39 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

The linesman was literally right in line, and it looked to me like he made a downward motion with his flag to indicate onside ... ?

Watch it here from 37:00 :  https://www.chelseafc.com/en/video/full-match-chelsea-0-1-liverpool 

 

Erm why do you think no one celebrates? It's because the linesman has given it offside.

No one else can give it offside instantly. 

8 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Erm why do you think no one celebrates? It's because the linesman has given it offside.

No one else can give it offside instantly. 

He doesn't raise the flag for it though ... the opposite in fact. That downwards motion of the flag ... pointing it at the touchline ... is how they denote onside isn't it ?

But he definitely doesn't flag for it in the coverage as far as I can see ?

In the replay you can see the linesman running all the way along the touchline and not once does he raise his flag ... and he's absolutely bang level with the players so has a perfect view of it. 

Academic anyway ... personally I think offsides should have to be "clear and obvious" like everything else VAR is looking at. When goals are disallowed for a hand or a fingernail it's all a bit ridiculous ... 

4 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

He doesn't raise the flag for it though ... the opposite in fact. That downwards motion of the flag ... pointing it at the touchline ... is how they denote onside isn't it ?

But he definitely doesn't flag for it in the coverage as far as I can see ?

In the replay you can see the linesman running all the way along the touchline and not once does he raise his flag ... and he's absolutely bang level with the players so has a perfect view of it. 

Academic anyway ... personally I think offsides should have to be "clear and obvious" like everything else VAR is looking at. When goals are disallowed for a hand or a fingernail it's all a bit ridiculous ... 

Have always said this. A while back Wenger was talking about a change where it would only be offside if there was clear daylight between attacker and defender. What happened to that?

 

14 hours ago, Nibs said:

Have always said this. A while back Wenger was talking about a change where it would only be offside if there was clear daylight between attacker and defender. What happened to that?

 

I would prefer that too none of this 50/50 stuff. 

15 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

He doesn't raise the flag for it though ... the opposite in fact. That downwards motion of the flag ... pointing it at the touchline ... is how they denote onside isn't it ?

But he definitely doesn't flag for it in the coverage as far as I can see ?

In the replay you can see the linesman running all the way along the touchline and not once does he raise his flag ... and he's absolutely bang level with the players so has a perfect view of it. 

Academic anyway ... personally I think offsides should have to be "clear and obvious" like everything else VAR is looking at. When goals are disallowed for a hand or a fingernail it's all a bit ridiculous ... 

The TV coverage just didn't show the part where he raised the flag. If the linesman doesn't give offside it's not offside until it's overturned by VAR. And then you'd see Sterling et al celebrate. 

The screenshot you show the play is still happening, so the linesman isn't going to do anything. The linesman doesn't have an action for what is "onside" because the entire game is onside until it's not. 

So it's not academic. As in this instance VAR didn't do anything. You're actually asking them to overturn an offside because it's not clear and obvious. That is exactly what VAR shouldn't be doing. 

15 hours ago, Nibs said:

Have always said this. A while back Wenger was talking about a change where it would only be offside if there was clear daylight between attacker and defender. What happened to that?

 

Sounds nice but in practice all that is doing is shifting the line of offside to a different point and we'd be arguing the same point. 

A better solution for me is to define offside by the players further forward foot. 

5 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

The TV coverage just didn't show the part where he raised the flag. If the linesman doesn't give offside it's not offside until it's overturned by VAR. And then you'd see Sterling et al celebrate. 

The screenshot you show the play is still happening, so the linesman isn't going to do anything. The linesman doesn't have an action for what is "onside" because the entire game is onside until it's not. 

So it's not academic. As in this instance VAR didn't do anything. You're actually asking them to overturn an offside because it's not clear and obvious. That is exactly what VAR shouldn't be doing. 

Did you watch the video link I posted ? 

The line drawing ignores a few issues really.
First of all the cameras used aren't fast enough to give a precise moment the ball leaves the passers foot (in the screenshot above it's blurred).
Furthermore it ignores parallax, and getting a line perfectly perpendicular across a pitch isn't easy.

It, like much of VAR, is a good system that isn't well implemented. I prefer the 3d rendered system we've seen in some international games, though I'm not certain if that has other issues it comes up against or not.

It was a clear offside.

The broadcast failed to show a clear angle of the offside decision when it went to VAR.

16 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Did you watch the video link I posted ? 

I did, and whilst I can understand the confusion Birsight is right. 

The linesman doesn't push his arm down to suggest he thinks its onside whilst in play, he does nothing. Linesmen always run like that to avoid the flag waving around, which it would if he pumped his arms by his side like a normal running motion would. He'll be in direct comms with the ref at that point probably saying he thinks its offisde but letting play continue because its tight and we have var. 

The ball goes in the net, Sterling begins to celebrate but looks over and stops before just running back into postion. The liverpool fans jeer. They both dont do that unless its flagged as offside by the lino.

The camera the cuts to the linesmen who has now popped his flag down and is running back to where on the pitch he believes the offisde is, but the camera cuts before he extends his arm to show this. 

The main travesty in all of this is the angle shown on TV. You can clearly see the offside from the original camera angle. How the angle they ended up using was deemed as the best in Wembley which must have countless different cameras, I will never know

23 minutes ago, Niall1905 said:

I did, and whilst I can understand the confusion Birsight is right. 

The linesman doesn't push his arm down to suggest he thinks its onside whilst in play, he does nothing. Linesmen always run like that to avoid the flag waving around, which it would if he pumped his arms by his side like a normal running motion would. He'll be in direct comms with the ref at that point probably saying he thinks its offisde but letting play continue because its tight and we have var. 

The ball goes in the net, Sterling begins to celebrate but looks over and stops before just running back into postion. The liverpool fans jeer. They both dont do that unless its flagged as offside by the lino.

The camera the cuts to the linesmen who has now popped his flag down and is running back to where on the pitch he believes the offisde is, but the camera cuts before he extends his arm to show this. 

The main travesty in all of this is the angle shown on TV. You can clearly see the offside from the original camera angle. How the angle they ended up using was deemed as the best in Wembley which must have countless different cameras, I will never know

Ok fair enough. My perception was he was indicating Jackson was ok, and I think the commentator was fooled by the arm movement downwards as well, as he actually says "... pass to Jackson who is onside!" before Jackson has even passed to Sterling ... The lino's arm is extended downwards completely straight, and then he bends it when he starts running. If you don't see the subsequent later flag, the natural conclusion is that he flagged him onside and didn't give it, and VAR has then made the decision to disallow the goal.  Sometimes not being at the ground and relying on TV doesn't help 🙂

1 hour ago, bisright1 said:

Sounds nice but in practice all that is doing is shifting the line of offside to a different point and we'd be arguing the same point. 

A better solution for me is to define offside by the players further forward foot. 

I disagree. It's easy, if player are level or it's fractional, it's onside and goal stands. Only offside if there is clean daylight between attacker & defender. No-one can argue then.

28 minutes ago, Nibs said:

I disagree. It's easy, if player are level or it's fractional, it's onside and goal stands. Only offside if there is clean daylight between attacker & defender. No-one can argue then.

My confusion with the daylight rule, is that have you got to see daylight all the way down? Because if the defender is leaning one way and the attacker the other, I would be able to see daylight, but the attackers head could be behind the players feet, so would be further away from the goal from him. 

I like Wengers more recent suggestion, that the attacker only has to keep a part of the body onside to be deemed as onside. So keep a trailing leg or fooot or something. 

You would still get marginal decisions, but there are always going to be marginal decisions with offside. Even if you allowed a 5cm buffer to say, if its in that then hes still onside, because then we would move it to, well he was marginally outside of the buffer.

I just like the idea that if the emphasis is on the attacker to keep a part of him onside, its an advantage to him. So any marginal decision is their inability to keep any part of their body onside, rather than a tiny bit of their toe being offside.

3 hours ago, Sheva said:

It was a clear offside.

The broadcast failed to show a clear angle of the offside decision when it went to VAR.

I thought so too. This was nothing like the Lukaku offside a few seasons back. The angle we were seeing on tv and what was used for VAR was really bad. I saw another angle that was more straight that was showing Jackson was well offside.

These are the two stills shown on Sky

It's clear the still is taken with the ball in motion after Palmer has passed it, so the freeze frame can't be accurate. The one with the lines drawn shows Jackson's feet are behind Konate's, and yet - as with Lukaku - they've chosen a vague line on his arm to pronounce him offside. When the technology is as limited as this such marginal calls really shouldn't be made by VAR. They didn't even attempt such a line from Konate's arm to see where that falls compared to Jackson's arm. 

 

Edited February 28, 20242 yr by Backbiter

Why doesn't the linesman flag for that immediately if he thinks Jackson is offside ? He has an absolutely perfect view of it as he is bang in line with the players ... why wait for the passage of play to go all the way to a goal before raising your flag ? 

Just now, Sexyfootball said:

Why doesn't the linesman flag for that immediately if he thinks Jackson is offside ? He has an absolutely perfect view of it as he is bang in line with the players ... why wait for the passage of play to go all the way to a goal before raising your flag ? 

They are instructed not to flag immediately and to let play progress.

1 minute ago, Backbiter said:

They are instructed not to flag immediately and to let play progress.

Sounds daft  to me ... an artificial way to create drama ... or perhaps justify having an expensive VAR guy sat at Stockley Park ... or help manipulate a result LOL

3 hours ago, Nibs said:

I disagree. It's easy, if player are level or it's fractional, it's onside and goal stands. Only offside if there is clean daylight between attacker & defender. No-one can argue then.

I guarantee that whatever rule change they do with offside there will be arguments. 

5 minutes ago, Sexyfootball said:

Sounds daft  to me ... an artificial way to create drama ... or perhaps justify having an expensive VAR guy sat at Stockley Park ... or help manipulate a result LOL

If you aren't going to let play develop then you'd just get rid of VAR. 

Which is what I think should happen. 

8 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

I guarantee that whatever rule change they do with offside there will be arguments. 

If you aren't going to let play develop then you'd just get rid of VAR. 

Which is what I think should happen. 

But why would you let play develop if you are sure he's offside ? I get that this one is marginal, but what if it doesn't result in a goal ? Do you still flag and go back to where it happened for a freekick, or do you just let it slide ? What a waste of time either way ... 

I don't pay much attention to what they do normally, but this seems crazy to me ... are they literally not flagging for anything now in case it develops into a goal ? Are they letting multiple offsides go just to "let play develop" ? Why should play be allowed to develop anyway from an offside situation ?

51 minutes ago, timetowaste said:

Of course he wouldn’t want to leave. Why would he? He’s done everything he wanted to do in football and he’s on a lucrative deal way above what he deserves. 
 

Only thing that you can honestly say he’s committed to is getting back in the England squad. 

 

2 hours ago, Sexyfootball said:

But why would you let play develop if you are sure he's offside ? I get that this one is marginal, but what if it doesn't result in a goal ? Do you still flag and go back to where it happened for a freekick, or do you just let it slide ? What a waste of time either way ... 

I don't pay much attention to what they do normally, but this seems crazy to me ... are they literally not flagging for anything now in case it develops into a goal ? Are they letting multiple offsides go just to "let play develop" ? Why should play be allowed to develop anyway from an offside situation ?

If it's very obvious then they'd flag. 

If the linesman flagged everytime he thought it was offside and the game stopped, then VAR would only be used to disallow goals. That isn't ideal. 

Painful watch when he is not at it..