised to give the the benefit of doubt to the attacker.

Who are making these rules?

[Toronto Villa]

Just seen Maddison’s rules out goal, again a ridiculous goal ruled out for a fingertip. Do you remember when back in the day if it was uncertain the linesman was advised to give the the benefit of doubt to the attacker.

Who are making these rules?

And that was actually a rule change because tactics had become so negative and really helped to open up the game. Not they are entirely looking at the attackers position and nobody is zooming in on the ball to see precisely when it is kicked. You cannot do one without the other yet they are.

[tomd2103]

Just seen Maddison’s rules out goal, again a ridiculous goal ruled out for a fingertip. Do you remember when back in the day if it was uncertain the linesman was advised to give the the benefit of doubt to the attacker.

Who are making these rules?

And that was actually a rule change because tactics had become so negative and really helped to open up the game. Not they are entirely looking at the attackers position and nobody is zooming in on the ball to see precisely when it is kicked. You cannot do one without the other yet they are.

Would have to see it again, but it didn't look like it was measured by the arm for Watkins' goal tonight.  Looked like it was measured by the feet.

Edit - just seen it again on MOTD2 and seems it wasn't measured by the arm.  So have we got different people using different methods now?