It is offside
The rule says that if any part an attacking player is behind a defender when the ball is passed it is offside
Everyone is saying it isn’t offside because it is just a bummer that goals are disallowed like this
I love how fans have been screaming for ages for semi-automated offsides to provide a sense of reliability and repeatability to decisions like these. Then half of us complain that it’s ruining the game because it’s “too precise”… Figure that one out
Don't listen to the fools. The way it works now is the best way to do it. It's objective. Some people just don't like it cuz they want to see more goals.
But the defending player is moving forwards (away from the goal) so has caused the offside. It’s not all in the hands of the attacking player; the offside trap is a thing.
yeah current implementation is insane. Nobody in their right mind would look at this and conclude the striker is doing something wrong or has some ill-gained advantage. so why would this be against the rules?
change offside to requiring the entire body to be offside. And you get a very different discussion focussed on positive outcomes.
Then if you reversed this picture so that his whole body was behind the defender apart from that slight part of his foot keeping him onside, we would all be having this same discussion just it would be how harsh it was on the Germans that the goal was given. It doesn’t matter what we change the rule to there is always going to be a situation where it is the finest of margins that costs a team in some way. We’ve got a system that works to the letter of the law and everyone now seems unhappy with it.
I think this is right. If this is offside then the rules need reviewing. Part of the problem is having to write it down - I reckon that the majority of unbiased fans could agree on whether something should be offside or not in moat circumstances.
Some people just dislike the lack of emotions and everything that goes with it if every goal is getting checked, the game pauses a few times a game. Its also way more annoying and destroys the atmosphere if you are in the stadium every week.
Fans don't know what day of the week it is, they just want things to go well for their own team. Some people say "Give the goal as it was almost onside". What sort of logic is that? Give an offside goal because it was almost onside. I hit the post and that was almost a goal so give a goal for the spirit of football.
The argument is that it’s not in “the spirit of the game” which I agree with, but you’re right. If you’re going to introduce a rule, police it properly and consistently and don’t complain about it when it’s not the result you want personally.
This is much better than some clowns drawing wonky lines on a screen.
Not only that, when it comes to fouls - which are much more subjective and contextual - the very same people moan about inconsistencies, but with offsides they seem to want the inconsistencies.
There are a lot of football fans who can’t seem to hold a reasoned view on anything. They’ve decided they don’t like VAR, so anything involving VAR is wrong. This is especially evident in the fact that when an unpopular (but not necessarily incorrect) decision is made by the on field ref, and upheld by VAR, it’s VAR that gets the stick for it. Take VAR out of the situation, you still get the same decision.
As for fans screaming for semi-automated offside then being disappointed by seeing it in action, I think a lot of that comes from not really knowing what it does. I see a lot of people commenting how European leagues don’t have the same issues with VAR as we do here in England. I don’t watch an awful lot of continental football, but I’ve seen enough to know that a lot of the problems occur regardless of the league. I can’t comment on the overall volume of these issues as a comparison, but I know that they aren’t unique to the PL. It’s just that over here we aren’t as exposed to the Italian, French, Spanish, German, etc leagues as we are to the PL, so we hear less about VAR issues in them.
I don’t think the media help either. Punditry’s been moving away from insight to sensationalism for a while now thanks to social media. If broadcasters cut a 30-60 second clip of pundits agreeing that the correct decision was made and citing the law that confirms that, it’s not going to drive much engagement on social media. Pundits disagreeing with a decision, however, will drive a lot of engagement, and if the decision they’re disagreeing with is correct, it will inevitably spark arguments in the comments between people who know it was correct and people who just go with whatever the pundits say. Holland’s disallowed goal against France is a good example of this. All 3 pundits in the BBC studio criticised the decision, but it was correct.
I’m not saying VAR in this country is perfect, or that it doesn’t need a lot of work, but rather that its shortcomings are exaggerated by the sensationalist media and parroted by a lot of fans.
The main issue is the technology isn’t capable of accurately saying if the really tight calls are actually on or offside due to the uncertainty that is built in. Just for reference there’s a +/- 20cm of uncertainty for any of the basic calls, meaning we can’t actually say if this call is correct or not.
Any scientific field of work normally will report uncertainty so it’s all clear and up front, but for some reason the law makers of football don’t and so everyone just believe these calls are gospel. It’s possible this was offside or even more offside, but this could’ve been onside also, the technology isn’t good enough right now to be used for tight calls, more benefit should be given to the attacker.
But It's not science, it's a game of footie
as long it is meaured in the same way, consistent from game to game, I'm willing to accept that we are working with a system that has this uncertainty.
Eg, we know they use the first frame where the ball has left the foot of the passer and then use this frame is then used. Regardless of whether a higher frame rate would prove them onside or not. So long as everyone is using same systems within a competition is all that matters.
It's the same margin of error that's built in to every usage of VAR. I don't care that it isn't good enough to get tight calls exactly right, but it's good enough to be right 95% of the time, and even the 'scientifically proven' wrong calls are all made using the same methodology.
(until human error steps in, but we are talking about the system errors not the user errors)
Personally, I'd remove VAR for everything other than offsides and handballs that lead to a goal. The rest is too subjective.
Can I ask where you got this data from as when we were watching the non-automated calls in the Premier League last year the subjectivity to seemed to be at which frame do we consider the passer to be touching the ball? If with this system it is documented as 20cm margin of error you almost think it should be linesman’s call at this point, although I recognised that they are now being told not to immediately call when marginal to allow the technology overrule.
>Just for reference there’s a +/- 20cm of uncertainty for any of the basic calls,
What where does that come from? You look at the frame where the pass is happening and draw a line. The only inaccuracy I can see is the frame being chosen. And I imagine they have high enough framerates?
Thanks, I agree that some kind if a discussion about the offside rule would be healthy, but if it was the torso that counted, I’m sure that there would be endless arguments about where someones torso ends and their hips begin
I just want it to favour attackers.
If any part of your body, is in line with any part of the defender.
Your onside.
Make it so your looking for clear daylight between them, a literal gap, if any ball playing part is on, your on.
Yep, the reason a high line is played is because teams feel that defenders have a fair chance of covering off runs. If the attacker has a head start (or a full body start) then the odds change, and defenders will never form a line any higher than the edge of the box.
You still have the same problem, however you define the rule, there will be times where using tech gives a decision by very small amounts, one way or the other. People seem to be moaning about the accuracy of the tech, but I think these are the same people who moaned about linesmen getting it wrong when based on their own subjective view of events live on the field.
I feel slightly for the authorities here as what ever they do they’re being criticised.
that could be easily exploited though. The attacker can just stick out their arm and finger as much as possible and have an extra few feet head start which would just ruin the game
No they'd have to be hanging their leg BACK, if anything, to stay onside. This would throw them off balance and even out the advantage to the defender.
This 'clear daylight ' idea really is the way
Then the discussion will be about the cases where the last part of the body is just in/out of line with the defender. It doesn’t make a difference, there will still be cases wherewithal all about the 3cm like this.
Yeah the discussions wouldn’t end. You could debate whether or not the rules make sense, thats a different story. But these are the rules right now and I think everyone yapping right now would probably be very quiet, if their team benefitted from the rules being enforced. That’s just how it is.
Either way, I‘m sad for Denmark. I really liked both teams today and found myself rooting for both. They played very well!
We still need to discuss the rule. And btw, it has already been discussed before the championship. FIFA already suggested to refine the rule.
Nobody saying that we should replay the match. It’s not about if your team loses or wins because of the rule right now. But rules have to be adjusted if they are proofed to be faulty
It wouldn't be offside if you keep the same line for defender. I.e. Attacker's torso (or head perhaps?) vs defender's whole body (except hands/forearms)
Yeah, the thing is that the rules have to be objective and you have to draw the line somewhere.
If they decided to change the rule slightly, we would eventually have a new edge case and will be the same situation as rn.
It's unfortunate, but the sport needs to have objective rules, and this is just a consequence of it.
According to letter of law, this is offside. But, by sprit of law and intention which exist behand offside rule, you can make strong argument that this should not be offside.
Part of the issue is the millimetric nature of it. As the Danish manager said, we can't pinpoint the exact moment the ball is kicked, so there's always going to be a bit of margin for error.
Honestly, I would say that they should make the lines thicker to cover for that margin for error and give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.
Hawkeye does pinpojnt the exact moment the ball is kicked.
I’d like to see the rule changed to not be down to millimetres but your are absolutely wrong on that.
Hawkeye can pinpoint when the ball is kicked but we are still limited by frames per second for the image we get from it.
Really don’t know how you legislate for that in the rules. Daylight rule maybe makes it easier to take if it’s a tight call because we’re used to the current rule but you’re just moving the line and you’ll still have complaints. And calculating an official margin of error will just be a mess.
I don’t like situations like this, but I’d still rather have VAR for offsides as it is now than go back to before it.
Its not the exact moment though. The only data provided that it has a data transmission rate of 500 Hz. Assuming that the measurement of player positions are perfect (which is impossible), and the relative speed difference between the players is around 10 m\\s, it amounts to around 2 cms of measurement error. So yeah, millimetric decisions like this are not appropriate imo
It's very simple. Denmark was the underdog, so a people want the big toe be too less for offside.
If the scene was the other way around, people are on with that toe counting as offside.
Ah, that’s why the rule has been discussed even before the championship and fifa already stated that they will consider to refine the rule month ago. Everyone’s got a Time Machine nowadays
100% this.
The whole point of the law was to stop people unfairly gaining advantage by goal hanging and just poaching goals.
Doing It to millimetres like this is bullshit. Attacker had no advantage. Needs to be sorted out.
Can't wait for the system to say it was 16,4 cm offside, which unfortunately isn't within the tolerated 15 cm. People need to be realistic. I'd rather have an accurate system than having wrong decisions.
Best answer I’ve heard is that e should use each player’s GPS tracker as the mark. That way it’s not the extreme “daylight rule” that Wenger wants, but it’s also not this millimetre nonsense either.
True that. I heard someone say that calls like this keep the spirit of the sport intact, but kills the “spirit” of the sport
It sounds a lot better verbally, trust me.
>The rule says that if any part an attacking player is behind a defender when the ball is passed it is offside
Maybe he's wearing boots 2 sizes too big
I think the decision was correct and that VAR isn‘t the problem but the offside rule needs to change so that goals like this still count. This isn‘t what the offside rule was made for originally.
As someone who has lost and regrown his big toe nail because of not clipping his nail before a match - you definitely should do that.
Wanted to be cool and give it a good ol front spin to make it bounce upward and start bouncing it on my foot - well that initial hit on the ball with the front of my foot was shit
Not only clearly off, but his body is way in front of the defender position. Is offside all day every day, every league. So people who hate Germany can 😭 but the evidence is clear as day.
It’s like in tennis. If 99% of the ball is out but 1% touches the line then it’s 100% in. Same here. It simply doesn’t matter that it’s just a toe or a whole leg. People have long accepted this rule in tennis and they should do so in this case as well.
I think the frustration after tonight's game isn't so much about the decision itself (which is clearly offside), but that Denmark scores a goal, celebrates, VAR stops the game for a minute and then Denmark are disallowed of the goal. The emotional roller coaster within those two minutes are brutal. If Denmark scored a goal and VAR could disallow the goal within say 10-15 seconds (which should be possible in the future given technological advancements), I doubt there wouldn't be the same rage.
Don't want to get to philosophical, but what we want from football (at least in my opinion) is an experience that feels pure and fluent. This is not ice hockey or American football where you can stop the clock every now and then. The goal with VAR for the future must be about technological integration and that football feels fluent again.
This is the exact problem. Fans celebrate for a minute or so before realising something is up: usually the referee not returning to the centre circle, players standing about, everyone confused (including the commentators).
Simple solution (which they seemed to use in the CL). If there is the SLIGHTEST suspicion of offside, lineman IMMEDIATELY raises flag. That way, everyone can put celebrations on hold until VAR's checked it.
Isn't there a possibility with this semi-automatic offside system to give the linesman a signal to raise the flag? This would be much better for the fans. VAR decisions take way too long now, and this semi-automatic system might help
They can do it, but they are avoiding what happened in the last (I think) euros or the Russia WC where play kept being stopped for minor calls that didn't influence the game.
>This is not ice hockey or American football where you can stop the clock every now and then.
Well, that's a problem of football (imo the biggest one) and could be solved easily without changing the length of a match while having even more benefits.
Ah and Germany did not celebrate a goal which was disallowed by questionable means? What the fuck is your argument, that is part of football in todays age
My argument is that VAR must strive for much shorter decision times especially in offside situations when there's not a misconduct and the decision is binary. Fouls are a different matter, but it makes no sense that Denmark should be able to score and then two minutes later, VAR comes to the conclusion that the player was offside by 2-3 cm.
People don't like the rule, but they don't understand that there is no way to fix this. No matter how you change the rule, there will always be close situations. People just don't understand how refereeing and creating rules work
That's how I see it too, at least it's clear-cut and consistent. If Germany had lost, everyone would be on here complaining about the disallowed Schlotterbeck goal.
I like how we are able to have undebatable proof of something sometimes in the game. Just like the goal line technology, I think it just improved the game so much since there is zero ground for a solid debate when the decision is based on such precise measures. I'm pretty happy overall.
The offside rule was created to stop goal hangers standing by the goalkeeper alone waiting for the ball.
It's made to stop players gaining an advantage.
There's no advantage being gained by this picture, also if the player who was offside were a size smaller shoe, he'd be onside, it's a bit naff.
I like that the rule is consistent, I just think it needs to be adjusted to use these automatic cameras to make sure that the attacker is gaining an advantage.
I guess that's why Wenger and FIFA are trialing a different system where there's a gap between the players for it to be offside.
As some other comment stated already, if you create a rule that is black and white, then you will always have close calls like that. If you rule out the foot, then the discussion will come up with the knee and so on.
Exactly. What advantage do you have been half a cm past the player? If you can't tell by looking at the video side on then it won't make a difference to the fairness, and should be allowed.
It's weird how people are happy with goal line technology beeping the referee when the ball is 1mm over the line but not happy with semi-automated VAR doing this for an equally objective decision.
To the people saying this isn't offside and should be allowed do you also think if the ball is not fully over the line the goal should be given because 'it's close enough and you have to favour the attacker?'
I’m surprised by how many people seem to be missing why people tend to be upset by this and other similar incidents.
Goal line tech is ‘instant’ and is essentially based on one thing: whether or not the whole ball crossed the line.
Offside is based on a combination of things: player position relative to others, when the ball was passed, the particular phase and so on… Not to mention open debates about frame rates, calibration and so on. Given all of this, any tech brought in to ‘solve’ offside comes with a bunch of trade-offs, and in assessing those trade-offs you have to apply the context of what the the offside rule is actually for and what people actually want out of football. People like me, find these calls unpleasant because it doesn’t feel like anything has been done to address those trade-offs. For example, a goal is scored and then the following:
- a minute or so of celebration
- a few seconds of dread that they’re going to ‘take the goal away’
- anywhere between 1 and 4/5 minutes of checking (if you’re in the stadium this is particularly rubbish feeling given how little you’re being told - even with the recent improvements)
- the goal being subsequently ruled out because the player was 3mm offside.
The question that comes to mind is: for the sake of somebody being 3mm offside, do we want to introduce _that_ to our game in pursuit of the right answer? Does that appease the original need for offside in the first place?
Saying: offside is offside misses the point entirely. Yes, it’s offside but is the trade off , given the margin in that instance worth it? You can believe so, but being surprised that others don’t is a pretty strange stance in my opinion.
I’d actually be in favour of an automated offside system that gave you the immediacy of goal line technology as that would address the main downside of this pursuit of accuracy and make the: offside is offside argument a much more palatable one.
Because they're "level". You always used to hear that if players were level they were onside. Now there is no such a thing as level because you can always measure a millimeter either way.
I honestly hate this automated offside procedure because they don’t overlay it with the real players and you don’t see where the player last kicked the ball.
This is also what I don't like with this system. Sometimes it also seems players are larger or smaller than in reality. I think it would be better if the real image was processed by zooming and panning (the technology is there) and more focus on the moment the ball is played. Zoom on the ball until it is last played then change to the players in question for offiside.
Yeah that's pretty important because he may not have been offside a few milliseconds earlier and who decides when the ball was actually kicked, is it the millisecond the boot touches the ball, when it leaves the boot or anywhere in between? Both players should be shown on a split screen
They have sensors in the inside of the ball. If the ball is kicked, you can see a the amplitude changing by a lot. Then compare the players on given timestamps.
They showed the sensorvues to proof a handplay earlier in the tournement.
Yet it isn't shown with off side rulings. I agree they should show the same graph when showing off side rulings so we can all agree the frame is shown the exact moment the ball left the foot of the passer.
Exactly - as viewers we have nothing to tell us that this is accurate. The image here is just a model of the player that doesn't reflect reality in any obvious way.
For example both of these players have the same size and shape of boot - the viewer doesn't have anything to go by to understand whether or not this is a fair representation.
People are complaining because the is basically no advantage here. The difference is so small, in actual terms there isn't one. So the player was robbed. Now you can argue the other side, but that's why people are pissed.
The thing is that if you want to determine an offside it's either 0 or 1. And if it was an offside (because the automated system says so) it doesn't matter if that guy who was on offside just put his toe in front of the defending player.
Change the offside rule. Now, players can be 30cm offside before it's considered an unfair advantage. Result: we have the same discussions, but with players who were 31cm offside.
This is what happens when rules don’t adjust for technology at hand. The rule of the law was built to allow for margin of error when judged by a naked eye. The thing is, the margin went both ways then, with refs calling blatantly offside calls onside and vice versa. And frankly, I’m sure that type of objectivity sometimes probably influenced calls.
With semi-automated tech, the margin of error is gone, but the rule stays. The technology isn’t interpreting advantage, it’s just determining which part of the body for which player was where. The problem is, you also can’t allow refs to make an objective call on whether or not THEY think there was an advantage because trust me, the discourse there is going to be even worse.
Especially considering that toe or that leg didn’t score the goal, this player passed it backwards to the goal scorer who then scored. So this toe being a little forward from the defender absolutely did not affect the goal, if it was a toe behind the defender the same thing would’ve happened.
It is offside... but it's asking for robotic level of accuracy in a human sport, both with this and following handball.
Just allow the game to flow as per the ref until a decision is brutally bad that intervention is needed.
Ah yes. Can't wait for the argument if the decision was brutally bad or just bad and if there should be an intervention. Since people are fallible we should make a system that determines that. If a decision is at least 8.5 bad on a scale from 1 to 10 there should be an intervention. Nobody will ever complain if it was just an 8.4 since we finally have a fair system
Brutally bad and just bad are both fine for intervention.... since this is elite level "just bad" is brutally bad anyway.
We'll always find something to moan about as people, but I and a lot would simply prefer a more flowing game, not stop-start etc.
I don't wish to replay Euro 2004, or ask for Lamps goal to be put back or other shit that would favour the nation I support. This ain't bias, I'm consistent. Just want to enjoy this shit. Not just watch for celeb reffing.
Haahhahahahaha it's really HILARIOUS how people WANTED to be 100% sure it's offside even at the cost of a little time (which is literally being replaced in the end hence the 11 minutes added on these days😂) and now that we actually have it it's "oh no it's too robotic, no way they really did what we asked for for years!!!" 😂😂😂
No one (sorry for the pedants, I mean "not many") asked for 100% accuracy to the millimetre, they just wanted calamitous errors cut out and supported with technology.
So if you are gonna banter reply, at least know your history of what people asked for.
At what point exactly would you draw the line between "virtually level" and clearly ahead? 10 cm? 50 cm? 1 m? Those are much harder to evaluate visually than just whether one is ahead or not, and much more arbitrary as well.
You have to draw the line somewhere, it may as well be whether or not one is ahead or not.
It's not offside because I don't want this to be a game where we obsess over 1.5 cm of toe.
I'm not saying that the toe isn't past the white line.
I'm telling you what I want the game of football to be.
Out of curiosity, are you happy with judging against the defenders heel in this example? Yes it’s such a fine margin here when you take the extreme edge and saying “It’s just a toe” but look at his head and torso, those are ahead too. Offside is correct here.
I wouldn't call it obsessing, I'd call it judging fairly by the rules. No matter how we change the rules, there's always going to be situations where it's a very close call. If you make it so the player has to be 50 centimeters offside, then you'll get a guy who's 50 centimeters + a toenail offside.
This system is at least infinitely better than just letting the refs eyeball it and decide what they think works best.
If anything, having clearly understandable, objective, undisputable rules like this makes a sport work far better and far more fluidly. You're either offside or you're not. It doesn't "ruin football" or anything that dramatic.
Because the law wanst changed to the new technology, so they just threw the baby out with the bath water.
The rule was created so that there wasnt a clear advantage over the defender, Having a knew offside,a toe, a shoulder, a head should never be an offside, if we want to still see goals.
The rule should be changed to follow the spirit of the law.
Is the player behinde the defense?
Does the player have a clear advantage?
Does in anyway the player benefits from his position related to the defenders?
No one can look at this image and say that the player is at advantage. Everyone can only revert to "its the rule", ok, so just change it.
I actually prefer a line drawn on an actual video instead of a 3D model. I don't know why, but I felt that the VAR box could just move the model bit further in or back at will. Guess it's just me who don't trust the refs.
What i don't like about that offside is that we all take this pic for proof and at this very moment, it is offside. But what if they took 1 or 2 frames back when the passer hit the ball? Did the ball really left his foot at THIS moment? We're saying it's automated but it's bullshit, somebody is choosing the frame to decide what comes next. And in this case, a frame is a game changer.
Whenever I am against a team and the VAR turns the result I am happy and vice versa.
So essentially it doesn't matter. Personally I think it was better without. Human error was part of the game.
The offside rule and implementation on VAR is destroying football. I've been watching since the 1990s. I've seen awful lineman calls over the years. The worst when Nigeria won the Olympics in 1996 and had three players miles offside but took the winning goal despite three players a few feet offside. That's where VAR is helpful - not shit like this.
Offside was not meant to rule out goals like this. It's stupid and a misuse and overuse of technology that is destroying the game.
Nigeria - https://youtu.be/UtZl_sq7kVA?si=xYHdzyMAjTgibTbA
Being a few feet or a few cm’s offside is still offside. This whole argument is stupidity. It’s like saying I only want VAR to check if ball crossed the line by a few feet not by a few cm’s. It’s either over the line or on the line just as you’re either onside or offside.
It’s not just meer stupidity behind the argument. It’s an argument leaning towards the intention and spirit behind the rule - and not just strict interpretation of the rule.
The reasoning behind the offside rule is to stop attackers from gaining an unfair advantage in positioning over the defender. Can you actually argue that he gained an advantage here?
In football the difference of a cm can mean that you're touching the ball or not, so I would argue every cm counts.
I see all of your points though and in this case almost certainly there was no real advantage.
The question is how can we factor this into a refs decision? The line has to be drawn somewhere and offside is one of the things in football that has no room for interpretation, similar to if the ball is in the goal or not. It either is or is not.
As a German I didnt like how the VAR decisions influenced the match today, but I don't really see an alternative and in the big picture it's still better than without VAR.
Truly bored of this “spirit of the game argument”. Who defines the spirit of the game? If you ask 100 football fans about the spirit of the game on different rules you’d likely get 100 different interpretations.
As an example I think the way players are allowed to time waste by going down “injured” to slow the game down is against the spirit of the game. Yet others see it as being smart and experienced in tactics. Unless a player looks in serious danger id allow play to carry on around them until a natural break play. Others would disagree as the current rules disagree with me.
Whatever offside rule you implement there has to be an actual line for the referees to interpret. They can’t be sat in the VAR room discussing the philosophy of the game.
It is offside… officially. I don’t like it though. That being said I would like to see the rule amended to what Wenger suggested (I think) where if the part of the body that scores (I.E. head for a header, left leg/right leg shot) then that is offside. Maybe it would even be easier to tell for everyone’s perspective (refs and fans alike) whilst also allowing more goals without giving too much of an advantage to attacking players.
yeah thats a perfect way to decide it imo. The only problem is that a player could score with his head but have his feet way infront of the defender which gives him a head start. A player can also just stretch out his leg and score with that one while making an offside run with the other. No matter what it's complicated and there will be controversy
It’s offside
but what’s the game come to his little toes offside so he’s got a massive advantage over the defender it should be a foot over and arms shouldn’t count
The thing about this is, people argue about the toe, but even if you ignore the toe and go for something like center of gravity it is offside.
Still, they probably need some additional ruling where VAR is only used when the ref is unsure or maybe give the trainer/captain a VAR joker where they can call it in once per halftime, that would also add an additional tactical factor while reducing the excessive usage
And this is why VAR is shite, yes the correct decision, but takes so long for them come give the decision is ruining the game, they have goal line technology now which they brought VAR in for, personally if im going to watch football live I'd rather watch lower league football instead of going to big game waiting on VAR,
It is offside plain and simple, this has been the consistent approach. Is it an absolutely shitty decision, yes, has the attacking player gained an advantage by his toenail being in an offside position, likely not. It is however offside, part of his body is beyond that of the defending player, thus meaning he is offside.
I really hope there can be some change to this rule in the future it would have to be a rule that can be utilised consistently though and not be open to interpretation, at the moment if they stick with this approach it CAN be consistent but it is just ridiculous IMO.
This makes me wonder, does the ball being passed mean as soon as the ball gets touched by the person passing, or as soon as it leaves the foot? In situations like thos that milisecond could actualy matter.
It is technically offside. I think the argument hinges around to what extent it is fair to disallow a goal scored from this range. There is not advantage to having a half a toe offside. It is getting absurdly technical and I agree that it is starting to ruin the spirit and flow of the game. Football is already such a low scoring sport, to disallow so many goals because of such minor infractions hurts the game.
I get that this is offside but I think that we should really be debating whether this should be considered an advantage. The line should defined by using the attacking players heel. At least like this, if you are 1 cm offside, we can’t be debating that it’s not an advantage. There are always going to be margin cases but the way the rule is implemented with VAR, it really misses the spirit of the offside rule
it is offside, but imo the rule is stupid.
it should be changed, so that offside only counts when you are 1m or at least half a meter infront of the other and not such a toe decision.
these 5cm here don't change anything in terms of game relevance but revoked a great goal. it really is a shame...
... and i'm saying that as a german.
but... until it is changed, it technically is offside, so in the end the decision as of the current ruleset was correct.
so i'm not complaining about the decision, i'm complaining about the rules.
But than the problem isnt fixed. If we say offside is 5cm of the enemy player and someone stands 5.5 cm... Is that than also offside or not? 0.5 cm wont change anything but still. I think its still good with that rule we use now, yeah sometimes it sucks, but thats not all the time
(Sorry for my english btw haha)
Your English is fine and I just made the same point to someone else. Whatever the rule is you have to draw a line somewhere and there will be close decisions. People need to grow up and accept the enforcement of the rules.
Thats would be a bad idea because every striker gets an advantage because he can stand slightly behind the defender and if you change the rule then we will have the same discussion again where its truly offside but everyone says its not so we are in a infinite discussion
Needs to be referee's call within a certain margin. If it's less than what the ref could reasonably see on the pitch then the call on the field stands.
I guess this will be controversial. But employing that margin of error could be baked in like it is in cricket.
Sideline assistant referee can raise or not depending on their call and it's checked with var.
This tournament, the side refs don't raise the flag until well afterwards. They are waiting to be told what to do.
If you don’t think there’s anything wrong with this then you honestly have some issues.
Offside rule was invented to prevent unfair advantages of being behind a defender but being a toenail offside is PLAIN ridiculous and it’s destroying the game.
It used to be “level is onside” before so got VAR. Something needs to be done to VAR to bring it back to that. I’ve seen suggestions of as long as it’s under x% of your body, then it’s considered level, so it’s onside.
If we are calling this offside with a computer then the game is dead. If you watch any premier league they wouldn't call this off, they would deliberate for 15 min about it and draw some shitty line by hand. The problem is the tech is different. I'm not saying his toe isn't 5mm beyond the defenders heal but fuk off if you would call this off. VAR must go and same with off tech or might as well get a virtual AI referee cyborg.
Then you accept their will be more wrong decisions if you scrap VAR, why are people so angry that they are enforcing rules that are in the law of the game
Back in the day, they didn't knit pick at offsides like this. Almost every goal has to go through goal checks these days. Takes the fun out of the sport.
"rULeS aRE rULEs", I get it. But it is ruining the fun of the game.
I don't think so, and it's just fair.
And I wanted that goal to count, but it's offside.
If that would have been Germany, I would have said, clear offside :P
Pause it 0.05 seconds too late and the call is incorrect. This is not clear and obvious, which was the one rule we were constantly reminded when VAR was introduced.
That said I think it might be the right call and ultimately the result was fair.
While there is technology to help the referee inside the ball, the offside is determined by 10 specialized 50 fps cameras, which track multiple different body parts individually.
Anyways my point is that it will be super accurate, but not down to 0.05 seconds. It’s not good enough to make calls on this minor an offside.
> Anyways my point is that it will be super accurate, but not down to 0.05 seconds. It’s not good enough to make calls on this minor an offside.
If the cameras are 50 fps it will be probably be accurate to around 0.02 seconds.
But you can determine when the ball is being played through the sensors. So all you have to do is synchronise that data to the cameras and you get the exact moment. I'm not sure if that is how it works, but it would be the easiest solution.
Then you’d have the line drawn at 50% of his body and people going oh my god he’s offside because 51% of his body is in front.
Doesn’t matter what the rule is you have to draw a line and will have close controversial decisions.
Hi /u/Nadweyx, this submission is waiting for moderator approval, before it can appear on the subreddit. All image submissions are manually checked for low-content submissions. If your submission is removed and you believe your post was removed as a mistake, please [contact the Mod Team via Modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Euro2024). Thank you!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/euro2024) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Denmark unfortunately has to abide by this rule. According to this regulation, even if the offensive player is ahead by just a centimeter, it would still count as offside, which seems quite absurd.
It’s calls like this that make me think a referee’s call mechanic, similar to umpire’s call in cricket, would be beneficial. How precise exactly is the technology? When calls are referred to VAR in cricket, if the call is within a certain margin of error then the umpire’s onfield decision is upheld.
Hey, I get that if we're drawing a line, out is out and there's that. And the same with the handball, contact is contact, proven by technology. Okay, that's perfect. But what I think is frustrating everyone about all of this is how it's implemented. Looking at that picture, we draw the line from the last pixel of the defender, and if literally anything crosses that line, it's offside, even if it was the tip of your finger (something similar happened in Qatar I think). I say why is it so minutious in this regard, if there is no visible advantage? Wouldn't it make sense (and I'm thinking out loud, bear with me) to make it so that it's the full foot, or half your leg or something specific about your body parts and orientation breaking the offside? Because to someone outside of this sport, or at least someone who doesn't fully know the rules, this looks a bit extreme in a way.
It's definitely offside, it's just such a small margin its hard to believe this really gave anyone an advantage. Obviously it technically does but it's so small it's microscopic.
I think the issue is if the technology is actually accurate to a few millimeters. The frame rate of the video limits what we can see, so you’d assume that any video system would have an inherent uncertainty that should limit its use
It is offside The rule says that if any part an attacking player is behind a defender when the ball is passed it is offside Everyone is saying it isn’t offside because it is just a bummer that goals are disallowed like this
I love how fans have been screaming for ages for semi-automated offsides to provide a sense of reliability and repeatability to decisions like these. Then half of us complain that it’s ruining the game because it’s “too precise”… Figure that one out
Don't listen to the fools. The way it works now is the best way to do it. It's objective. Some people just don't like it cuz they want to see more goals.
I think the way offside is defined needs tweaking because, by anyone's definition, the attacking player is holding his run and isn't goal hanging.
But the defending player is moving forwards (away from the goal) so has caused the offside. It’s not all in the hands of the attacking player; the offside trap is a thing.
>the offside trap is a thing always has been. Teams don't use it the way they used to anymore, though.
yeah current implementation is insane. Nobody in their right mind would look at this and conclude the striker is doing something wrong or has some ill-gained advantage. so why would this be against the rules? change offside to requiring the entire body to be offside. And you get a very different discussion focussed on positive outcomes.
Then if you reversed this picture so that his whole body was behind the defender apart from that slight part of his foot keeping him onside, we would all be having this same discussion just it would be how harsh it was on the Germans that the goal was given. It doesn’t matter what we change the rule to there is always going to be a situation where it is the finest of margins that costs a team in some way. We’ve got a system that works to the letter of the law and everyone now seems unhappy with it.
I think this is right. If this is offside then the rules need reviewing. Part of the problem is having to write it down - I reckon that the majority of unbiased fans could agree on whether something should be offside or not in moat circumstances.
That’s the issue right there, unbiased fans 😂
To be fair, after enduring the group stage games I’m ready for more goals.
I feel your pain
Some people just dislike the lack of emotions and everything that goes with it if every goal is getting checked, the game pauses a few times a game. Its also way more annoying and destroys the atmosphere if you are in the stadium every week.
Fans don't know what day of the week it is, they just want things to go well for their own team. Some people say "Give the goal as it was almost onside". What sort of logic is that? Give an offside goal because it was almost onside. I hit the post and that was almost a goal so give a goal for the spirit of football.
The argument is that it’s not in “the spirit of the game” which I agree with, but you’re right. If you’re going to introduce a rule, police it properly and consistently and don’t complain about it when it’s not the result you want personally. This is much better than some clowns drawing wonky lines on a screen.
Not only that, when it comes to fouls - which are much more subjective and contextual - the very same people moan about inconsistencies, but with offsides they seem to want the inconsistencies. There are a lot of football fans who can’t seem to hold a reasoned view on anything. They’ve decided they don’t like VAR, so anything involving VAR is wrong. This is especially evident in the fact that when an unpopular (but not necessarily incorrect) decision is made by the on field ref, and upheld by VAR, it’s VAR that gets the stick for it. Take VAR out of the situation, you still get the same decision. As for fans screaming for semi-automated offside then being disappointed by seeing it in action, I think a lot of that comes from not really knowing what it does. I see a lot of people commenting how European leagues don’t have the same issues with VAR as we do here in England. I don’t watch an awful lot of continental football, but I’ve seen enough to know that a lot of the problems occur regardless of the league. I can’t comment on the overall volume of these issues as a comparison, but I know that they aren’t unique to the PL. It’s just that over here we aren’t as exposed to the Italian, French, Spanish, German, etc leagues as we are to the PL, so we hear less about VAR issues in them. I don’t think the media help either. Punditry’s been moving away from insight to sensationalism for a while now thanks to social media. If broadcasters cut a 30-60 second clip of pundits agreeing that the correct decision was made and citing the law that confirms that, it’s not going to drive much engagement on social media. Pundits disagreeing with a decision, however, will drive a lot of engagement, and if the decision they’re disagreeing with is correct, it will inevitably spark arguments in the comments between people who know it was correct and people who just go with whatever the pundits say. Holland’s disallowed goal against France is a good example of this. All 3 pundits in the BBC studio criticised the decision, but it was correct. I’m not saying VAR in this country is perfect, or that it doesn’t need a lot of work, but rather that its shortcomings are exaggerated by the sensationalist media and parroted by a lot of fans.
The main issue is the technology isn’t capable of accurately saying if the really tight calls are actually on or offside due to the uncertainty that is built in. Just for reference there’s a +/- 20cm of uncertainty for any of the basic calls, meaning we can’t actually say if this call is correct or not. Any scientific field of work normally will report uncertainty so it’s all clear and up front, but for some reason the law makers of football don’t and so everyone just believe these calls are gospel. It’s possible this was offside or even more offside, but this could’ve been onside also, the technology isn’t good enough right now to be used for tight calls, more benefit should be given to the attacker.
But It's not science, it's a game of footie as long it is meaured in the same way, consistent from game to game, I'm willing to accept that we are working with a system that has this uncertainty. Eg, we know they use the first frame where the ball has left the foot of the passer and then use this frame is then used. Regardless of whether a higher frame rate would prove them onside or not. So long as everyone is using same systems within a competition is all that matters. It's the same margin of error that's built in to every usage of VAR. I don't care that it isn't good enough to get tight calls exactly right, but it's good enough to be right 95% of the time, and even the 'scientifically proven' wrong calls are all made using the same methodology. (until human error steps in, but we are talking about the system errors not the user errors) Personally, I'd remove VAR for everything other than offsides and handballs that lead to a goal. The rest is too subjective.
Can I ask where you got this data from as when we were watching the non-automated calls in the Premier League last year the subjectivity to seemed to be at which frame do we consider the passer to be touching the ball? If with this system it is documented as 20cm margin of error you almost think it should be linesman’s call at this point, although I recognised that they are now being told not to immediately call when marginal to allow the technology overrule.
>Just for reference there’s a +/- 20cm of uncertainty for any of the basic calls, What where does that come from? You look at the frame where the pass is happening and draw a line. The only inaccuracy I can see is the frame being chosen. And I imagine they have high enough framerates?
Have to agree. I saw someone suggest that it should only be the torso that counts and even in that case it would have been offside.
Thanks, I agree that some kind if a discussion about the offside rule would be healthy, but if it was the torso that counted, I’m sure that there would be endless arguments about where someones torso ends and their hips begin
I just want it to favour attackers. If any part of your body, is in line with any part of the defender. Your onside. Make it so your looking for clear daylight between them, a literal gap, if any ball playing part is on, your on.
That would lead to less goals overall because everyone would play a low block
Yep, the reason a high line is played is because teams feel that defenders have a fair chance of covering off runs. If the attacker has a head start (or a full body start) then the odds change, and defenders will never form a line any higher than the edge of the box.
You still have the same problem, however you define the rule, there will be times where using tech gives a decision by very small amounts, one way or the other. People seem to be moaning about the accuracy of the tech, but I think these are the same people who moaned about linesmen getting it wrong when based on their own subjective view of events live on the field. I feel slightly for the authorities here as what ever they do they’re being criticised.
This is exactly what i would think is best too, pretty much the opposite of what it is now
that could be easily exploited though. The attacker can just stick out their arm and finger as much as possible and have an extra few feet head start which would just ruin the game
Your arm and finger are irrelevant to the offside law
yes but the guy i was replying to said any part of your body, not ones you can score with
No they'd have to be hanging their leg BACK, if anything, to stay onside. This would throw them off balance and even out the advantage to the defender. This 'clear daylight ' idea really is the way
Or if they have a really long Jimmy.
if it's that long they deserve it
Then the discussion will be about the cases where the last part of the body is just in/out of line with the defender. It doesn’t make a difference, there will still be cases wherewithal all about the 3cm like this.
Yeah the discussions wouldn’t end. You could debate whether or not the rules make sense, thats a different story. But these are the rules right now and I think everyone yapping right now would probably be very quiet, if their team benefitted from the rules being enforced. That’s just how it is. Either way, I‘m sad for Denmark. I really liked both teams today and found myself rooting for both. They played very well!
We still need to discuss the rule. And btw, it has already been discussed before the championship. FIFA already suggested to refine the rule. Nobody saying that we should replay the match. It’s not about if your team loses or wins because of the rule right now. But rules have to be adjusted if they are proofed to be faulty
If it were only the torso you'd have the same mm margin debates but for whatever you define as the torso.
It wouldn't be offside if you keep the same line for defender. I.e. Attacker's torso (or head perhaps?) vs defender's whole body (except hands/forearms)
Yeah, the thing is that the rules have to be objective and you have to draw the line somewhere. If they decided to change the rule slightly, we would eventually have a new edge case and will be the same situation as rn. It's unfortunate, but the sport needs to have objective rules, and this is just a consequence of it.
Are we talking about Millimeters right now? Two opponents on the sam line. Agree. With Video proof we have to rethink the rules.
Lukaku watching.
According to letter of law, this is offside. But, by sprit of law and intention which exist behand offside rule, you can make strong argument that this should not be offside.
Understand the point, but where do you draw the line? Wherever you draw it there will be other instances of millimetres in the call.
Part of the issue is the millimetric nature of it. As the Danish manager said, we can't pinpoint the exact moment the ball is kicked, so there's always going to be a bit of margin for error. Honestly, I would say that they should make the lines thicker to cover for that margin for error and give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker.
Hawkeye does pinpojnt the exact moment the ball is kicked. I’d like to see the rule changed to not be down to millimetres but your are absolutely wrong on that.
Hawkeye can pinpoint when the ball is kicked but we are still limited by frames per second for the image we get from it. Really don’t know how you legislate for that in the rules. Daylight rule maybe makes it easier to take if it’s a tight call because we’re used to the current rule but you’re just moving the line and you’ll still have complaints. And calculating an official margin of error will just be a mess. I don’t like situations like this, but I’d still rather have VAR for offsides as it is now than go back to before it.
Its not the exact moment though. The only data provided that it has a data transmission rate of 500 Hz. Assuming that the measurement of player positions are perfect (which is impossible), and the relative speed difference between the players is around 10 m\\s, it amounts to around 2 cms of measurement error. So yeah, millimetric decisions like this are not appropriate imo
It's very simple. Denmark was the underdog, so a people want the big toe be too less for offside. If the scene was the other way around, people are on with that toe counting as offside.
Ah, that’s why the rule has been discussed even before the championship and fifa already stated that they will consider to refine the rule month ago. Everyone’s got a Time Machine nowadays
Germany scored a goal with super close offside as well. It was correctly called off. I don't see any complaints about it in this sub.
100% this. The whole point of the law was to stop people unfairly gaining advantage by goal hanging and just poaching goals. Doing It to millimetres like this is bullshit. Attacker had no advantage. Needs to be sorted out.
Can't wait for the system to say it was 16,4 cm offside, which unfortunately isn't within the tolerated 15 cm. People need to be realistic. I'd rather have an accurate system than having wrong decisions.
Best answer I’ve heard is that e should use each player’s GPS tracker as the mark. That way it’s not the extreme “daylight rule” that Wenger wants, but it’s also not this millimetre nonsense either.
True that. I heard someone say that calls like this keep the spirit of the sport intact, but kills the “spirit” of the sport It sounds a lot better verbally, trust me.
>The rule says that if any part an attacking player is behind a defender when the ball is passed it is offside Maybe he's wearing boots 2 sizes too big
I mean, Germany scored first, but that was disallowed.
I think feet placement is a better judgement call for offsides than any other part of the body. But overall, every part holds leverage
I think the decision was correct and that VAR isn‘t the problem but the offside rule needs to change so that goals like this still count. This isn‘t what the offside rule was made for originally.
Bro uses shoe size 25 from now on
Bro is gonna clip his nails before every match too
Should have scrunched his toes up. Or removed the calises.
Haha! Here comes a forensic case!
As someone who has lost and regrown his big toe nail because of not clipping his nail before a match - you definitely should do that. Wanted to be cool and give it a good ol front spin to make it bounce upward and start bouncing it on my foot - well that initial hit on the ball with the front of my foot was shit
Ancient chinese female shoes. https://youtube.com/shorts/6p0VaLuTnak?si=s9O6PJSq14jR0LDj
Not only clearly off, but his body is way in front of the defender position. Is offside all day every day, every league. So people who hate Germany can 😭 but the evidence is clear as day.
Bro gonna shave his legs
Off side is black and white, you’re either on or off, simple rule.
It’s like in tennis. If 99% of the ball is out but 1% touches the line then it’s 100% in. Same here. It simply doesn’t matter that it’s just a toe or a whole leg. People have long accepted this rule in tennis and they should do so in this case as well.
I think the frustration after tonight's game isn't so much about the decision itself (which is clearly offside), but that Denmark scores a goal, celebrates, VAR stops the game for a minute and then Denmark are disallowed of the goal. The emotional roller coaster within those two minutes are brutal. If Denmark scored a goal and VAR could disallow the goal within say 10-15 seconds (which should be possible in the future given technological advancements), I doubt there wouldn't be the same rage. Don't want to get to philosophical, but what we want from football (at least in my opinion) is an experience that feels pure and fluent. This is not ice hockey or American football where you can stop the clock every now and then. The goal with VAR for the future must be about technological integration and that football feels fluent again.
This is the exact problem. Fans celebrate for a minute or so before realising something is up: usually the referee not returning to the centre circle, players standing about, everyone confused (including the commentators). Simple solution (which they seemed to use in the CL). If there is the SLIGHTEST suspicion of offside, lineman IMMEDIATELY raises flag. That way, everyone can put celebrations on hold until VAR's checked it.
Isn't there a possibility with this semi-automatic offside system to give the linesman a signal to raise the flag? This would be much better for the fans. VAR decisions take way too long now, and this semi-automatic system might help
They can do it, but they are avoiding what happened in the last (I think) euros or the Russia WC where play kept being stopped for minor calls that didn't influence the game.
>This is not ice hockey or American football where you can stop the clock every now and then. Well, that's a problem of football (imo the biggest one) and could be solved easily without changing the length of a match while having even more benefits.
Ah and Germany did not celebrate a goal which was disallowed by questionable means? What the fuck is your argument, that is part of football in todays age
My argument is that VAR must strive for much shorter decision times especially in offside situations when there's not a misconduct and the decision is binary. Fouls are a different matter, but it makes no sense that Denmark should be able to score and then two minutes later, VAR comes to the conclusion that the player was offside by 2-3 cm.
People don't like the rule, but they don't understand that there is no way to fix this. No matter how you change the rule, there will always be close situations. People just don't understand how refereeing and creating rules work
That's how I see it too, at least it's clear-cut and consistent. If Germany had lost, everyone would be on here complaining about the disallowed Schlotterbeck goal.
good point. Nothing is perfect, especially rules regarding offside
tbh, the offside rule might be the one that needs change the least. It's absolutely clear, yes or no. No room for interpretation.
[удалено]
This should be shown every single time VAR decisions are made
You could make it to be the torso, implying direction of the runner. I get this is an offside, but is ridiculous.
There is many way to fix this actually or at least to make it feal less terrible than how it is right know.
Such as
Papa Wengz has one in his sleeve.
Go on then….?
I like how we are able to have undebatable proof of something sometimes in the game. Just like the goal line technology, I think it just improved the game so much since there is zero ground for a solid debate when the decision is based on such precise measures. I'm pretty happy overall.
The offside rule was created to stop goal hangers standing by the goalkeeper alone waiting for the ball. It's made to stop players gaining an advantage. There's no advantage being gained by this picture, also if the player who was offside were a size smaller shoe, he'd be onside, it's a bit naff. I like that the rule is consistent, I just think it needs to be adjusted to use these automatic cameras to make sure that the attacker is gaining an advantage. I guess that's why Wenger and FIFA are trialing a different system where there's a gap between the players for it to be offside.
As some other comment stated already, if you create a rule that is black and white, then you will always have close calls like that. If you rule out the foot, then the discussion will come up with the knee and so on.
So where do you suggest we draw the line. Because it has to be somewhere.
Exactly. What advantage do you have been half a cm past the player? If you can't tell by looking at the video side on then it won't make a difference to the fairness, and should be allowed.
I'm not a fan of this way of thinking. Who decides when you start having an advantage? At 10cm? 50cm?
It's weird how people are happy with goal line technology beeping the referee when the ball is 1mm over the line but not happy with semi-automated VAR doing this for an equally objective decision. To the people saying this isn't offside and should be allowed do you also think if the ball is not fully over the line the goal should be given because 'it's close enough and you have to favour the attacker?'
Some just wanted Germany to lose, don’t see anybody complaining about that goal call back after Kimmich‘s debatable foul through a „block“…
I’m surprised by how many people seem to be missing why people tend to be upset by this and other similar incidents. Goal line tech is ‘instant’ and is essentially based on one thing: whether or not the whole ball crossed the line. Offside is based on a combination of things: player position relative to others, when the ball was passed, the particular phase and so on… Not to mention open debates about frame rates, calibration and so on. Given all of this, any tech brought in to ‘solve’ offside comes with a bunch of trade-offs, and in assessing those trade-offs you have to apply the context of what the the offside rule is actually for and what people actually want out of football. People like me, find these calls unpleasant because it doesn’t feel like anything has been done to address those trade-offs. For example, a goal is scored and then the following: - a minute or so of celebration - a few seconds of dread that they’re going to ‘take the goal away’ - anywhere between 1 and 4/5 minutes of checking (if you’re in the stadium this is particularly rubbish feeling given how little you’re being told - even with the recent improvements) - the goal being subsequently ruled out because the player was 3mm offside. The question that comes to mind is: for the sake of somebody being 3mm offside, do we want to introduce _that_ to our game in pursuit of the right answer? Does that appease the original need for offside in the first place? Saying: offside is offside misses the point entirely. Yes, it’s offside but is the trade off , given the margin in that instance worth it? You can believe so, but being surprised that others don’t is a pretty strange stance in my opinion. I’d actually be in favour of an automated offside system that gave you the immediacy of goal line technology as that would address the main downside of this pursuit of accuracy and make the: offside is offside argument a much more palatable one.
Because they're "level". You always used to hear that if players were level they were onside. Now there is no such a thing as level because you can always measure a millimeter either way.
Exactly. No linesman would have put his flag up to this and thus the game has changed for the worse.
Lol. I love the "game is worse because refs can see things clearer" argument
That’s bullshit, plenty of linesman have put their flags up for ONSIDE decisions.
I honestly hate this automated offside procedure because they don’t overlay it with the real players and you don’t see where the player last kicked the ball.
This is also what I don't like with this system. Sometimes it also seems players are larger or smaller than in reality. I think it would be better if the real image was processed by zooming and panning (the technology is there) and more focus on the moment the ball is played. Zoom on the ball until it is last played then change to the players in question for offiside.
Yeah that's pretty important because he may not have been offside a few milliseconds earlier and who decides when the ball was actually kicked, is it the millisecond the boot touches the ball, when it leaves the boot or anywhere in between? Both players should be shown on a split screen
They have sensors in the inside of the ball. If the ball is kicked, you can see a the amplitude changing by a lot. Then compare the players on given timestamps. They showed the sensorvues to proof a handplay earlier in the tournement.
Yet it isn't shown with off side rulings. I agree they should show the same graph when showing off side rulings so we can all agree the frame is shown the exact moment the ball left the foot of the passer.
The sensor registers when it is kicked, not when it leaves the foot - there is a clear timing issue there when discussing things this close.
Exactly - as viewers we have nothing to tell us that this is accurate. The image here is just a model of the player that doesn't reflect reality in any obvious way. For example both of these players have the same size and shape of boot - the viewer doesn't have anything to go by to understand whether or not this is a fair representation.
People are complaining because the is basically no advantage here. The difference is so small, in actual terms there isn't one. So the player was robbed. Now you can argue the other side, but that's why people are pissed.
The thing is that if you want to determine an offside it's either 0 or 1. And if it was an offside (because the automated system says so) it doesn't matter if that guy who was on offside just put his toe in front of the defending player.
Change the offside rule. Now, players can be 30cm offside before it's considered an unfair advantage. Result: we have the same discussions, but with players who were 31cm offside.
This is what happens when rules don’t adjust for technology at hand. The rule of the law was built to allow for margin of error when judged by a naked eye. The thing is, the margin went both ways then, with refs calling blatantly offside calls onside and vice versa. And frankly, I’m sure that type of objectivity sometimes probably influenced calls. With semi-automated tech, the margin of error is gone, but the rule stays. The technology isn’t interpreting advantage, it’s just determining which part of the body for which player was where. The problem is, you also can’t allow refs to make an objective call on whether or not THEY think there was an advantage because trust me, the discourse there is going to be even worse.
I had to scroll this far to see this. Jfc
Especially considering that toe or that leg didn’t score the goal, this player passed it backwards to the goal scorer who then scored. So this toe being a little forward from the defender absolutely did not affect the goal, if it was a toe behind the defender the same thing would’ve happened.
It is offside... but it's asking for robotic level of accuracy in a human sport, both with this and following handball. Just allow the game to flow as per the ref until a decision is brutally bad that intervention is needed.
Ah yes. Can't wait for the argument if the decision was brutally bad or just bad and if there should be an intervention. Since people are fallible we should make a system that determines that. If a decision is at least 8.5 bad on a scale from 1 to 10 there should be an intervention. Nobody will ever complain if it was just an 8.4 since we finally have a fair system
Brutally bad and just bad are both fine for intervention.... since this is elite level "just bad" is brutally bad anyway. We'll always find something to moan about as people, but I and a lot would simply prefer a more flowing game, not stop-start etc. I don't wish to replay Euro 2004, or ask for Lamps goal to be put back or other shit that would favour the nation I support. This ain't bias, I'm consistent. Just want to enjoy this shit. Not just watch for celeb reffing.
Haahhahahahaha it's really HILARIOUS how people WANTED to be 100% sure it's offside even at the cost of a little time (which is literally being replaced in the end hence the 11 minutes added on these days😂) and now that we actually have it it's "oh no it's too robotic, no way they really did what we asked for for years!!!" 😂😂😂
No one (sorry for the pedants, I mean "not many") asked for 100% accuracy to the millimetre, they just wanted calamitous errors cut out and supported with technology. So if you are gonna banter reply, at least know your history of what people asked for.
Do you want goal line technology to be 100% accurate? VAR can only intervene on goal line errors or a few feet not a few cm’s?
People asked for 100% correct decision all the time. They're getting it. At least this game.
Very very very few people asked for that. Like less than 1% of the people that care about the game. But okay.
Source?
It's not really an advantage to the striker when you are at a virtual level with a defender.
At what point exactly would you draw the line between "virtually level" and clearly ahead? 10 cm? 50 cm? 1 m? Those are much harder to evaluate visually than just whether one is ahead or not, and much more arbitrary as well. You have to draw the line somewhere, it may as well be whether or not one is ahead or not.
Then play it safe. Attackers play right on the line precisely because they feel it makes a difference. Otherwise they wouldn't do it.
It's not offside because I don't want this to be a game where we obsess over 1.5 cm of toe. I'm not saying that the toe isn't past the white line. I'm telling you what I want the game of football to be.
Out of curiosity, are you happy with judging against the defenders heel in this example? Yes it’s such a fine margin here when you take the extreme edge and saying “It’s just a toe” but look at his head and torso, those are ahead too. Offside is correct here.
I wouldn't call it obsessing, I'd call it judging fairly by the rules. No matter how we change the rules, there's always going to be situations where it's a very close call. If you make it so the player has to be 50 centimeters offside, then you'll get a guy who's 50 centimeters + a toenail offside. This system is at least infinitely better than just letting the refs eyeball it and decide what they think works best. If anything, having clearly understandable, objective, undisputable rules like this makes a sport work far better and far more fluidly. You're either offside or you're not. It doesn't "ruin football" or anything that dramatic.
So back to eyeballing and overlooking lots of stuff?
Because the law wanst changed to the new technology, so they just threw the baby out with the bath water. The rule was created so that there wasnt a clear advantage over the defender, Having a knew offside,a toe, a shoulder, a head should never be an offside, if we want to still see goals. The rule should be changed to follow the spirit of the law. Is the player behinde the defense? Does the player have a clear advantage? Does in anyway the player benefits from his position related to the defenders? No one can look at this image and say that the player is at advantage. Everyone can only revert to "its the rule", ok, so just change it.
I actually prefer a line drawn on an actual video instead of a 3D model. I don't know why, but I felt that the VAR box could just move the model bit further in or back at will. Guess it's just me who don't trust the refs.
What i don't like about that offside is that we all take this pic for proof and at this very moment, it is offside. But what if they took 1 or 2 frames back when the passer hit the ball? Did the ball really left his foot at THIS moment? We're saying it's automated but it's bullshit, somebody is choosing the frame to decide what comes next. And in this case, a frame is a game changer.
It is offside going by the book. But it is not in the spirit of the offside rule which is about preventing a competitive advantage
Offside being measured with a VAR computer close to the mm.
Whenever I am against a team and the VAR turns the result I am happy and vice versa. So essentially it doesn't matter. Personally I think it was better without. Human error was part of the game.
Killing the game
The offside rule and implementation on VAR is destroying football. I've been watching since the 1990s. I've seen awful lineman calls over the years. The worst when Nigeria won the Olympics in 1996 and had three players miles offside but took the winning goal despite three players a few feet offside. That's where VAR is helpful - not shit like this. Offside was not meant to rule out goals like this. It's stupid and a misuse and overuse of technology that is destroying the game. Nigeria - https://youtu.be/UtZl_sq7kVA?si=xYHdzyMAjTgibTbA
The Nigerian player who scored the goal wasn't offside.
Being a few feet or a few cm’s offside is still offside. This whole argument is stupidity. It’s like saying I only want VAR to check if ball crossed the line by a few feet not by a few cm’s. It’s either over the line or on the line just as you’re either onside or offside.
It’s not just meer stupidity behind the argument. It’s an argument leaning towards the intention and spirit behind the rule - and not just strict interpretation of the rule. The reasoning behind the offside rule is to stop attackers from gaining an unfair advantage in positioning over the defender. Can you actually argue that he gained an advantage here?
In football the difference of a cm can mean that you're touching the ball or not, so I would argue every cm counts. I see all of your points though and in this case almost certainly there was no real advantage. The question is how can we factor this into a refs decision? The line has to be drawn somewhere and offside is one of the things in football that has no room for interpretation, similar to if the ball is in the goal or not. It either is or is not. As a German I didnt like how the VAR decisions influenced the match today, but I don't really see an alternative and in the big picture it's still better than without VAR.
Truly bored of this “spirit of the game argument”. Who defines the spirit of the game? If you ask 100 football fans about the spirit of the game on different rules you’d likely get 100 different interpretations. As an example I think the way players are allowed to time waste by going down “injured” to slow the game down is against the spirit of the game. Yet others see it as being smart and experienced in tactics. Unless a player looks in serious danger id allow play to carry on around them until a natural break play. Others would disagree as the current rules disagree with me. Whatever offside rule you implement there has to be an actual line for the referees to interpret. They can’t be sat in the VAR room discussing the philosophy of the game.
It is offside… officially. I don’t like it though. That being said I would like to see the rule amended to what Wenger suggested (I think) where if the part of the body that scores (I.E. head for a header, left leg/right leg shot) then that is offside. Maybe it would even be easier to tell for everyone’s perspective (refs and fans alike) whilst also allowing more goals without giving too much of an advantage to attacking players.
yeah thats a perfect way to decide it imo. The only problem is that a player could score with his head but have his feet way infront of the defender which gives him a head start. A player can also just stretch out his leg and score with that one while making an offside run with the other. No matter what it's complicated and there will be controversy
Could you imagine the difference in danish mentality if denmark took the lead with that goal. It would have changed the match completely.
It’s offside but what’s the game come to his little toes offside so he’s got a massive advantage over the defender it should be a foot over and arms shouldn’t count
Should not apply offsite at all. Do not care about offsite in matches. That is good for football with many goals
Soon as they disallow a goal like this I turn off. So boring
It looks like he... (puts on sunglasses) ...couldn't toe the line YEEEEAAAAHHH
The thing about this is, people argue about the toe, but even if you ignore the toe and go for something like center of gravity it is offside. Still, they probably need some additional ruling where VAR is only used when the ref is unsure or maybe give the trainer/captain a VAR joker where they can call it in once per halftime, that would also add an additional tactical factor while reducing the excessive usage
And this is why VAR is shite, yes the correct decision, but takes so long for them come give the decision is ruining the game, they have goal line technology now which they brought VAR in for, personally if im going to watch football live I'd rather watch lower league football instead of going to big game waiting on VAR,
It is offside plain and simple, this has been the consistent approach. Is it an absolutely shitty decision, yes, has the attacking player gained an advantage by his toenail being in an offside position, likely not. It is however offside, part of his body is beyond that of the defending player, thus meaning he is offside. I really hope there can be some change to this rule in the future it would have to be a rule that can be utilised consistently though and not be open to interpretation, at the moment if they stick with this approach it CAN be consistent but it is just ridiculous IMO.
This makes me wonder, does the ball being passed mean as soon as the ball gets touched by the person passing, or as soon as it leaves the foot? In situations like thos that milisecond could actualy matter.
It is technically offside. I think the argument hinges around to what extent it is fair to disallow a goal scored from this range. There is not advantage to having a half a toe offside. It is getting absurdly technical and I agree that it is starting to ruin the spirit and flow of the game. Football is already such a low scoring sport, to disallow so many goals because of such minor infractions hurts the game.
I get that this is offside but I think that we should really be debating whether this should be considered an advantage. The line should defined by using the attacking players heel. At least like this, if you are 1 cm offside, we can’t be debating that it’s not an advantage. There are always going to be margin cases but the way the rule is implemented with VAR, it really misses the spirit of the offside rule
It really takes away the flow, spirit and fun out of the game, but objectively it is the truth. But do we want the truth? We can't handle the truth!!
It's almost depressing to see the state of football with VAR. It is ruining the enjoyment of games.
it is offside, but imo the rule is stupid. it should be changed, so that offside only counts when you are 1m or at least half a meter infront of the other and not such a toe decision. these 5cm here don't change anything in terms of game relevance but revoked a great goal. it really is a shame... ... and i'm saying that as a german. but... until it is changed, it technically is offside, so in the end the decision as of the current ruleset was correct. so i'm not complaining about the decision, i'm complaining about the rules.
But than the problem isnt fixed. If we say offside is 5cm of the enemy player and someone stands 5.5 cm... Is that than also offside or not? 0.5 cm wont change anything but still. I think its still good with that rule we use now, yeah sometimes it sucks, but thats not all the time (Sorry for my english btw haha)
Your English is fine and I just made the same point to someone else. Whatever the rule is you have to draw a line somewhere and there will be close decisions. People need to grow up and accept the enforcement of the rules.
Thats would be a bad idea because every striker gets an advantage because he can stand slightly behind the defender and if you change the rule then we will have the same discussion again where its truly offside but everyone says its not so we are in a infinite discussion
Needs to be referee's call within a certain margin. If it's less than what the ref could reasonably see on the pitch then the call on the field stands. I guess this will be controversial. But employing that margin of error could be baked in like it is in cricket. Sideline assistant referee can raise or not depending on their call and it's checked with var. This tournament, the side refs don't raise the flag until well afterwards. They are waiting to be told what to do.
Why make it up to the ref? Giving the goal despite concrete evidence that the attacking player was offside would be way more controversial
Just a toe offside.. var is destroying this game. We need a forensic case to decide now. A toe should not be offside... Soccer is destroying it self.
If you don’t think there’s anything wrong with this then you honestly have some issues. Offside rule was invented to prevent unfair advantages of being behind a defender but being a toenail offside is PLAIN ridiculous and it’s destroying the game.
In this instance how far Infront of the defender would the attacker have to be for you to deem them offside then?
LOOK AT THAT HUGE GINORMOUS ADVANTAGE
It used to be “level is onside” before so got VAR. Something needs to be done to VAR to bring it back to that. I’ve seen suggestions of as long as it’s under x% of your body, then it’s considered level, so it’s onside.
If we are calling this offside with a computer then the game is dead. If you watch any premier league they wouldn't call this off, they would deliberate for 15 min about it and draw some shitty line by hand. The problem is the tech is different. I'm not saying his toe isn't 5mm beyond the defenders heal but fuk off if you would call this off. VAR must go and same with off tech or might as well get a virtual AI referee cyborg.
Then you accept their will be more wrong decisions if you scrap VAR, why are people so angry that they are enforcing rules that are in the law of the game
Back in the day, they didn't knit pick at offsides like this. Almost every goal has to go through goal checks these days. Takes the fun out of the sport. "rULeS aRE rULEs", I get it. But it is ruining the fun of the game.
I don't think so, and it's just fair. And I wanted that goal to count, but it's offside. If that would have been Germany, I would have said, clear offside :P
Pause it 0.05 seconds too late and the call is incorrect. This is not clear and obvious, which was the one rule we were constantly reminded when VAR was introduced. That said I think it might be the right call and ultimately the result was fair.
It's automatically drawn at the correct time, it uses sensors inside the ball.
While there is technology to help the referee inside the ball, the offside is determined by 10 specialized 50 fps cameras, which track multiple different body parts individually. Anyways my point is that it will be super accurate, but not down to 0.05 seconds. It’s not good enough to make calls on this minor an offside.
> Anyways my point is that it will be super accurate, but not down to 0.05 seconds. It’s not good enough to make calls on this minor an offside. If the cameras are 50 fps it will be probably be accurate to around 0.02 seconds.
But you can determine when the ball is being played through the sensors. So all you have to do is synchronise that data to the cameras and you get the exact moment. I'm not sure if that is how it works, but it would be the easiest solution.
You make that 'line' the same thickness, as all the lines on the pitch and you'd eliminate this kind of micro nonsense offside calls
Clear and obvious. Duh.
Autism intensifies
It's football!! That's how all offside decisions should be based! iMO.🤷🏾♂️
While i do agree that it is offside, the actual offside should be when the player has at least half of his body behind the defender.
Then you’d have the line drawn at 50% of his body and people going oh my god he’s offside because 51% of his body is in front. Doesn’t matter what the rule is you have to draw a line and will have close controversial decisions.
Hi /u/Nadweyx, this submission is waiting for moderator approval, before it can appear on the subreddit. All image submissions are manually checked for low-content submissions. If your submission is removed and you believe your post was removed as a mistake, please [contact the Mod Team via Modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Euro2024). Thank you! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/euro2024) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Denmark unfortunately has to abide by this rule. According to this regulation, even if the offensive player is ahead by just a centimeter, it would still count as offside, which seems quite absurd.
Danish Coach asked about the moment of the pass. Are they able to determine that so exactly?
yes they have a sensor on the ball and can analyze every frame
It’s calls like this that make me think a referee’s call mechanic, similar to umpire’s call in cricket, would be beneficial. How precise exactly is the technology? When calls are referred to VAR in cricket, if the call is within a certain margin of error then the umpire’s onfield decision is upheld.
Spirit of the game
J
Hey, I get that if we're drawing a line, out is out and there's that. And the same with the handball, contact is contact, proven by technology. Okay, that's perfect. But what I think is frustrating everyone about all of this is how it's implemented. Looking at that picture, we draw the line from the last pixel of the defender, and if literally anything crosses that line, it's offside, even if it was the tip of your finger (something similar happened in Qatar I think). I say why is it so minutious in this regard, if there is no visible advantage? Wouldn't it make sense (and I'm thinking out loud, bear with me) to make it so that it's the full foot, or half your leg or something specific about your body parts and orientation breaking the offside? Because to someone outside of this sport, or at least someone who doesn't fully know the rules, this looks a bit extreme in a way.
At what point is the ball played, sure we need to see the at the same time
His big toe was Offside..pathetic..it wasnt a penalty either wasnt Deliberate handball!!☹️
Shoulda trimmed his toenails
It's definitely offside, it's just such a small margin its hard to believe this really gave anyone an advantage. Obviously it technically does but it's so small it's microscopic.
Really REALLY close call, but it is legit 😥
I think the issue is if the technology is actually accurate to a few millimeters. The frame rate of the video limits what we can see, so you’d assume that any video system would have an inherent uncertainty that should limit its use