Official Football Thread

I think the only way Liverpool throws it away is if Van Dijk suffers a long-term injury, or a large number of key players are simultaneously injured for some time. They've shown that they can win without Alisson, Alexander-Arnold, Fabinho, Salah, Mane or Firmino. They didn't have Alisson, Fabinho, Salah and -until 73'- Firmino against Everton and they battered them. Fabinho and Mane weren't playing against Bournemouth yesterday and Alexander-Arnold started on the bench, another comfortable victory. Their depth is good enough to hold the line if there are 3-4 starters missing.

City is dead in the water, they clearly failed to respond to Laporte's injury and just haven't been anywhere as decisive as they've been in the last two years. I expected them to focus on the Champions League this season, and they'll probably do that to an even greater extent now. Leicester is the only team that has an outside chance of taking down Liverpool, though their current form is unlikely to last and they're much more vulnerable to injuries.

tl;dr - Injury is the only football-related thing that can stop Liverpool from winning the title.
 
Black Wizard said:
And it could be that long before Manchester United win the league again.
Click to expand...

Doubt it. United are far too wealthy and popular not to have a resurgence soon. They are still attractive enough for top players to want to play for them, and top managers to want to manage them.

It's far more likely for United to win a title in the next five years than it is for them to not win one for 30 years.
 
Arsenal appointed former player as manager, he is yet to create the same boost Solskjær did a year ago. Right now Arsenal look more like United did in the worst period ... after Sunny got the permanent job.

Now with both Everton and Arsenal with caretaker managers, maybe we could have all post-SAF Man Utd managers in the Premier League before the end of 2019? Moyes back at Everton and Van Gaal to sort out Arsenal's defensive worries?
 
So after the EPL started using VAR, we have had several episodes of the VAR team using plenty of time to call offside, where the margins are down to a few cm.

What I have yet to hear is a discussion on whether it makes sense from a physics point of view to operate with such small margins. Consider the following facts:
  1. When the pass is made, the ball is in contact with the player's foot for maybe 0,01s.
  2. The attacking (potentially offside) player and the defending player may be moving in opposite direction, both with a speed from 0 to 10 m/s.
  3. If one is moving at 10 m/s, one covers 10 cm in 0,01 s.
My point is: When it is not even defined whether the pass is made when the ball first makes contact with the foot, or when the ball leaves the foot, it makes no sense to rule offside when the margin is so small that the above would make a difference between offside and no offside. In other words, stop using minutes on decisions that are down to centimeters. If you have only one picture frame where the ball is in contact with the foot, and can't see clearly whether it is offside, then don't rule offside.

The point of VAR should be to help referees correct obvious mistakes and judge situations they don't see clearly.
 
Re: Offside and Var.

I think VAR isn't the problem here. The offside rule is the problem. VAR is just applying the rule to the letter of the law. The rule used to be if the attacker was level he's considered onside, now it's a ridiculous situation where a millimetre of a players body counts. I personally think the attacking player should have to be totally in front of the defender to be considered offside. The rule exists to stop players hanging around the box for the entire game, we don't need to get forensic about it.
 
Dr. Eddies Wingman said:
What I have yet to hear is a discussion on whether it makes sense from a physics point of view to operate with such small margins. Consider the following facts:
  1. When the pass is made, the ball is in contact with the player's foot for maybe 0,01s.
  2. The attacking (potentially offside) player and the defending player may be moving in opposite direction, both with a speed from 0 to 10 m/s.
  3. If one is moving at 10 m/s, one covers 10 cm in 0,01 s.
My point is: When it is not even defined whether the pass is made when the ball first makes contact with the foot, or when the ball leaves the foot, it makes no sense to rule offside when the margin is so small that the above would make a difference between offside and no offside. In other words, stop using minutes on decisions that are down to centimeters. If you have only one picture frame where the ball is in contact with the foot, and can't see clearly whether it is offside, then don't rule offside.
Click to expand...

A guy who color commentates Premier League games on TV here bangs on and on and on about this every time VAR is used for a close offside decision, sounding noticably pissed off each time a goal is disallowed in the end and going on a rant.
 
srfc said:
I think VAR isn't the problem here. The offside rule is the problem. VAR is just applying the rule to the letter of the law. The rule used to be if the attacker was level he's considered onside, now it's a ridiculous situation where a millimetre of a players body counts. I personally think the attacking player should have to be totally in front of the defender to be considered offside. The rule exists to stop players hanging around the box for the entire game, we don't need to get forensic about it.
Click to expand...

The rule is still the same in that sense. If you are level, you are considered onside. The problem is we've become more, as you've put it, forensic about it, so there's greater effort to determine whether you actually are level or not.

It is indeed the application of VAR that is the problem, for the reasons Wingman stated. There isn't enough precision in VAR to disallow a goal due to a milimetric offside decision. For me, what ought to happen is for there to be a degree of negligibility in the application of VAR to offside decisions, that is, the call on the ground should stand if it's a milimetric decision.

The application of VAR in the Premier League is especially problematic compared to elsewhere, because the main official cannot overrule a decision made by the VAR office, nor can he reach a VAR decision himself. They did it to speed up the game, but it unjustly takes the authority away from the main official.
 
Yeah, I watch a good bit of Serie A, and I thought it had been working ok for the last two seasons, where most of the time the ref watches the video replay himself.
 
How do they interpret offside in Italy? I mean, in relation to the microscopic analysis we see in England. Does it work better, in your opinion?
I think VAR can definitely work, in some capacity but it hasnt been amazin so far. Apart from ridiculous offside decisions, the delay in celebratin for goals is quite a downer, its stealing some of the joy and passion from the game. I also think its crazy the the ref cant use a pitchside monitor.
Does anybody know, are the refs mic'd up in any countries, like in rugby? It works for rugby, I think. Its good for the crowd to have some idea whats goin on and why a decision has been made. Although the language used by soccer players, towards the ref, probably makes that a non starter.
 
You just get shown the two lines where the attacker and the defender are you don't see the process happening.

There was a terrible decision in a Napoli game about a month ago, when Llorente was rugby tackled in the box and a peno wasn't given as they interpreted Llorente as having made first contact, the opposition went right down the other end and scored, so it was a double whammy and the ref never went and looked at the replay.

From 2:46
 
Not sure about Evertons goal today. I think keepers generally get too much protection but something like that is usually a free and I really cant see how VAR decided otherwise.
 
Ooo man... Memphis Depay is injured... for at least half a year. He probably will not take part on the European Champions. :/
 
Liverpool eliminated Arsenal from the competition and essentially forfeited the next round. Absolute pisstake.

(I say that with the awareness that Arsenal very well could have lost to Villa themselves)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top