Offside

[WWFC4EVA]

So a corner taker can be classed as offside, for a phase well prior to a goal being scored....but a player directly offside during the current phase of play, leading to a goal, can be classed as onside...right, makes perfect sense that!!!
It seems more and more apparent that it depends totally on the club badge that's emblazoned on the players shirt!!!

 

[manchesterwolf17]

It's slowly killing the game tbh. The spontaneous eruption of excitement after a goal is scored is now always tempered as you wait for the almost inevitable VAR check. If excitement in any way is taken out of the game then you gradually erode its enjoyment and eventually its popularity.

Remember the most you've ever celebrated a goal. That will never be beaten now. VAR has killed the possibility of that.

And do you know what's worse - Is that the more significant the goal, the more you're going to doubt it ultimately being given. It's human nature.

 

[WWFC4EVA]

Remember the most you've ever celebrated a goal. That will never be beaten now. VAR has killed the possibility of that.

And do you know what's worse - Is that the more significant the goal, the more you're going to doubt it ultimately being given. It's human nature.

It's **** mate!!!
I wasn't at the game today as I was working and had to make do with watching live updates on Flashscore. When our goal flashed up I totally forgot where I was and went absolutely mental. Then it dawned on me that I have no idea what was really happening and there was every chance it could be reviewed and overturned. I immediately became subdued and awaited news of a VAR intervention...it didn't come, thankfully but that euphoric moment of ecstasy had been lost!!!
It's crap, that moment, that feeling, that's the very pinnacle of being a football fan and it's been stolen!!!

 

[thetwistedsock]

Remember the most you've ever celebrated a goal. That will never be beaten now. VAR has killed the possibility of that.

And do you know what's worse - Is that the more significant the goal, the more you're going to doubt it ultimately being given. It's human nature.

Sad fact.

 

[manchesterwolf17]

It's **** mate!!!
I wasn't at the game today as I was working and had to make do with watching live updates on Flashscore. When our goal flashed up I totally forgot where I was and went absolutely mental. Then it dawned on me that I have no idea what was really happening and there was every chance it could be reviewed and overturned. I immediately became subdued and awaited news of a VAR intervention...it didn't come, thankfully but that euphoric moment of ecstasy had been lost!!!
It's crap, that moment, that feeling, that's the very pinnacle of being a football fan and it's been stolen!!!

Couldn't agree more.

I heard Danny Murphy on Talk Sport this week - Jim White was smugly questioning on him on whether he wants incorrect goals to stand -

Murphy responded - Well, if it means that a 7 year old can celebrate a last minute winner with his Dad without fear that it will be ruled out for a toenail being offside then yes.

Spot on.

 

[manchesterwolf17]

Perfect example being shown on MOTD now with the first NF goal.

Who the hell as a fan knows whether that's going to be on or off?

It baffles me how much they celebrate when a goal is given after a check. I barely move. It's just not the same at all.

 

[Contrarian]

It's slowly killing the game tbh. The spontaneous eruption of excitement after a goal is scored is now always tempered as you wait for the almost inevitable VAR check. If excitement in any way is taken out of the game then you gradually erode its enjoyment and eventually its popularity.

It's strange how it's changed. Every goal we score, I always initially think it's going to be disallowed. Even Podence thunderbolt today - did someone dare pass forwards in the build up? Probably offside. Any West Ham players lying on the ground in our half? Could well be pulled back for a free kick. That actually happened in the goal v Newcastle.

I'm now of the thinking that every goal scored now, *could* be disallowed if the officials look long and hard enough. The key is how much effort they put in to disallowing it. How far back they go. How they define this "phases of play" concept that seems to stretch depending on venue and shirt colour.

A big part of the problem is that it's worse in the ground, but Premier League football is now an entertainment product with most money coming in from viewers all over the world.

 

[sillytuna]

Just saw the Utd goal. I genuinely think that's even worse than salah's. Utterly ridiculous decision.

 

[Contrarian]

Couldn't agree more.

I heard Danny Murphy on Talk Sport this week - Jim White was smugly questioning on him on whether he wants incorrect goals to stand -

That's pathetic. Because VAR still allows mistakes to stand - and adds in it's own set. Games are still being decided on crucial penalties and free kicks that shouldn't have been given. And others that should be, but aren't given. Injury time is still utter nonsense. They even improved it in the World Cup, but our lot can't be bothered.

Didnt' some report look it into and estimate that crucial decisions had gone from something like 90% correct to 93% correct with VAR? i.e. It just isn't worth it for the cost, financial and emotional. What we really need is better quality refereeing, especially in our league.

 

[jrpb-3]

think that by the letter of the latest attempt at defining the offside rules there is so much to interpret that both Salah and Rashford could equally have been ruled onside or offside depending on the ref, and for either decision VAR wouldn’t have overruled as not a clear and obvious error.

The problem with offside at the moment is the rules themselves, all the changes have just made it worse.

 

[manchesterwolf17]

That's pathetic. Because VAR still allows mistakes to stand - and adds in it's own set. Games are still being decided on crucial penalties and free kicks that shouldn't have been given. And others that should be, but aren't given. Injury time is still utter nonsense. They even improved it in the World Cup, but our lot can't be bothered.

Didnt' some report look it into and estimate that crucial decisions had gone from something like 90% correct to 93% correct with VAR? i.e. It just isn't worth it for the cost, financial and emotional. What we really need is better quality refereeing, especially in our league.

Absolutely. And most crucial of all - Fans. Real fans. Not some little tit behind a keyboard, absolutely hate it. Because they know what it does to their experience of the game. How it kills the joy of a moment and fills it with trepidation.

 

[maws]

Mate I’ve given up with the rules as I’ve no idea what they are anymore? Salah offside last week but benefits from it today Raul offside but doesn’t benefit with touches from opposition defenders being the last touch? Hand ball rule- anyone know the rules? Time added on anyone know who keeps track of it? Free kicks being taken far from where they were meant to, goalies holding the ball longer than 6 seconds, players gaining yards on throws the list goes on it’s all so inconsistent. Mout actually took an elbow in the face today but no foul given and play was eventually stopped with the ref assuming Mout was faking it with cameras everywhere (except at Anfield in the last minute) is it so difficult for someone looking at the TV to inform the ref there was an elbow and he isn’t faking it? Sad indictment of the modern game but I didn’t celebrate Raul’s goal as I guessed it would suffer VAR treatment. One last thing the professional foul. Where players know they’re only going to get a yellow and foul a player usually in full flow as Traore was today. Fans want to see entertainment and players in full flow running at a defence is entertaining only to be chopped down and a yellow card. Make it instant red and eradicate it from the game oh and finally **** VAR

Excellent post…. I’ll add to it, if the ref today had already booked Rice earlier the traore fouls a sending off for 2 yellows, and Rice wouldn’t have made it, ref bring too lenient. Same happened to Casameiro as well, yet Semedo had to get subbed as he got the softest yellow, teams at the bottom get softer yellows, no 2 ways about it.

Whilst I’m ranting, Toney gets tgat penalty today how is Cuhna and Nunes fouls not penalties!!! It’s ****ing bonkers, VAR was supposed to sort this **** out.

As for offside it needs to return to if you’re in an offside position your offside, end of. Who alters these rules? Who gives them the authority to ruin our game? The worlds slowly been taken over by faceless ****s, trying to decide the rules for others. Offside and handball are indecipherable now

 

[JohnB]

Excellent post…. I’ll add to it, if the ref today had already booked Rice earlier the traore fouls a sending off for 2 yellows, and Rice wouldn’t have made it, ref bring too lenient. Same happened to Casameiro as well, yet Semedo had to get subbed as he got the softest yellow, teams at the bottom get softer yellows, no 2 ways about it.

Whilst I’m ranting, Toney gets tgat penalty today how is Cuhna and Nunes fouls not penalties!!! It’s ****ing bonkers, VAR was supposed to sort this **** out.

As for offside it needs to return to if you’re in an offside position your offside, end of. Who alters these rules? Who gives them the authority to ruin our game? The worlds slowly been taken over by faceless ****s, trying to decide the rules for others. Offside and handball are indecipherable now

Well said Julen.

 

[Plastic Shrapnel]

If the ref today had already booked Rice earlier the traore fouls a sending off for 2 yellows, and Rice wouldn’t have made it, ref bring too lenient. Same happened to Casameiro as well, yet Semedo had to get subbed as he got the softest yellow, teams at the bottom get softer yellows, no 2 ways about it.

The issue with that statement is that West Ham are beneath us.

 

[Contrarian]

How can any of the apologists for the officials justify the current interpretation of offside? Many goals disallowed for toenail offsides. Not forgetting ours against Liverpool, where it seems the officials just had a feeling that somebody somewhere was offside, they just weren't sure who. Yet Salah and Rashford, half a mile offside and the goals stand.

So exactly the incidents that the spirit of the offside rule is meant to prevent (i.e .goal hanging) are allowed, yet some great goals get disallowed for a shoulder or a heel being offside. This is so wrong.

We seem to have had a fair few disallowed in recent seasons, too. No problem with the blatant ones that would always have been disallowed. But the hairline ones that would have been goals at any point in the past 50 years. Though probably not at Anfield or Old Trafford of course - that's always been the case. Add those in and we might not be such low scorers!

Anyway, the whole point of the game is to score goals without cheating - and these millimetre offsides are pathetic as that just never was what the rule was meant to prevent. Especially irritating as it is still open to interpretation exactly how long they spend drawing the lines and interpreting phases of play to disallow goals for the unfavoured teams.

 

[sillytuna]

Those who make the laws of the game have long since forgotten that it's supposed to be about making the game better.

 

[blackbullyV2]

The offside law is clearly a joke right now. Salah's goal should never have stood, but as it did, why on earth was Raul's ruled out today?? The defender has the least touch, and it looked like he played the ball to me.

 

[VancouverWolf]

I honestly don't think this rule is that confusing.

If you are a member of the big six it will not be offside, if you are not a member then it will be offside.

Do you think Guo would go along with that double standard? He has invested a lot of money in Wolves and I doubt that he’d just roll over and accept some of the wild accusations posted on here.
Why would he? Billionaires are not usually stupid or tolerant of situations that impact their fortunes or portfolios.

I presume every journalist, author, tv network and newspapers would just love to get their hands on on any piece of evidence that would make them very, very rich if they broke a story of ref corruption.

However, as much as I doubt deliberate corruption or biased decisions by refs , I must say that I don’t have enough info to be sure.

 

[SA Wolf]

Those who make the laws of the game have long since forgotten that it's supposed to be about making the game better.

Almost every change that is made in the game erodes the enjoyment for me. The last law change that improved the game was 3 points for a win and that was introduced in 1981, over 40 years ago.
Since then, we've had numerous law changes and I can't think of 1 that has improved the game and most seem to be at best neutral (goal-line technology) and at worst to spoil the game I've enjoyed for more years than I care to remember - VAR, 3 subs, 5 subs, offside interpretation, golden goal, 6 second rule for goalkeepers (never enforced anyway, so goalies hold onto the ball forever), the list goes on......
Whether FIFA, UEFA or even the Premier League get involved in changing the rules; it results in a worse product. Leave the **** alone!!!!

 

[Jonzy54]

I remember towards the end of George Best’s career he went off to play in America .There is a clip of him waltzing through the opposition defence beating player after player.
It was a wonderful goal but no doubt VAR would have killed the spontaneity by finding something wrong with Walton saying it was the correct decision

 

[Jonzy54]

Almost every change that is made in the game erodes the enjoyment for me. The last law change that improved the game was 3 points for a win and that was introduced in 1981, over 40 years ago.
Since then, we've had numerous law changes and I can't think of 1 that has improved the game and most seem to be at best neutral (goal-line technology) and at worst to spoil the game I've enjoyed for more years than I care to remember - VAR, 3 subs, 5 subs, offside interpretation, golden goal, 6 second rule for goalkeepers (never enforced anyway, so goalies hold onto the ball forever), the list goes on......
Whether FIFA, UEFA or even the Premier League get involved in changing the rules; it results in a worse product. Leave the **** alone!!!!

I don’t disagree but that wasn’t a law change.
As I mentioned in the week there have always been 17 laws of the game with the 18th being common sense .
Obviously many of the laws say’ In the opinion of the referee’ which is open to interpretation but we have seen so many variations of what constitutes offside since the advent of VAR.
A few years ago I taught my wife and Granddaughter what constitutes offside but they haven’t a clue these days .
Football is and should be a simple game but it is now on the road to ruin because of the external meddling .

 

[sedgwolf1980]

It's strange how it's changed. Every goal we score, I always initially think it's going to be disallowed. Even Podence thunderbolt today - did someone dare pass forwards in the build up? Probably offside. Any West Ham players lying on the ground in our half? Could well be pulled back for a free kick. That actually happened in the goal v Newcastle.

I'm now of the thinking that every goal scored now, *could* be disallowed if the officials look long and hard enough. The key is how much effort they put in to disallowing it. How far back they go. How they define this "phases of play" concept that seems to stretch depending on venue and shirt colour.

A big part of the problem is that it's worse in the ground, but Premier League football is now an entertainment product with most money coming in from viewers all over the world.

I’m exactly the same.

 

[sedgwolf1980]

It’s crazy how all these years later it comes back to that famous Cloughy quote, which really couldn’t be more apt.

 

[sedgwolf1980]

Just to add aswell, Rauls goal yesterday came off the defender.

One law, 2 different interpretations of it, depending on what badge is on the shirt.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Just to add aswell, Rauls goal yesterday came off the defender.

One law, 2 different interpretations of it, depending on what badge is on the shirt.

Exactly .

joke

 

[maws]

The issue with that statement is that West Ham are beneath us.

True, though they weren’t at the start of play. Also they’re definitely media darlings, you only had to look at the amount of press photographers down our goal compared to up theirs.

 

[Wolf316]

Do you think Guo would go along with that double standard? He has invested a lot of money in Wolves and I doubt that he’d just roll over and accept some of the wild accusations posted on here.
Why would he? Billionaires are not usually stupid or tolerant of situations that impact their fortunes or portfolios.

I presume every journalist, author, tv network and newspapers would just love to get their hands on on any piece of evidence that would make them very, very rich if they broke a story of ref corruption.

However, as much as I doubt deliberate corruption or biased decisions by refs , I must say that I don’t have enough info to be sure.

Whilst I don’t think there’s corruption there is absolute bias from refs we see it week in week out.

 

[Oh When the Wolves]

Just to add aswell, Rauls goal yesterday came off the defender.

One law, 2 different interpretations of it, depending on what badge is on the shirt.

Funny how match of the day doesn’t do a review of that

 

[glorybox]

Without doubt these interpretations of the offside law aren’t used anywhere outside the top few divisions. It seems like common sense prevails everywhere else.

 

[waggys left foot]

The authorities have tried to frame a rule to give attackers an advantage but by moving away from a black and white interpretation they have introduced inconsistency which just winds everyone up.

Back to the drawing board methinks .

 

[Willywolf]

The issue with that statement is that West Ham are beneath us.

Rice is a darling of the media/FA though. Seems because he plays for West Ham and England, has been linked with moves to bigger clubs, that he is relatively untouchable.

 

[WasStefan]

For me that Forest goal yesterday was offside, didn’t even look close in real time. Definitely something to do with the frame of which VAR used as the ‘point of contact with the ball’

 

[DJW]

Giving refs in this country all this technology is like giving a monkey a machine gun. Nothing wrong with VAR it's the fools using it.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Just to add aswell, Rauls goal yesterday came off the defender.

One law, 2 different interpretations of it, depending on what badge is on the shirt.

I think that incident compared with the Rashford one just shows how subjective the interpretation of these rules is. In both instances, the ball lands at the attacking player off the head of a defender. In both cases, the attacking player was offside (marginally in Raul’s case) when the ball was played by the attacking team. I’m ok with offside in both, or given in both, but to suggest that one is and one isn’t because the defender “played it” is wholly subjective. I mean why is the defender there in the first place? The defender is affecting play whether he touches the ball or not, or whether that touch is incidental to the flight or causes a significant change of direction. Defenders often play without even touching the ball, such as when blocking attackers or shielding the ball, so trying to distinguish them playing it by the degree of their touch on the ball is wide open to bias and subjectivity.

Now I get the reason for this stupid rule, it’s for the cases where a defender or keeper passes the ball to an attacking player who is standing in an offside position. If the referees are too stupid to apply the rule in a sensible and consistent manner, which they really shouldn’t be, then just revert to offside based purely on the position of the attacker, and introduce the technology trialled in Qatar to remove issues like Toti’s wrongly ruled out goal.

To add insult to injury, take the reverse and United’s equaliser yesterday. Now an attacker is in a clear offside position, and clearly affecting play by drawing defenders and the goalie and feigning a strike on the ball, yet because he doesn’t touch the ball, but his team mate does, who is only inches away does, it’s not offside? That’s not a rule failure, because there is a rule to say Rashford was affecting play in an offside position, that’s incompetence or bias by the officials. It’s giving licence to Rashford to continue to operate in an offside position which is giving him an advantage compared to the opposition.

 

[ANONYMOUS☆WOLF]

The current offside rule = whatever is most advantageous to the precious sky 6.
**** everyone else!

 

[Snarlingwolf]

Giving refs in this country all this technology is like giving a monkey a machine gun. Nothing wrong with VAR it's the fools using it.

Great analogy, DJW.

 

[Jonzy54]

Just to add aswell, Rauls goal yesterday came off the defender.

One law, 2 different interpretations of it, depending on what badge is on the shirt.

It was a deflection as opposed to a deliberate attempt to play the ball so it was the correct decision and not just a VAR interpretation.A deflection has always been interpreted as offside at the point of contact

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Giving refs in this country all this technology is like giving a monkey a machine gun. Nothing wrong with VAR it's the fools using it.

Nice analogy. I’ll chip in with the old favourite, they are like a monkey with a typewriter. Give them long enough and they will write Shakespeare, but in meantime, they will write a bunch of garbled nonsense.

 

[Jonzy54]

For me that Forest goal yesterday was offside, didn’t even look close in real time. Definitely something to do with the frame of which VAR used as the ‘point of contact with the ball’

I froze it and he was just onside

 

[SanFranWolf]

Like most, I have no idea what the rules for offside are.

They've taken them and made them so convoluted, nobody understands them.

I only found out last week that you can be offside from a backwards pass!

Offside should be as simple as - if you're ahead of the last defender IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE when the ball is played, you're off side.

...and you can't be offside if the ball is played backwards.

Easy.