Should this be offside?

The fact that you have a third of people saying 'yes', and two thirds saying 'no' highlights the real issue. The decision ultimately still stands with the officials, whether its the on field ones, or the ones controlling VAR. Its a subjective decision, and as we don't all think the same, you're going to get different answers. VAR works when the result isn't subjective. The question here should be, does the 'interfering with play' rule need to be looked at? There's too much ambiguity when it comes to instances like this. I've always been of the view, if you're on the field, you're interfering with play one way or the other.

 

I think it’s the clear and obvious error rule that need amending and the fact that VAR overrules the on field officials. You can’t say to me that the decision was clear and obvious.
For me as the assistant and ref judged it was a good goal it should stand.

VAR is causing officials to be more cautious in making decisions and waiting for VAR to make decisions for them, which is wrong.
If the assistant thinks it’s offside, let them make that decision. If the player is stood offside and the assistant missed it then overrule it. If it’s a split second run where the attackers left nipple is closer to the goal than the defender let it stand.

 

no because he clearly committed the offense

 

The goalkeeper has to account for the offside player regardless of if he touches it or not, to that end he is actively involved in play. Personally I dislike that aspect of the rule, it should be black and white, he was in an offside position hence the goal is offside.

 

This is the real issue for me. I think the technology works, but it's in the hands of people who don't know how to use it, hamstrung by rules designed before the technology existed.

It's like someone has gone back in time, given Christopher Colombus a sat nav, and told him to find the Americas.

 

The problem for me is the circumstances under which VAR is used. Clear and obvious error. If that usage guideline was adhered to, there would hardly be any VAR decisions. Sledgehammer to crack a nut springs to mind,

 

isn’t this guy playing him on…

 

It looks a balls up from start to finish this one.
Appalling all round

 

Perfectly gd goal disallowed agaib, var is a travesty sometimes, the guy offside kinda goes for it bit its past him and in b4 he can get anywhere near it.

 

That’s a good spot with the defender on the wing. What a cóck up.

 

If we're saying that defender plays him inside then surely the guy who took the corner and has crossed the byline is offside and the goal should be struck off?

I'm just being picky, I guess. But that's the problem with the offside rule, it's impractical and can't account for every situation.

We have one argument saying the guy who goes for the ball but fails to touch it is offside because he made the attempt. If you're on the pitch you're interfering with play.

This is countered by the idea that a guy stood half the width of the pitch away is playing him onside even though he can have no impact on the ball or player. Again, if you're on the pitch you're interfering with play.

But then the guy who took the kick is back on the field of play (both feet are over the line) and given he's on the pitch he must be interfering with play too - even though, as with the defender, he cannot impact the play at this point.

As someone who did refereeing and ran the line for a while at youth level it's a nightmare. I hate the offside law and every change to it makes it gradually worse despite the intention of clearing it up.

 

And goal raking.

 

The player is in an offside position, half heartedly attempts to play the ball and, even had he made contact, the keeper was never getting anywhere near and doesn't even attempt to.

You have to be some sort of vindictive, sadist uber-lovely person to disallow that. Absolutely no common sense applied anymore.

 

Definitely, the keeper wouldn't be able to dive for a player stood on or nearly on the goal line for one thing, defenders having to hang back all the time.
Just sack of VAR and go back to what it was, none of this ridiculous stuff like a players big toe making him off.

 

Whilst I agree with most of what you say, the rule doesn't refer to "interfering with play" (I'm not sure where that phrase actually comes from) but it says "seeking to gain advantage". Subtle difference I accept.

In this particular case the player went to head the ball then ducked out of the way so I'd say he was definitely seeking to gain an advantage. But then again, you could apply exactly that logic to our first goal at the Sty, Aichison was offside when Cole played it forwards so Aichison jumped over the ball to show that he wasn't seeking an advantage, BUT he certainly was at the instant that Cole played the ball.

I very nearly argued myself round full circle which shows what an awful rule it is. It requires the officials to effectively read a player's mind.

Edit; I haven't voted cos I really can't make my mind up....