Brentford vs Aston Villa Post-Match Thread

[PaulWinch again]

Like handball, offside is a law that those refereeing and regulating the game have completely forgotten why it was introduced and what’s its purpose was and is.

We now have VAR scrutinising and analysing decisions to the nth degree and with no sense as to what the game is supposed to be and why laws to control it exist.

To an extent, but offside is something that lends itself to being more binary than handball. It’s an annoying, and there’s clearly no advantage when someone is a millimetre offside. But when is it an advantage - a centimetre? Two? Five? It all becomes very subjective unless you just say as soon as someone is in front they’re offside.

[Somniloquism]

There'd be plenty kicking up more of a fuss about it if the goal had been the crucial one and cost us two points , as it stands it didn't matter so some may adopt a laissez faire stance on this one.

I expect more ire would have been aimed at the Watkins miss then at VAR giving a binary decision.

[Somniloquism]

We saw in the FA Cup with Manure getting an awful offside decision go their way that VAR assisted offside is more than welcome. If stopping that bollocks means an inch offside is also called, then I'm fine with that.

[tomd2103]

There'd be plenty kicking up more of a fuss about it if the goal had been the crucial one and cost us two points , as it stands it didn't matter so some may adopt a laissez faire stance on this one.

I expect more ire would have been aimed at the Watkins miss then at VAR giving a binary decision.

It's not binary though as they often can't freeze the picture the exact moment the ball is touched.  I've looked at the still from last night and the ball has clearly already left the foot of the player playing it through to Watkins.  Therefore, the freeze frame they are making a decision on isn't the correct one.

[VillaTim]

There'd be plenty kicking up more of a fuss about it if the goal had been the crucial one and cost us two points , as it stands it didn't matter so some may adopt a laissez faire stance on this one.

I expect more ire would have been aimed at the Watkins miss then at VAR giving a binary decision.

It's not binary though as they often can't freeze the picture the exact moment the ball is touched.  I've looked at the still from last night and the ball has clearly already left the foot of the player playing it through to Watkins.  Therefore, the freeze frame they are making a decision on isn't the correct one.

He's onside . It's a terrible call .

[Somniloquism]

Not sure how you can confirm it left the foot on the frame they had frozen it on from the angles shown and the distance. I will point out that the BBC freeze frame and the VAR one is not the same thing. But, just for you and others, This is before the pass from Ramsey, his passing leg is still in the back position AND Watkins is still offside as it was called on all their planted legs. (Far defender hadn't planted yet, but that was the one they used for the call so makes no difference).

[Nev]

Offside or not, for certain teams the analysis is nothing more than a cursary glance with no extend look or lines deployed. for others, it's forensic. That is my beef.

[The Edge]

There'd be plenty kicking up more of a fuss about it if the goal had been the crucial one and cost us two points , as it stands it didn't matter so some may adopt a laissez faire stance on this one.

I expect more ire would have been aimed at the Watkins miss then at VAR giving a binary decision.

It's not binary though as they often can't freeze the picture the exact moment the ball is touched.  I've looked at the still from last night and the ball has clearly already left the foot of the player playing it through to Watkins.  Therefore, the freeze frame they are making a decision on isn't the correct one.

Genuine question. At what point do they judge that a pass has been made? Is it at the first contact with the ball or is it at the point where the ball actually loses contact with the players boot?

[Drummond]

There'd be plenty kicking up more of a fuss about it if the goal had been the crucial one and cost us two points , as it stands it didn't matter so some may adopt a laissez faire stance on this one.

I expect more ire would have been aimed at the Watkins miss then at VAR giving a binary decision.

It's not binary though as they often can't freeze the picture the exact moment the ball is touched.  I've looked at the still from last night and the ball has clearly already left the foot of the player playing it through to Watkins.  Therefore, the freeze frame they are making a decision on isn't the correct one.

Genuine question. At what point do they judge that a pass has been made? Is it at the first contact with the ball or is it at the point where the ball actually loses contact with the players boot?

Yes.

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

There'd be plenty kicking up more of a fuss about it if the goal had been the crucial one and cost us two points , as it stands it didn't matter so some may adopt a laissez faire stance on this one.

I expect more ire would have been aimed at the Watkins miss then at VAR giving a binary decision.

It's not binary though as they often can't freeze the picture the exact moment the ball is touched.  I've looked at the still from last night and the ball has clearly already left the foot of the player playing it through to Watkins.  Therefore, the freeze frame they are making a decision on isn't the correct one.

Genuine question. At what point do they judge that a pass has been made? Is it at the first contact with the ball or is it at the point where the ball actually loses contact with the players boot?

Yes.

How about if the passing players laces have come undone ? The ball could have left his boot but then a flailing lace brushes against the ball in flight ? That nano second could be just enough time for a hair on Watkins kneecap to move into an offside position thus denying us a winning goal in the dying seconds of extra time against Barcelona in the final in May.

[VillaTim]

It should surely be from the millisecond the boot makes initial contact with the ball as that is where the intent begins. Of course these clowns in the retail park make it up as they go along and first check is club badge then they go from there.

[Smithy]

Not sure how you can confirm it left the foot on the frame they had frozen it on from the angles shown and the distance. I will point out that the BBC freeze frame and the VAR one is not the same thing. But, just for you and others, This is before the pass from Ramsey, his passing leg is still in the back position AND Watkins is still offside as it was called on all their planted legs. (Far defender hadn't planted yet, but that was the one they used for the call so makes no difference).

This image is part of the reason I don't like it, a player can be onside or offside depending where they are in the stride pattern.  If you're leg is up as the other player is planting his leg you could be offside, and the onside if the reverse is true.  Even if your upper bodies are in exactly the same position.

I think any rule that punishes a player based on where they are in their stride pattern at the time of a pass is frankly ridiculous.  And I know we've benefitted from these calls too.

If you want to make the rule so that 1cm offside is still offside, make it like sprinters dipping for the line.  Chest position counts.

[VillaTim]

The photo isn't helpful. It's from a weird angle to start with and it's not anywhere near the moment the ball is played. He also looks onside in the picture anyway as Pinncoks right foot is playing him on.

[Somniloquism]

And then all you are moving is the criticisms of the systems on the chest area, which will actually be even harder to draw accurately as not everyone is facing the same way at the same angle unlike sprinting. But the pictures actually showed that Ollie was ahead before the pass, during the pass and after the pass so he was offside.

The system is as is and I much prefer it to the shite shown the other month with a Manure player who was obviously offside by 2 feet scoring a winning goal.

[LeeS]

The system is as is and I much prefer it to the shite shown the other month with a Manure player who was obviously offside by 2 feet scoring a winning goal.

I respectfully disagree. It has really altered the viewing experience to the point that I despise VAR in its entirety. By all means use technology but if it’s not instant (or as instant as a lino raising a flag) then it isn’t good enough. I just don’t care about the odd miscarriage of justice.