European Finals.

[BWFC_Insane]

A really entertaining match that, on the night, either team could have won. For me, the ridiculous offside rules are ruining football. A man can be offside, easily seen, not his shoe or kneecap. Rugby has offside, based on common sense; football has lost he plot. Austria could feel aggrieved at their dismissal despite Italy skills, because they never stopped trying right to the end, but they can go home with a lot of pride. Small consolation I know, but that's life.

I just hope that the media hype like "The Sun" band-waggon jumpers, doesn't distract our own lads attention away from their target.

Offside is binary though. You either are or you aren’t. If you introduce some form of buffer or introduce some common sense application you will just revert to inconsistency again.

I think the obsession with drawing lines is a collective madness from lawmakers who have forgotten the point of the offside rule.

VAR should get three looks at it (all decisions, including offside) in real time and if aren't sure it's wrong from that you stay with the on field decision.

How would that make it any better? You either are or you aren’t offside. Adding an extra layer of ‘well that was obvious yet they didn’t overrule it’ isn’t the answer. I’m not a fan of VAR but in this tournament it’s been used relatively well. For me if you want offside to become non binary then it needs a change in the law. Nobody on a screen can necessarily agree without lines and the lines take the judgement call away. I repeat the laws of the game state you either are or you aren’t offside. I don’t see any argument that ball over the line has to be clear…it’s measured down to sub millimetre level. Why is offside different?

It would make it better because it wouldn't take five minutes to work out if someone's toenail was offside or not.

I don't want it to become "non-binary", but that's a specious distinction for two reasons.

Firstly, the current offside method is not "scientific". They present it like it is but it's still a judgement call from the people running it as to where to draw the lines. You say it's binary but the guidance says for example that your "arm" can't be offside, and that your "arm" doesn't include your shoulder. That's a judgement call. Then there's the technological limitations. They still don't have the frames per second rate to show exactly when the ball is kicked, and the protocol says they can't use a frame before it has been kicked, only after. So if the penultimate frame is a millisecond before it's kicked, the one they use you can sometimes see the ball has already gone.

And I'm far from convinced they use a high enough resolution when drawing the line to make sure they get it exactly right. A pixel here or there would be enough on some of these calls.

Secondly, there are hundreds of other decisions a game which would be black or white. Who did that corner/goal kick touch last (one of the examples that got used to argue for goal line technology was that Clint Hill "goal" against us for QPR, but that shouldn't have been a corner anyway, that was a black or white decision).

Obviously whether a goal is offside or not is more important that who gets a throw in on halfway but my point is we accept it isn't as simple as is it black or white, there are other factors on what we should use the technology for.

So the main arguments against are how long it takes, and a general presumption against ruining the emotions in the game by changing decisions (so only change those that are obviously wrong), and then to a lesser extent leaving the refereeing of games to the referees.

I just don't see what the pros are to getting the lines out. The point of the offside rule is to stop strikers goal hanging and the bonus it brings to the game is it squashes the space to play in. Defences can use it but there's no element of skill involved it catching someone offside by 1mm (obviously there is in catching someone offside generally, but if it's that tight there's a huge element of luck). If someone's not clearly offside from three real time replays I don't think you can complain, and vice versa. Once you take the clear errors out you're not punishing any skill and you take away the farce of 5 minutes of nonsense to rule goals out.

That’s an argument against using VAR full stop. Clearly on or offside means different things to different people. Nobody is a fan of delays but more or less in this tournament that’s been minimal. The thing is you either use VAR to its best ability or you don’t. I’d be happy not to use it but then to use it and rely on someone’s judgement is probably not a good idea. The lines as you note will have a margin of error but it’s likely tiny. As I say if you want to change offside and VAR interpretation then you need a change in the rules. VAR can only take the laws of the game and make a decision accordingly. Anything else for me becomes a waste of space because it’s up to individual opinion. If we had Knight and Riley as video refs we’d never get another point in that case.

[Prufrock]

The margins they use it for *are* tiny though. Take the Lukaku goal that was rules out the other day, it was by millimetres but the frame they used De Bruyne had already kicked it.

And I don't think you do need to change the rules at all.

The real question for me is what do you want VAR for? If you want to micro decide every decision, you end up where we are now. It's been relatively quick in this tournament but it still takes time and leads to too many things being changed (and away from offsides still too many decisions that are "wrong", Wales for example getting done by no free kick in Moore and then the Wilson red card).

For me it should only get involved for obviously wrong decisions. If it's not obviously wrong then tough.

If you get a few where afterwards they get the lines out and he was actually 2mm offside, tough. The world won't stop turning. And it stops the nonsense of celebrating a goal then stood there constantly waiting for someone to get their computer out.

[BWFC_Insane]

The margins they use it for *are* tiny though. Take the Lukaku goal that was rules out the other day, it was by millimetres but the frame they used De Bruyne had already kicked it.

And I don't think you do need to change the rules at all.

The real question for me is what do you want VAR for? If you want to micro decide every decision, you end up where we are now. It's been relatively quick in this tournament but it still takes time and leads to too many things being changed (and away from offsides still too many decisions that are "wrong", Wales for example getting done by no free kick in Moore and then the Wilson red card).

For me it should only get involved for obviously wrong decisions. If it's not obviously wrong then tough.

If you get a few where afterwards they get the lines out and he was actually 2mm offside, tough. The world won't stop turning. And it stops the nonsense of celebrating a goal then stood there constantly waiting for someone to get their computer out.

You will then just have people arguing about what was obvious or not. I don’t see the point in using it if you are just relying on more judgement. Cricket managed to create a system that took into account the error and I don’t really see why football cannot change the rules to say that the onfield decision stands unless the lines are ‘x far’ apart. That adds in the margin of error. But it needs a change of rules. It also means decisions on field matter more and that would end some of the ‘will keep flag down just in case’ nonsense.

Are you happy with a ball over the line thing? Or should that be clear and obvious only too?

[Prufrock]

Not to be too lawyerly but I'd be aiming for the judicial review standard that you're looking a decision no reasonable referee could've given. So you see it three times in real time and if the VAR are happy on that too overrule they do, otherwise the decision stands.

The point is you would get rid of the shockers, plenty big decisions over the years that were obviously wrong from one look. JLloyd's tackle on Ronaldo say. Where the ref either because of the angle or whatever just gets it wrong. Loads of offsides in particular because a linesman has to be looking at the ball and along the line at the same time and sometimes with the defence running out and the forward in they get ones wrong which are clearly wrong on a replay.

I'm fine to change those as it would be quick, three real time replays, and it would lead to far fewer decisions changing (I think they should be rare). But it would add something to no VAR as you'd get rid of the shockers.

If it was a choice for me between no VAR and VAR as it is, I'd get rid (though it isn't going to happen).

I'd prefer your "lineman's call" than the current system. But it would still take ages.

I don't get why you think the rules would need changing. Obviously the VAR protocol would need changing but I'm on about changing the VAR protocol so I think that's self-explanatory

I don't mind the goal line technology because it's instantaneous.

[BWFC_Insane]

Not to be too lawyerly but I'd be aiming for the judicial review standard that you're looking a decision no reasonable referee could've given. So you see it three times in real time and if the VAR are happy on that too overrule they do, otherwise the decision stands.

The point is you would get rid of the shockers, plenty big decisions over the years that were obviously wrong from one look. JLloyd's tackle on Ronaldo say. Where the ref either because of the angle or whatever just gets it wrong. Loads of offsides in particular because a linesman has to be looking at the ball and along the line at the same time and sometimes with the defence running out and the forward in they get ones wrong which are clearly wrong on a replay.

I'm fine to change those as it would be quick, three real time replays, and it would lead to far fewer decisions changing (I think they should be rare). But it would add something to no VAR as you'd get rid of the shockers.

If it was a choice for me between no VAR and VAR as it is, I'd get rid (though it isn't going to happen).

I'd prefer your "lineman's call" than the current system. But it would still take ages.

I don't get why you think the rules would need changing. Obviously the VAR protocol would need changing but I'm on about changing the VAR protocol so I think that's self-explanatory

I don't mind the goal line technology because it's instantaneous.

You can change the VAR protocols but in effect you’d be failing to apply the current rules with some arbitrary ‘if we aren’t sure very quickly then goal stands’. So goals that are offside according to the rules will be given. Which makes a mockery of using VAR in the first place.

Your objection is purely down to time but my argument is you have three choices. 1) Don’t use VAR. 2) Change the offside law to better fit with VAR 3) Accept that you are either on or offside under the current laws and that sometimes there will be a short delay.

I personally think this tournament has shown the proper application of VAR. Not scrutiny of everything but generally using it to get tight calls right. Handball is another one where the laws changed yet frankly it’s a bit of a nonsense. Brushes your arm unintentionally and goal is disallowed. But that’s the rule. DRS has improved cricket but everyone accepts it as a good measure and source and LBW has a margin of error commensurate with the tech and still prioritises on field decisions. But LBW and offside are different in that nobody can see the real ball hit the stumps but can see an armpit offside.

[KeyserSoze]

Oof.

[BWFC_Insane]

Oof.

VAR used well again. Clear cheating as he’d fell and Czech lad would be through.

[KeyserSoze]

Oh yeah I'm not arguing with the decision. Just a general oof into the empty air.

[BWFC_Insane]

Top limbs there.

[KeyserSoze]

International tournament football is just the best isn't it.

[Prufrock]

Tuesday looks like a semi final atm.

[BWFC_Insane]

Dutch must be Schick.

[KeyserSoze]

Dutch must be Schick.

Czechs de ligted

[BWFC_Insane]

Ultimate example of VAR this game. Cheating adequately punished after a referee on the field bottles it in real time.

[TANGODANCER]

Life is full of surprises and the Dutch nation got one today. At the risk of having to play them, I hope Belgium give Portugal another one tonight. The Czechs fully deserved their win because they raised their game and went for it. Their effort and energy got it's just reward.

[Harry Genshaw]

Re raising their game. My biggest worry re England under Southgate is his seeming inability to change things around when the game is running away from us - Belgium and Croatia in the last world Cup immediately spring to mind. Does he have the bravery and tactical nous to switch players, formation, tempo when we're in trouble?

[BWFC_Insane]

Belgium Portugal the thing that stands out to me is the speed these teams play at and especially going forwards. They will keep it sideways but then take the opportunity to play forwards very quickly. One touch stuff. That for me is where England are lacking. Neither of these sides are unbeatable but they play the game at a tempo and also press well.

[KeyserSoze]

Pepe is such a c*nt

[BWFC_Insane]

Pepe is such a c*nt

Horrible player.

[BWFC_Insane]

Not that Im in any way sorry about this but Portugal have been robbed here. Far and away the better side.