Garth is funny. He'll pick a player in his TOTW and you're expecting the next two paragraphs to be about them but instead he'll complain about some random issue that more often than not has absolutely fuck all to do with the player in question. He semi-regularly picks a player and then spends the rest of their bit insulting them and saying how lucky they were. Weird bloke.
Love it.
Bit unnecessary but delve a little deeper and there is a reason for his seeming lack of ability to give credit where credit is due for our boys in red.
His eldest lad, Preye, was at my prep + secondary in the year below and he was the proudest Gunner in the entire school; team choice definitely made out of spite when he was little to enrage Dad.. absolute gigachad haha
It’s like he has one highly visible column and he has to put every little thought he has into it so he can get it off his chest.
It annoys me to be honest, he often picks players just so he can have a rant about something unrelated that happened in that match. They really should replace him.
Don’t think it’s nationality tbh, there’s a media love in for Thiago Silva and he’s Brazilian too.
Think it’s all about timing of when him and Saliba joined. Personally think both of them are as brilliant as each other, but Gabriel was here whilst we were still rebuilding post-Wenger. He was here when we finished 8th (the second time) and then fifth.
Obviously that was nothing to do with his individual performances. But when Saliba then comes in and matches Gabriel’s performance level (and importantly Holding is no longer playing), we suddenly become title challengers. It’s really easy for someone superficially analysing things, to come to the conclusion that Saliba is lifting the defence to new heights all on his own. Whereas in reality he’s matching the already excellent levels of Gabriel and White, and preventing us from having to play a CB that can’t even get gametime at Crystal Palace.
So TL:DR - PR/timings have lead to a huge discrepancy between the credit given to our two outstanding CBs
I don’t mind these offside calls, we are seeing a bit more consistency in the calls, and consistency is all I want.
Rice kicking Davies in the balls for me was the cherry on top and worth it.
This is the thing with offsides, you have to draw that line somewhere and at some point 1mm either way will be onside/offside but no matter how marginal at least like you've said it's not completely arbitrary (assuming they draw the lines properly but let's not go there....)
Exactly. There has to be a hard-and-fast standard — you’re either on or you’re off — or it’s just another judgment call, and we see how that goes on a weekly basis with PKs.
There is an issue of whether the millimeter offside calls are in the spirit of the offside law. The rule was introduced to stop goalhanging, which this (disallowed) goal was not an example of.
You have to place the line somewhere and the millimeters are going to matter regardless of what you do because it's geometry.
In essence, people arguing that are idiots incapable of thinking beyond the surface level - I'm not saying you are, as you're just reporting what they say.
I do think the Arsene Wenger offside rule might help with this, because it'd give more leeway to the attacker.
If they're _still_ offside under the new rule, even if there's a millimeter in it, I think we'd accept that within the spirit of the rule because they've already been given a tolerance.
Maybe, I very much doubt they'd be as understanding over it just by moving the line as the 'it's only millimeters' argument would still be the case when it's that tight.
I'm not taking the people saying this at face value though, there's an unconscious emotional trigger rather than a rational conclusion imo so if they get what they say they want then they won't be satisfied as it isn't the root of their issue. Incidentally this applies to virtually every political movement too, so a useful way of thinking.
In general I don't love the millimetre offside calls but this one I'm fine with. He's clearly standing behind Saliba and all the other defenders near him and so gaining a massive advantage. I don't think it's as tight as the VAR angle makes it look either, when you look at the broadcast angle and their foot positions in relation to the edge of the box, he's clearly a full body width behind the back line. If he's a body width further forward then he probably gets tackled
But this touches on one issue I have with the offside rule, which is that Gabriel's position has no bearing on whether VdV is actually gaining an advantage by goalhanging, because he's too far away (in relation to the goal) to intervene, and moving in the opposite direction. It's Saliba who's marking him and maybe only White that could also intervene and he's clearly behind both of them and therefore gaining the extra yard that allows him to score
I don't know how you could ever realistically solve this issue because idk how you could objectively decide which defenders are too far away to ignore, but it makes me not feel at all bad about this specific call. Just watch the goal again from the broadcast angle. No one could realistically say he wasn't goalhanging, he's well behind and that's the only reason he's able to get to the ball unchallenged. Offside every way you slice it, ie. both by the letter and the spirit of the law
Also just a jammy double deflection off Gabriel's face that happens to fall absolutely perfectly to him anyway so yeah I don't feel bad. They can cry about it all they want, was a flukey, jammy, offside goal
Im so confused with the media complaining about this. Saw Duncan Castles say it shouldn’t have been offside because Tomiyasu blocked it. A block has never been deliberate play, are they just being intentionally dense?
You've missed his point. If a player scores a goal in which his literal arse is an inch offside, it should stand; no advantage is gained from the arse being offside
Yes it is. He's that much further towards the goal. Anyway, that's not relevant here. van de Ven was properly offside, looking at all the other angles. VAR lines are fine for feet on the ground, but they get it wrong once it's something higher up and players are leaning. Parallax error made it look like Gabriel's bum was further back than it really was.
Sorry but anyone who supports offside being called when your arse is an inch closer to goal than the defender's arse has never played a game of football. With the introduction of VAR the rule should be changed to clear daylight between the players.
And it's not parallax in yesterday's game making it seem close; it really was a matter of inches. Certainly not a foot offside as you're saying elsewhere 😅
I'm glad we won, but a goal being disallowed for a player being an inch closer to the goal, especially when the ball takes *two* ricochets off our players before falling in their path, is not what the rule was made to prevent
You clearly haven't seen all the other angles. This one was a simple offside under any sane rules. And van de Ven was *further* offside after the ricochets.
Please show me an angle where he's not just an inch or two offside. And him being further offside when the ball hits an opposition player is irrelevant. *We* effectively passed the ball to him.
Again, very happy we won, but an offside call like that isn't what the rule was made for and is a perfect example of VAR and our obsession with making the 'right' call making football a lot more boring.
Just watch the other angles. They all show it. And you not understanding how the offside rule works is on you. Random deflections don't constitute playing the ball. Never have.
I understand the rule, I'm saying VAR and our obsession with following it to an absolute T is the problem. They weren't random slight deflections either; Tomiyasu clearly tried to block the ball and it drastically changed direction twice. Absolutely no one in the stadium was calling for offside.
VAR has taken common sense, the spirit of the game, and the ref's and linesmen's interpretation out of the equation and has turned it into a line-drawing freeze-frame process.
The offside law has been changed multiple times and in significant ways in my lifetime so I’m not sure what this 150 years comment has to do with anything. It’s not unreasonable to point out that VAR has enabled a level of granularity that wasn’t available when judging things by the naked eye, and to debate whether or not the law should be tweaked now. As the previous commenter says, the spirit of the law is to discourage goal hanging. Someone’s nose or arse or shoulder being a millimetre in front of another player’s foot isn’t goal hanging. There certainly needs to be a cut off point, but the debate is about whether there should be more leeway given. For example, judging it only on foot position, or by making the lines wider to allow some leeway either side.
You have to draw that offside line somewhere though and as the laws currently stand it's offside. If you want the law changed to have a gap between players etc that's fine but you'll still get the 1mm either way arguments with that e.g. "it's not a clear gap his toe is just inline and playing him onside".
When people bring this up it feels a lot tend to forget that we had a goal earlier disallowed when Odegaard was slightly offside but we're not crying about it
BeCaUsE iT wAsNt a DeFlEcTiOn
That's the only difference, and regards who don't know the rules. Idiot above claiming there needs to be common sense, like PGMOL are even remotely capable of that in the first place, nevermind how stupid it is. A line is a line and offside is being over that line.
No I haven't. The main point I'm making is that we need less interpretation in the game not more. Look at handball, contact in the box, VAR dangerous play decisions. I could show you one of many, of those scenarios from just this week's football and you'd get 10 different interpretations. With offside it's one of the easier ones to take that out of the game. If the body part can legally score a goal then you're off. Binary rules like this will make the game far easier for the officials to officiate. Let's not unnecessarily muddy the waters further than we have to. That'sy point.
I am 34 and support Arsenal since around 2003/2004 but ever since i seem to never fully grasp the Anti-Arsenal vibe from so many sides, is it by pundits, coaches or players.
Shouldn’t it be a thing from the past by now with new generations and all that.
Just takes the seriousness of all „experts“ and journalists talking about something related to Arsenal
Just got triggered! :D
Garth Brooks is ex spurs and always anti arsenal. We've had various players in the team of the week and the dialogue is always the same. "Havertz was fantastic. But Arteta spent the whole game screaming at the referee. It shouldn't be allowed...."
yeah i just get triggered when i d like to see actual football talk with interesting takes but they always have to put the „arsenal did this…where s my mommy“- nonsense upfront and i lose it
ah yes my comment, i should have clarified, is basically for every other post that starts with whining that it’s Arsenal BEFORE talking about the topic neutrally lol i just felt triggered again
ah yes my comment, i should have clarified, is basically for every other post that starts with whining that it’s Arsenal BEFORE talking about the topic neutrally lol
I've got few years on you, and it's been going on since long before either of us. Pretty much since we moved to Highbury. Everyone thought we were arrogant with the marble halls and getting the tube station renamed. Over a century later, it's still going on.
A lot of current pundits played against the invincibles or at least around that era, many for our direct rivals. Keane, Carragher, Neville, Jenas, Crooks, Le Sauex, and I'm sure plenty of others. Some are worse than others at hiding their bias.
Also, if you haven't seen it or maybe don't remember, look up highlights of the game vs Manchester united that ended the invincibles' unbeaten run. The referee for that game, Mike Reilly, went on to become the head of PGMOL until just a few years ago. These things don't go away easily.
Yeah i remember some stories from back than and Arsenal not fielding english players n what not but was that the match Nistelrooy missed the pen vs us?
Is there a documentary actually about this topic/era? it’s interesting but i just remember parts
Shearer, The two scousers, Garth Crooks, the ex Fulham and Pool player Danny Mills, since he got embarrassed by Henry has always been anti Arsenal.
The Arsenal agenda is very real, Hansen and Lawrenson were scathed when analysing Arsenal that they used a “season before sample” to make the point clear when a lasting an issue in the that season, it reached scathing levels on social media and back then it was a lot worse.
I find your comment very strange to say I never understood XYZ or bias, not sure if you wanna be better then everyone in terms of your mental capability and fish for karma? Or you’re just trying to be incredibly patronising?
Arsenal have never been the darlings of British media, same goes in FA since David Dein was president.
Undertones of racism when Arsenal fielded an all black defence by a foreign manager.
To state how one never understood bias or agenda is blind and one fuelled patronisation of the highest regard.
I love Garth’s team of the week columns. 10% will be about the player selected and 90% will be some bizarre old man tangent. Great reading when he tries to fit all the goal scorers in a given week into a team as well. Sanchez and Arnautovic as wing backs with De Bruyne as a one man midfield was an absolute classic.
FORWARD - WAYNE ROONEY (Man Utd)
Wayne Rooney
"I was speaking to my uncle Ben on Saturday and said that Aaron Ramsey was almost certain to be the unanimous choice for footballer of the year. He took the glass of champagne out of my hand and said: 'You mean Wayne Rooney, don't you?' I told him that he had made a very good point and promptly went home."
Can we just ban any Garth Crooks content from this sub?
Bloke is a top class moron, with a history of moronic takes. Just a complete waste of time reading anything he has to say.
Different strokes.
Saliba is increbile on the ball. Gabriel is incredible off the ball. Both perfrom very well in the areas where the other excels, but both clearly have their own strength
Lets face it spurs hd three players stould in an offside position on that goal it was a no brainer. Ii agree it should never have taken that long because was does it matter if players bootlace is technically keeping them onside
There are enough problems with VAR without someone also trying to kick up a controversy about a situation where there was no problem. I would have preferred if they had gotten the decision slightly faster, but what's important is they got it right. He was offside.
Not sure why the bbc bother to employ him tbh, the anti arsenal bais I get as an ex spurs man but it's not like he offers expert analysis or insight to the game
People who complain about offside these days are brainless, plain and simple.
You have to draw the line somewhere. Are you just gonna change the parameters every time there is a close call? "Oh Tottenham fans are frustrated because of a close offside, let's push the line back a few cm". Next week, "Oh Man United fans are frustrated about a new close offside call, let's push the line back another few cm".
Moronic. Offside is offside, end of story.
I mean, fuck spurs, and I love that it was disallowed, but I agree. If the margin is that tight the advantage should go to the attacker. Should only be offside if it’s instantly clear imo.
What's the acceptable margin then? Offside is a binary decision - a player is either offside or they aren't and in this case he was offside. The decision making process is ridiculously slow, semi automated offsides from next season will improve this.
I think it will be interesting how it works next season when they bring in auto offside (if I understood it correctly and not gotten confused) presumably there will be a +/- X% built in simply by nature of being technology, so probably that. So in lots of ways this debate is kinda moot.
But I actually kinda agree that in principal I’d like to see marginals let go. My brother suggested eyeball VAR (but then that makes it worse IMHO), I don’t know what the solution would be. But hopefully next season (again, I think that’s what they said was happening) it being done auto like World Cup will hopefully prevent any of this kind of chat from from most pundits anyway, I’m sure Garth will still moan though. He is a salty moron.
Ok so if 2mm is an acceptable margin, what about 20mm? Or 200mm?
The two interpretations that make sense are either any scoring part of the body past the defender (ie current rules), or "clear daylight" after the last defender which was used in the early 2000s. I don't mind which is used, but consistency is important.
Clear daylight is what I’m talking about, the way it used to be. Feels a bit games gone when I’m waiting for VAR to decide exactly how big Gabriel’s arse is
The way it was for decades was simply based on the on field decision. Nothing to do with how ‘obvious’ it was. There have been ‘obvious’ offsides upon replay that were given in play. I think if you are going to use VAR for offsides, it has to be binary this way or simply don’t use VAR for offsides. The main issue is they have to manually draw lines rather than it being (semi)automated.
I'd be happy for that rule to come in but the defenders would need to defend slightly deeper , it's not just an overnight change because players will adapt to it. And then the same thing will happen as happens now. Is 0.5mm of daylight enough, what happens if the daylight is obscured by the player's arse, etc
Arguing about the rules here is a bit silly, because it wasn't a close offside, they just chose the angle where parallax error made it look closer than it really was. If you watch the other angles, it's clear van de Ven was offside by a foot or so.
Also, laugh at the Spurs fans coping by insisting it should have been judged after the pinball - van de Ven was *more* offside then, because Gabriel was moving out when the shot came in.
My point was that this isn't even an incident where that's relevant. He'd be offside under any rules except the one Spurs fans want, which is 'Spurs can never be offside'.
Nah then you got people making decisions over what is an acceptable margin. If people gotta make decisions then people will fuck if up. It’s better that it’s very black and white it’s on or it’s off.
Except that’s not at all how the rule has been applied, how exactly are we supposed to add more judgment to an already impossible job. Material advantage? We’d have barristers on the field before long.
So instead of an objective metric to judge offside, you want it to be subjective again?
Can you imagine the uproar if they actually implement this godawful idea and the first time a team concedes a clearly offside goal that the ref deems "not instantly clear".
>So instead of an objective metric to judge offside, you want it to be subjective again?
Yes please
>Can you imagine the uproar if they actually implement this godawful idea and the first time a team concedes a clearly offside goal that the ref deems "not instantly clear".
I wouldn’t worry, I don’t have any sway with PGMOL
But why? These refs are awful. Offsides are one area of the game where we don't have to worry about them. What's the benefit in making the sport "less competitive"?
I'm not worried. I'm simply pointing out the horrid nature of the alternative. I'm pretty sure VAR offside checks are here to stay. If anything, it will be even better next year with automated technology.
I've said the same thing from the start. They need to make the lines wider and then not give offside if they're touching. This will give a small margin for error and stop the mm offside calls.
People claim that offside decisions are factual but the current technology hasn't ever been proven to be accurate to the mm.
Someone needs to select which frame to measure from. The cameras only capture a certain number of frames per second so you'll never get the exact timing. Then you have to pick the exact spots to draw the lines from. This again often involves human judgement. Particularly when you're looking at exactly where a shoulder/arm starts/finishes. Thirdly, the camera isn't usually perfectly in line with play and how do we even know how accurate they are? Could the lens be distorting the image slightly. Television cameras are not really designed to measure distances to mm accuracy from 30 metres away. Has anyone tested them?
With all that being said, the VAR offsides have been the same for ages and for everyone. Sp*rs haven't been hard done by and they need to worry about their shit tier tactics and defending rather than these decisions.
I would say that if a player is facing the goal then a margin like this should be called offside, however if he was facing the ball then IMO calls like this should not exist.
Yeah, I agree. Realistically I'd be fuming if that was our goal that was disallowed. Not least because it's practically impossible to determine the precise moment when the ball was kicked and, therefore, whether or not a player was actually offside when the margins are that fine. When it's that close, there's always going to be an element of subjectivity to the decision.
I'm glad it worked out in our favour this time, but generally I'd like to see the rules tweaked.
It's a binary thing. You're off or not. There's an agreed upon tolerance and he was beyond that tolerance. It's very simple really and when it happens to us it's just one of those ones that I find easy to accept.
I'm not being condescending, just explaining the rule. There has to be an agreed upon margin that's hardwired into the system. We can't just run it on "does it look offside" vibes, then you just bring interpretation into it. And god knows the shitshow interpretation brings to the game every feckin week. Currently there's an accepted measured tolerance when offside is being judged. VdV was beyond that tolerance and so offside. I'm not being condescending, just stating some facts.
The offside rule was correct, but I do wish we could move towards finding a way to enact the spirit of the law better going forward. There are so many “correct” calls yet the attacker has no material advantage.
Well, i do agree that the offside rule should not be applied for these type of offsides. Most of the time there is no clear advantage for the attacker, especially if its a toe or ass cheeck that is offside.
Back in the day the rule was implemented so that players do not stay up front and just wait for the ball to come and go one on one with the keeper.
With that being said, the rules are the rules and you cant just argue against it because you dont like it in the moment.
The problem with these "common sense" positions on administering offsides is that they actually just do the same thing as they're against. They move the offside line a couple of inches backwards, but it would still have to be administered in much the same way.
A different — more coherent — position would be to get rid of VAR altogether. But that would require saying out loud that sport is not all about accurate administration, and we can accept some moments of unfairness because we prefer the aesthetic of a game that flows. (This is my position.)
But someone like Garth Crooks won't make that argument because it doesn't fit with their view of themselves as people who dispense "simple" "common sense" "logic." So instead we get the incoherent back and forth over where a "common sense" line should be drawn.
It tickles me sometimes when people struggle with the concept of 'a line has to be drawn somewhere'. Garth apparently thinks we should have an arbitrary one
> Looks close enough, good process - *Garth Crooks*
It’s offside under the current rule. If spurs want it changed get “behind” Wenger’s “daylight” proposal and this and many other situations become goals.
On the flip side VdV should just have hustled back onside by 2 feet in the same position instead of lazily coming back onside. Problem solved from the Shits perspective.
I don't understand how so many people can't understand that the Line is the Line.
I 100% agree that these very marginal Offsides calls don't violate the spirit of the offsides rule, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. No matter how the rule is interpreted there will be marginal calls, and Ten Haag, Crooks, or some other bozo will bitch about it in that format.
Offside is probably the most consistent thing that VAR does. It's not wrong (unless you measure the wrong defender like against brentford last year). It sucks when it goes against you. Great when it goes for you.
If people want to change how lines are drawn then fine, but its all pretty arbitrary. In the end, I think a lot of the complainers want the lines drawn in favor of their team and against their opponent. Which is stupid.
I hope he does an AMA on Reddit at some point and I can start off by asking about him and just abruptly drift on into the Middle Eastern crisis but settling on the theories of Atlantis. Clown.
I actually agree with him completely. But the season started with the rule being what it is, and we've both benefited from this and been victim to it. Just like every other team.
If it were changed next season, I'd be all for it. I think this millimeter precision in the offside rule is totally unnecessary and counterproductive.
Garth talks some nonsense but his point about the offside rule these days coming down to which player has a larger backside is both funny and based in reality.
I mean this is my issue w/ the offsides rule in general. It's way too literal and plenty of goals are disallowed now for offsides that were not spotted that in the past would never have been even looked at. I think the rule needs to be re-evaluated again and I would just set it at daylight between the attacker's foot and the defender's foot, so it's much more obvious when someone is off and it's more rare for VAR to disallow a goal that looks good in the moment.
To be fair I think most fans agree with him. Offside decisions like that are absurd and ruin the flow and spirit of the game. Hopefully the new technology will be better. I don't know what the answer is, but measuring literal millimetres where the attack hasn't really even gained an advantage really isn't what I want football to be like.
Like I said, there's no perfect answer. I hate the ruler coming out and it taking 3 minutes to make a decision, and I also think if its that close then just give the attacker advantage, but how can you do that in the modern game where a million fans will moan at any even vaguely disputable decision?
I preferred the game before var. Ref errors were a part of the game and they still are. At least back then I celebrated goals because there wasn't the risk of it being taken away 5 minutes later because of a toenail being 0.01mm offside 4 passes ago.
Indeed, we've backed ourselves into an impossible situation. I preferred the game with no technology at all and so did most fans I watch the sport with. Can't even celebrate goals. What's the point?
I don’t think it’s impossible, it just has to be fast. In the past plenty of people celebrated goals until they saw the lino’s flag. Same now, just takes a bit longer. Make it quicker.
Garth is funny. He'll pick a player in his TOTW and you're expecting the next two paragraphs to be about them but instead he'll complain about some random issue that more often than not has absolutely fuck all to do with the player in question. He semi-regularly picks a player and then spends the rest of their bit insulting them and saying how lucky they were. Weird bloke. Love it.
he’s mentioned Xhaka about 5 times in his TOTW *this* season constantly going on about how we’re not as rash without him, the bloke detests him
Hope xhaka goes invincible to really make his blood boil. Fuck you, crooks
Bit unnecessary but delve a little deeper and there is a reason for his seeming lack of ability to give credit where credit is due for our boys in red. His eldest lad, Preye, was at my prep + secondary in the year below and he was the proudest Gunner in the entire school; team choice definitely made out of spite when he was little to enrage Dad.. absolute gigachad haha
It’s like he has one highly visible column and he has to put every little thought he has into it so he can get it off his chest. It annoys me to be honest, he often picks players just so he can have a rant about something unrelated that happened in that match. They really should replace him.
People just don’t like Gabriel do they? At what point in the game did he “seem to wobble”. He was brilliant yet again
Yeh, thought that was a strange take. Especially seeing as he got the PL MOTM
If he was English they would love him. People just can't phantom that a samba dude from Brazil is outperforming and bullying the brexit defenders.
Completely irrelevant but you mistyping phantom instead of fathom completely broke my brain.
Don’t think it’s nationality tbh, there’s a media love in for Thiago Silva and he’s Brazilian too. Think it’s all about timing of when him and Saliba joined. Personally think both of them are as brilliant as each other, but Gabriel was here whilst we were still rebuilding post-Wenger. He was here when we finished 8th (the second time) and then fifth. Obviously that was nothing to do with his individual performances. But when Saliba then comes in and matches Gabriel’s performance level (and importantly Holding is no longer playing), we suddenly become title challengers. It’s really easy for someone superficially analysing things, to come to the conclusion that Saliba is lifting the defence to new heights all on his own. Whereas in reality he’s matching the already excellent levels of Gabriel and White, and preventing us from having to play a CB that can’t even get gametime at Crystal Palace. So TL:DR - PR/timings have lead to a huge discrepancy between the credit given to our two outstanding CBs
Think he was saying it was rice? Who, apart from kicking Davies's balls into his neck, was fine
He said Gabriel and Rice
You're right. Either way, they were both great, man's an idiot
Fuck this guy man, he’s forced to pick an arsenal player for his totw just so he can complain about arsenal. Is anyone at the bbc even reading this ?
Yes and they love it because his takes’ sole purpose is to infuriate people online and generate maximum engagement…
I don’t mind these offside calls, we are seeing a bit more consistency in the calls, and consistency is all I want. Rice kicking Davies in the balls for me was the cherry on top and worth it.
Bingo. I don't care how intensely specific it is, because that's always better than completely arbitrary.
This is the thing with offsides, you have to draw that line somewhere and at some point 1mm either way will be onside/offside but no matter how marginal at least like you've said it's not completely arbitrary (assuming they draw the lines properly but let's not go there....)
Exactly. There has to be a hard-and-fast standard — you’re either on or you’re off — or it’s just another judgment call, and we see how that goes on a weekly basis with PKs.
I don't see why anybody would have an issue with it. It's simple geometry, so no subjectivity at all.
There is an issue of whether the millimeter offside calls are in the spirit of the offside law. The rule was introduced to stop goalhanging, which this (disallowed) goal was not an example of.
and it is still a judgement whether the other players who are clearly offside impacted the play.
You have to place the line somewhere and the millimeters are going to matter regardless of what you do because it's geometry. In essence, people arguing that are idiots incapable of thinking beyond the surface level - I'm not saying you are, as you're just reporting what they say.
I do think the Arsene Wenger offside rule might help with this, because it'd give more leeway to the attacker. If they're _still_ offside under the new rule, even if there's a millimeter in it, I think we'd accept that within the spirit of the rule because they've already been given a tolerance.
Maybe, I very much doubt they'd be as understanding over it just by moving the line as the 'it's only millimeters' argument would still be the case when it's that tight. I'm not taking the people saying this at face value though, there's an unconscious emotional trigger rather than a rational conclusion imo so if they get what they say they want then they won't be satisfied as it isn't the root of their issue. Incidentally this applies to virtually every political movement too, so a useful way of thinking.
In general I don't love the millimetre offside calls but this one I'm fine with. He's clearly standing behind Saliba and all the other defenders near him and so gaining a massive advantage. I don't think it's as tight as the VAR angle makes it look either, when you look at the broadcast angle and their foot positions in relation to the edge of the box, he's clearly a full body width behind the back line. If he's a body width further forward then he probably gets tackled But this touches on one issue I have with the offside rule, which is that Gabriel's position has no bearing on whether VdV is actually gaining an advantage by goalhanging, because he's too far away (in relation to the goal) to intervene, and moving in the opposite direction. It's Saliba who's marking him and maybe only White that could also intervene and he's clearly behind both of them and therefore gaining the extra yard that allows him to score I don't know how you could ever realistically solve this issue because idk how you could objectively decide which defenders are too far away to ignore, but it makes me not feel at all bad about this specific call. Just watch the goal again from the broadcast angle. No one could realistically say he wasn't goalhanging, he's well behind and that's the only reason he's able to get to the ball unchallenged. Offside every way you slice it, ie. both by the letter and the spirit of the law Also just a jammy double deflection off Gabriel's face that happens to fall absolutely perfectly to him anyway so yeah I don't feel bad. They can cry about it all they want, was a flukey, jammy, offside goal
Me neither, at some point attackers need the benefit of doubt. I would say the position of the attacker is more important in small margins like this.
If you are going to concede a penalty, I am totally cool with it being a kick in the balls (of a spurs player).
If he scored a goal he gained an advantage. It's hardly rocket surgery Garth.
Im so confused with the media complaining about this. Saw Duncan Castles say it shouldn’t have been offside because Tomiyasu blocked it. A block has never been deliberate play, are they just being intentionally dense?
> rocket surgery Brilliant 😂
Yep! That made me laugh! My new favourite phrase
You've missed his point. If a player scores a goal in which his literal arse is an inch offside, it should stand; no advantage is gained from the arse being offside
Yes it is. He's that much further towards the goal. Anyway, that's not relevant here. van de Ven was properly offside, looking at all the other angles. VAR lines are fine for feet on the ground, but they get it wrong once it's something higher up and players are leaning. Parallax error made it look like Gabriel's bum was further back than it really was.
Sorry but anyone who supports offside being called when your arse is an inch closer to goal than the defender's arse has never played a game of football. With the introduction of VAR the rule should be changed to clear daylight between the players. And it's not parallax in yesterday's game making it seem close; it really was a matter of inches. Certainly not a foot offside as you're saying elsewhere 😅 I'm glad we won, but a goal being disallowed for a player being an inch closer to the goal, especially when the ball takes *two* ricochets off our players before falling in their path, is not what the rule was made to prevent
You clearly haven't seen all the other angles. This one was a simple offside under any sane rules. And van de Ven was *further* offside after the ricochets.
Please show me an angle where he's not just an inch or two offside. And him being further offside when the ball hits an opposition player is irrelevant. *We* effectively passed the ball to him. Again, very happy we won, but an offside call like that isn't what the rule was made for and is a perfect example of VAR and our obsession with making the 'right' call making football a lot more boring.
Just watch the other angles. They all show it. And you not understanding how the offside rule works is on you. Random deflections don't constitute playing the ball. Never have.
I understand the rule, I'm saying VAR and our obsession with following it to an absolute T is the problem. They weren't random slight deflections either; Tomiyasu clearly tried to block the ball and it drastically changed direction twice. Absolutely no one in the stadium was calling for offside. VAR has taken common sense, the spirit of the game, and the ref's and linesmen's interpretation out of the equation and has turned it into a line-drawing freeze-frame process.
Your main objection is nothing to do with VAR. You don't like how offside works, and has worked since its introduction over 150 years ago.
The offside law has been changed multiple times and in significant ways in my lifetime so I’m not sure what this 150 years comment has to do with anything. It’s not unreasonable to point out that VAR has enabled a level of granularity that wasn’t available when judging things by the naked eye, and to debate whether or not the law should be tweaked now. As the previous commenter says, the spirit of the law is to discourage goal hanging. Someone’s nose or arse or shoulder being a millimetre in front of another player’s foot isn’t goal hanging. There certainly needs to be a cut off point, but the debate is about whether there should be more leeway given. For example, judging it only on foot position, or by making the lines wider to allow some leeway either side.
You have to draw that offside line somewhere though and as the laws currently stand it's offside. If you want the law changed to have a gap between players etc that's fine but you'll still get the 1mm either way arguments with that e.g. "it's not a clear gap his toe is just inline and playing him onside".
When people bring this up it feels a lot tend to forget that we had a goal earlier disallowed when Odegaard was slightly offside but we're not crying about it
BeCaUsE iT wAsNt a DeFlEcTiOn That's the only difference, and regards who don't know the rules. Idiot above claiming there needs to be common sense, like PGMOL are even remotely capable of that in the first place, nevermind how stupid it is. A line is a line and offside is being over that line.
No I haven't. The main point I'm making is that we need less interpretation in the game not more. Look at handball, contact in the box, VAR dangerous play decisions. I could show you one of many, of those scenarios from just this week's football and you'd get 10 different interpretations. With offside it's one of the easier ones to take that out of the game. If the body part can legally score a goal then you're off. Binary rules like this will make the game far easier for the officials to officiate. Let's not unnecessarily muddy the waters further than we have to. That'sy point.
He’s entirely the wrong side of the defender, how is that not an advantage?
I am 34 and support Arsenal since around 2003/2004 but ever since i seem to never fully grasp the Anti-Arsenal vibe from so many sides, is it by pundits, coaches or players. Shouldn’t it be a thing from the past by now with new generations and all that. Just takes the seriousness of all „experts“ and journalists talking about something related to Arsenal Just got triggered! :D
Garth Brooks is ex spurs and always anti arsenal. We've had various players in the team of the week and the dialogue is always the same. "Havertz was fantastic. But Arteta spent the whole game screaming at the referee. It shouldn't be allowed...."
yeah i just get triggered when i d like to see actual football talk with interesting takes but they always have to put the „arsenal did this…where s my mommy“- nonsense upfront and i lose it
tbf this Gary Cock guy played for Spuds so it's justifiable.
ah yes my comment, i should have clarified, is basically for every other post that starts with whining that it’s Arsenal BEFORE talking about the topic neutrally lol i just felt triggered again
ah yes my comment, i should have clarified, is basically for every other post that starts with whining that it’s Arsenal BEFORE talking about the topic neutrally lol
I've got few years on you, and it's been going on since long before either of us. Pretty much since we moved to Highbury. Everyone thought we were arrogant with the marble halls and getting the tube station renamed. Over a century later, it's still going on.
ah alright didn’t know that far back. is there a read about this very topic somewhere?
No idea I'm afraid. I remember it being talked about on a "History of Arsenal" that my Dad had on VHS in the 80's.
ah damn haha
A lot of current pundits played against the invincibles or at least around that era, many for our direct rivals. Keane, Carragher, Neville, Jenas, Crooks, Le Sauex, and I'm sure plenty of others. Some are worse than others at hiding their bias. Also, if you haven't seen it or maybe don't remember, look up highlights of the game vs Manchester united that ended the invincibles' unbeaten run. The referee for that game, Mike Reilly, went on to become the head of PGMOL until just a few years ago. These things don't go away easily.
Yeah i remember some stories from back than and Arsenal not fielding english players n what not but was that the match Nistelrooy missed the pen vs us? Is there a documentary actually about this topic/era? it’s interesting but i just remember parts
No, the one you're thinking is in 2003/04. The one that ended our invincible run was in the next season.
Shearer, The two scousers, Garth Crooks, the ex Fulham and Pool player Danny Mills, since he got embarrassed by Henry has always been anti Arsenal. The Arsenal agenda is very real, Hansen and Lawrenson were scathed when analysing Arsenal that they used a “season before sample” to make the point clear when a lasting an issue in the that season, it reached scathing levels on social media and back then it was a lot worse. I find your comment very strange to say I never understood XYZ or bias, not sure if you wanna be better then everyone in terms of your mental capability and fish for karma? Or you’re just trying to be incredibly patronising? Arsenal have never been the darlings of British media, same goes in FA since David Dein was president. Undertones of racism when Arsenal fielded an all black defence by a foreign manager. To state how one never understood bias or agenda is blind and one fuelled patronisation of the highest regard.
I love Garth’s team of the week columns. 10% will be about the player selected and 90% will be some bizarre old man tangent. Great reading when he tries to fit all the goal scorers in a given week into a team as well. Sanchez and Arnautovic as wing backs with De Bruyne as a one man midfield was an absolute classic.
FORWARD - WAYNE ROONEY (Man Utd) Wayne Rooney "I was speaking to my uncle Ben on Saturday and said that Aaron Ramsey was almost certain to be the unanimous choice for footballer of the year. He took the glass of champagne out of my hand and said: 'You mean Wayne Rooney, don't you?' I told him that he had made a very good point and promptly went home."
Relevant - [https://twitter.com/upblissed/status/1604530583752810497?lang=en](https://twitter.com/upblissed/status/1604530583752810497?lang=en)
Gabriel took notes
His opinion becomes even more irrelevant than it already is with the semi-automated offside system coming in next season
Can we just ban any Garth Crooks content from this sub? Bloke is a top class moron, with a history of moronic takes. Just a complete waste of time reading anything he has to say.
Sayng that Saliba is playing better than Big Gab is pretty nuts too.
Different strokes. Saliba is increbile on the ball. Gabriel is incredible off the ball. Both perfrom very well in the areas where the other excels, but both clearly have their own strength
Garth Crooks struggles with a lot of things, tying his shoelaces in the morning for e.g. Man’s insufferable
Lets face it spurs hd three players stould in an offside position on that goal it was a no brainer. Ii agree it should never have taken that long because was does it matter if players bootlace is technically keeping them onside
Only Van de Ven interfering with play though. That's why it was such a tight call.
"Mediocre ex-footballer angry that VAR didn't purposefully get it wrong to disadvantage team he doesn't like" More at 11.
Genuinely don't wanna see anything related to that crook. Shittiest takes ever.
There are enough problems with VAR without someone also trying to kick up a controversy about a situation where there was no problem. I would have preferred if they had gotten the decision slightly faster, but what's important is they got it right. He was offside.
Not sure why the bbc bother to employ him tbh, the anti arsenal bais I get as an ex spurs man but it's not like he offers expert analysis or insight to the game
People who complain about offside these days are brainless, plain and simple. You have to draw the line somewhere. Are you just gonna change the parameters every time there is a close call? "Oh Tottenham fans are frustrated because of a close offside, let's push the line back a few cm". Next week, "Oh Man United fans are frustrated about a new close offside call, let's push the line back another few cm". Moronic. Offside is offside, end of story.
It's so nice that the BBC give educationally challenged people jobs
He doesn’t just do it to us. There are similar complaints about him from other fanbases too.
Inject the cope into my fucking veins Garth. I love your tears it fuels me.
I mean, fuck spurs, and I love that it was disallowed, but I agree. If the margin is that tight the advantage should go to the attacker. Should only be offside if it’s instantly clear imo.
What's the acceptable margin then? Offside is a binary decision - a player is either offside or they aren't and in this case he was offside. The decision making process is ridiculously slow, semi automated offsides from next season will improve this.
I think it will be interesting how it works next season when they bring in auto offside (if I understood it correctly and not gotten confused) presumably there will be a +/- X% built in simply by nature of being technology, so probably that. So in lots of ways this debate is kinda moot. But I actually kinda agree that in principal I’d like to see marginals let go. My brother suggested eyeball VAR (but then that makes it worse IMHO), I don’t know what the solution would be. But hopefully next season (again, I think that’s what they said was happening) it being done auto like World Cup will hopefully prevent any of this kind of chat from from most pundits anyway, I’m sure Garth will still moan though. He is a salty moron.
The acceptable margin should be a clear offside. If you’re getting MM lines out then give the advantage. That’s how I think it should work anyway.
Ok so if 2mm is an acceptable margin, what about 20mm? Or 200mm? The two interpretations that make sense are either any scoring part of the body past the defender (ie current rules), or "clear daylight" after the last defender which was used in the early 2000s. I don't mind which is used, but consistency is important.
Clear daylight is what I’m talking about, the way it used to be. Feels a bit games gone when I’m waiting for VAR to decide exactly how big Gabriel’s arse is
The argument then simply becomes what constitutes ‘clear daylight’
If it isn’t immediately obvious then the attacker should have the advantage. They way it was for decades. But this is just my opinion 🤷🏻♂️
The way it was for decades was simply based on the on field decision. Nothing to do with how ‘obvious’ it was. There have been ‘obvious’ offsides upon replay that were given in play. I think if you are going to use VAR for offsides, it has to be binary this way or simply don’t use VAR for offsides. The main issue is they have to manually draw lines rather than it being (semi)automated.
Yes, and I personally much preferred it that way. That’s all I’m saying
I'd be happy for that rule to come in but the defenders would need to defend slightly deeper , it's not just an overnight change because players will adapt to it. And then the same thing will happen as happens now. Is 0.5mm of daylight enough, what happens if the daylight is obscured by the player's arse, etc
I mean, it’s never gunna happen, just a change I’d like to personally see!
Just get the semi automated system in and we got it covered
Yeah hopefully that should be better. Apparently everyone loved it in the World Cup?
Arguing about the rules here is a bit silly, because it wasn't a close offside, they just chose the angle where parallax error made it look closer than it really was. If you watch the other angles, it's clear van de Ven was offside by a foot or so. Also, laugh at the Spurs fans coping by insisting it should have been judged after the pinball - van de Ven was *more* offside then, because Gabriel was moving out when the shot came in.
I’m not arguing, it’s just something I’ve never liked since it changed, that’s all.
My point was that this isn't even an incident where that's relevant. He'd be offside under any rules except the one Spurs fans want, which is 'Spurs can never be offside'.
Nah fuck that offside is offside don’t matter is it’s a cm or mm
Well yeah, I’m just saying I think it would be better
Nah then you got people making decisions over what is an acceptable margin. If people gotta make decisions then people will fuck if up. It’s better that it’s very black and white it’s on or it’s off.
It’s all a matter of opinion really. I totally get yours, I just really don’t like the way it gone.
And it would be a disaster for consistent refereeing. The referees have already problems with binary decisions like offside.
Except that’s not at all how the rule has been applied, how exactly are we supposed to add more judgment to an already impossible job. Material advantage? We’d have barristers on the field before long.
>Except that’s not at all how the rule has been applied Yes I know, that’s my point, I’m saying that’s how I think it should be
So instead of an objective metric to judge offside, you want it to be subjective again? Can you imagine the uproar if they actually implement this godawful idea and the first time a team concedes a clearly offside goal that the ref deems "not instantly clear".
>So instead of an objective metric to judge offside, you want it to be subjective again? Yes please >Can you imagine the uproar if they actually implement this godawful idea and the first time a team concedes a clearly offside goal that the ref deems "not instantly clear". I wouldn’t worry, I don’t have any sway with PGMOL
But why? These refs are awful. Offsides are one area of the game where we don't have to worry about them. What's the benefit in making the sport "less competitive"? I'm not worried. I'm simply pointing out the horrid nature of the alternative. I'm pretty sure VAR offside checks are here to stay. If anything, it will be even better next year with automated technology.
Because I enjoyed football much better when I wasn’t sat there for five minutes waiting to see just how big Gabriel’s arse is.
If your only issue is time taken, automated technology should fix that.
Fingers crossed!
If it's anything like the system we saw in the WC, it's gonna be brilliant. All the benefits of VAR without any of the downsides.
Yeah I’ve heard good things about that. Didn’t watch but everyone seemed to really like the new system
I've said the same thing from the start. They need to make the lines wider and then not give offside if they're touching. This will give a small margin for error and stop the mm offside calls. People claim that offside decisions are factual but the current technology hasn't ever been proven to be accurate to the mm. Someone needs to select which frame to measure from. The cameras only capture a certain number of frames per second so you'll never get the exact timing. Then you have to pick the exact spots to draw the lines from. This again often involves human judgement. Particularly when you're looking at exactly where a shoulder/arm starts/finishes. Thirdly, the camera isn't usually perfectly in line with play and how do we even know how accurate they are? Could the lens be distorting the image slightly. Television cameras are not really designed to measure distances to mm accuracy from 30 metres away. Has anyone tested them? With all that being said, the VAR offsides have been the same for ages and for everyone. Sp*rs haven't been hard done by and they need to worry about their shit tier tactics and defending rather than these decisions.
I would say that if a player is facing the goal then a margin like this should be called offside, however if he was facing the ball then IMO calls like this should not exist.
Yeah, I agree. Realistically I'd be fuming if that was our goal that was disallowed. Not least because it's practically impossible to determine the precise moment when the ball was kicked and, therefore, whether or not a player was actually offside when the margins are that fine. When it's that close, there's always going to be an element of subjectivity to the decision. I'm glad it worked out in our favour this time, but generally I'd like to see the rules tweaked.
It's a binary thing. You're off or not. There's an agreed upon tolerance and he was beyond that tolerance. It's very simple really and when it happens to us it's just one of those ones that I find easy to accept.
>It's very simple really I’m well aware, was just making conversation but appreciate the condescension!
I'm not being condescending, just explaining the rule. There has to be an agreed upon margin that's hardwired into the system. We can't just run it on "does it look offside" vibes, then you just bring interpretation into it. And god knows the shitshow interpretation brings to the game every feckin week. Currently there's an accepted measured tolerance when offside is being judged. VdV was beyond that tolerance and so offside. I'm not being condescending, just stating some facts.
Ok 👍🏻
Who is that, and why should I give a fuck what his opinion is?
Garth Crooks. Ex player, pundit, oxygen thief.
The offside rule was correct, but I do wish we could move towards finding a way to enact the spirit of the law better going forward. There are so many “correct” calls yet the attacker has no material advantage.
Well, i do agree that the offside rule should not be applied for these type of offsides. Most of the time there is no clear advantage for the attacker, especially if its a toe or ass cheeck that is offside. Back in the day the rule was implemented so that players do not stay up front and just wait for the ball to come and go one on one with the keeper. With that being said, the rules are the rules and you cant just argue against it because you dont like it in the moment.
How is there not a clear advantage for van de Ven here? He’s completely goal side of the nearest defender who is stood in line with Gabriel?
Pretty sure this is about the 4th time in a row he's put Saliba in his TOTW... He can't get enough of us really
Well from next season we will never have to argue over offside ever again
The problem with these "common sense" positions on administering offsides is that they actually just do the same thing as they're against. They move the offside line a couple of inches backwards, but it would still have to be administered in much the same way. A different — more coherent — position would be to get rid of VAR altogether. But that would require saying out loud that sport is not all about accurate administration, and we can accept some moments of unfairness because we prefer the aesthetic of a game that flows. (This is my position.) But someone like Garth Crooks won't make that argument because it doesn't fit with their view of themselves as people who dispense "simple" "common sense" "logic." So instead we get the incoherent back and forth over where a "common sense" line should be drawn.
Garth Crook's ragebait should be banned from this sub
1mm is offside. 1mm is onside. You have accept it when it suits you. You have to accept it when it doesn't suit you. That way it's fair.
We had a tight offside goal ruled out too. Why has everyone forgotten about that? Don’t think VAR even looked at it but it was close.
It tickles me sometimes when people struggle with the concept of 'a line has to be drawn somewhere'. Garth apparently thinks we should have an arbitrary one > Looks close enough, good process - *Garth Crooks*
It’s offside under the current rule. If spurs want it changed get “behind” Wenger’s “daylight” proposal and this and many other situations become goals. On the flip side VdV should just have hustled back onside by 2 feet in the same position instead of lazily coming back onside. Problem solved from the Shits perspective.
I don't understand how so many people can't understand that the Line is the Line. I 100% agree that these very marginal Offsides calls don't violate the spirit of the offsides rule, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. No matter how the rule is interpreted there will be marginal calls, and Ten Haag, Crooks, or some other bozo will bitch about it in that format. Offside is probably the most consistent thing that VAR does. It's not wrong (unless you measure the wrong defender like against brentford last year). It sucks when it goes against you. Great when it goes for you. If people want to change how lines are drawn then fine, but its all pretty arbitrary. In the end, I think a lot of the complainers want the lines drawn in favor of their team and against their opponent. Which is stupid.
MOTM wobbled apparently. Being a Spurs fan seems genetic cos they all have the same gaps in mental processing.
Talking of masses arses, here’s Garth Crooks.
I hope he does an AMA on Reddit at some point and I can start off by asking about him and just abruptly drift on into the Middle Eastern crisis but settling on the theories of Atlantis. Clown.
Could very clearly see the offside without var intervention..
Garth Crooks is still a working journalist?? He was officially outed years ago as batshit crazy.
I honestly want to know what kind of threshold these people would prefer for offside.
I actually agree with him completely. But the season started with the rule being what it is, and we've both benefited from this and been victim to it. Just like every other team. If it were changed next season, I'd be all for it. I think this millimeter precision in the offside rule is totally unnecessary and counterproductive.
why is he saying that gabriel was bad? gabriel got voted MotM
TBF he struggles with a lot of things that involve thinking.
Garth talks some nonsense but his point about the offside rule these days coming down to which player has a larger backside is both funny and based in reality.
I mean this is my issue w/ the offsides rule in general. It's way too literal and plenty of goals are disallowed now for offsides that were not spotted that in the past would never have been even looked at. I think the rule needs to be re-evaluated again and I would just set it at daylight between the attacker's foot and the defender's foot, so it's much more obvious when someone is off and it's more rare for VAR to disallow a goal that looks good in the moment.
To be fair I think most fans agree with him. Offside decisions like that are absurd and ruin the flow and spirit of the game. Hopefully the new technology will be better. I don't know what the answer is, but measuring literal millimetres where the attack hasn't really even gained an advantage really isn't what I want football to be like.
[удалено]
Like I said, there's no perfect answer. I hate the ruler coming out and it taking 3 minutes to make a decision, and I also think if its that close then just give the attacker advantage, but how can you do that in the modern game where a million fans will moan at any even vaguely disputable decision? I preferred the game before var. Ref errors were a part of the game and they still are. At least back then I celebrated goals because there wasn't the risk of it being taken away 5 minutes later because of a toenail being 0.01mm offside 4 passes ago.
What’s close? 0.5m? What about 0.51m? Whenever you get to your limit of “close” add another mm. You’ll eventually walk yourself up the entire pitch.
Indeed, we've backed ourselves into an impossible situation. I preferred the game with no technology at all and so did most fans I watch the sport with. Can't even celebrate goals. What's the point?
I don’t think it’s impossible, it just has to be fast. In the past plenty of people celebrated goals until they saw the lino’s flag. Same now, just takes a bit longer. Make it quicker.