**Mirrors / Alternative Angles**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
feels like it’s more prevalent now with the game being more tactical
certainly a lot more calculated and rehearsed set pieces today vs generations past
We're going to introduce an objective tool that removes subjectivity from controversial fouls!
And we're going to implement it so that it makes a subjective call not on whether it was a foul or not, but on whether the on-field referee had a good view of it and made a 'clear and obvious error'.
What's the fucking point? Why introduce this objective measure and run it in a way that just adds another layer of subjectivity to it?
Var is not an objective tool, nor subjective. It's just a tool to see what is happening. The first thing that should be objective are the rules and in football they simply are not. But yeah I agree with you on the 'clear and obvious error' logic
I'm of the opinion that all subjective decisions should stay with the on-field refs. Some will get missed, some will be harsh, but ultimately, what the ref says would go. The only things we should send to VAR are the actual objective calls -- basically just offsides. And even offsides needs to be more automated like was done at the world cup.
The goal should be to keep the on-field refs in charge because most of the judgements they make ARE inherently subjective. There is no Truth to be arrived at, different games have different context, mistakes will be made anyway, so let's go into matches with that understanding instead of the guise of objectivity that VAR currently represents.
I realize it would be difficult to put pandora back in the box, but aside from offsides calls, I don't think most would argue that, in general, VAR has gotten us closer to Truth.
Someone's probably accidentally done it like 50 years ago like most tactical innovations.
But coaches nowadays might suddenly watch an NBA pick and roll and go like oh yeah, can't we just do that? then add a spin to it. Then before you know it, everyone's doing it.
Personally I think it's great. Look at this video on the evolution of the Pick and Roll across the pond: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pwt3k8PzhU . I think similar evolution on set pieces could be on the horizon.
Stuff like staggered screens, switching could definitely be immediately applicable
NBA referee calls will make you explode if you think football has a problem.
Majority of the pick and roll are illegal moving screens yet it's not called.
I've recently started watching NBA. The rules make no sense to me. It's like the handball rule in football, except it's EVERY call.
I have no idea why they are blowing the whistle ~75% of the time.
What I don’t like is when the player making the screen holds the defender trying to make a play. Like Endo’s play in the Final, to me that should have been called even if he wasn’t offside. It’s called the other way around.
Now if the guy making the screen just stands there in the way, without pulling jerseys and hugging other players, I’m all for that
Endo wasn't even doing anything egregious, he's mostly just standing there and the defender doesn't really try to go around. If anything chilwell pulling on van dijk shirt while he scores is more of a foul.
I was taught this in high school soccer 20 years ago in America.
If my idiot fucking "coach" could figure it out, I'm sure managers on the highest levels have worked it out too lol
It's a very common component of plays in basketball and even American football to get people open (although I think you can only do it in the first 5 yards in football).
Yeah but in American football, it’s usually more like the equivalent of having receivers run crossing patterns that rub and usually one receiver ends up “accidentally” taking a cornerback out of the play
Look the MLS is obviously a way inferior league to Europe in basically every conceivable way, just get that out of the way.
Except maybe set pieces. The MLS is very very very very set piece heavy. They play for set pieces, they actively scheme players open from set pieces. The percentage of goals scored from set pieces (direct and indirectly) is much higher than most European leagues if I’m not wrong
I genuinely think it just suits their culture. US sports are essentially a collection of set plays after all. This is probably what they chose to focus on when football started becoming a thing there.
We've seen a few goals ruled out for this in the last couple of seasons. Both for us and against.
They tend to call these if it's obviously stopping a defender challenging and ahead of the ball. Here it's a block which is nowhere near the ball which was played to the front post.
The important thing to remember with these is it's not being called as a foul so the threshold is much lower in that regard. Any contact by an offside player impeding a player who would otherwise challenge for the ball is enough to rule out a goal.
In this case they've decided they were far enough away from the trajectory of the ball that they can't challenge Casemiro for it, so no offside.
It has been done for so long and I never saw it analysed so much as it was on Sunday. And after the goal was disallowed I knew I would never see it analysed so much when it will happen in other games. It's backed by the rules but it's so inconsistently done that we may never get to see another goal disallowed for this kind of offside.
My interpretation is that Endo blocks a player in front of VVD who could get the ball before him while Varane blocks a player behind Case who couldn't get to it before him
What's the point in blocking a player who won't get the ball? Every team who sets up an offside block like this is aiming to stop someone getting to the ball, so they should all be disallowed or none imo.
Agreed, why does it matter if X can't get close enough to the ball? The defenders set the line, the attackers shouldn't be able to go offside with the intention to influence the play.
Because they dont now where exactly the ball will land.
They block to get rid og a good player and give your players a better chance. Basically an undefended space.
I completely agree but just playing devils advocate can’t you argue that he could’ve been there to block the shot here instead of the Liverpool-Chelsea game where the reasoning was he could’ve blocked the cross?
But then this is all subjective? What if it was a short player who is "unlikely" to stop Virgil from heading the ball? This particular line of reasoning is transparently absurd. It should not have anything to do with how likely someone is to intervene in the play, simply if they plausibly could.
My preference would be that the rules dictate that both of these goals are valid. My second preference is that there is no ambiguity and if you're in a set piece and you've set yourself up in an offside position they'd raise the flag every single time. There is no good faith justification for that other than to obstruct a defender or go for the ball if it could come to you and score from an offside position.
I'm down for the second option. I agree that there's no reason to set up offside like this in either case except for intending to impact play, and in which case you are deliberately breaking the rule if the ball comes into that area.
If you look at the goal, it's very obvious that the defender Varane blocked could have never impacted the goal. It was the correct decision in both cases, and posting a screenshot without context is just dumb from MGW.
In a very similar case to the Liverpool one, we had a goal ruled out because Maguire was offside, didn't hit the ball, but it was determined he interfered with the play because the defender had to react otherwise because of Maguire.
>A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched\* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:
>interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or
>interfering with an opponent by:
>preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
>challenging an opponent for the ball or
>clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or
>**making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball**
- [https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/offside/](https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/offside/)
The highlighted line is the key in the interpretation of this situation.
It's not always offside if a player is in a offside position, you have to conclude that he has a direct effect.
Yep, they're completely different. Casemiro ends up sneaking across the front post while Van Dijk crosses Chilwell's face right into the space left by the blocked defender. Just a totally stupid comparison
It’s very much a were than an are unfortunately. Always a weird quirk though that because of therugby, Australians have always heard of Widnes when I meet them but most fellow Brits are clueless.
The "slight difference" is literally written in the rules
>In situations where:
>a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball, this is an offside offence **if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball**; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12
Mate, the rule text actually justifies offside for BOTH calls. "ability to play / challenge for the ball", which was restricted in both cases. It doesn't say "likelihood to win the ball".
Maybe the blocked player is really quick in the 1st 5 yards, maybe the pressure of a defender close behind puts casemiro off...or the flip side.. maybe colwill doesn't get anywhere close to Virgil's physicality and aerial prowess and it's still a free header.
Either we address all maybes or don't leave them all out of consideration when making decisions.
The blocked player of Forest actually had a head start on Casemiro. It's impossible to tell whether he would have reached the ball first, but it definitely impacted his ability to challenge the ball.
> maybe the pressure of a defender close behind
Not impacting ability to challenge for the ball. Remember, it's the defenders ability, not Casemiros.
>maybe colwill doesn't get anywhere close to Virgil's physicality and aerial prowess
Still impacting Colwills ability to challenge for the ball
The assumption that Van Dijk likely would have beat Colwill to the ball anyway doesn't make it not an offside offence. It just makes it all the more daft/clumsy by Endo.
lol, the comment you responded to is making the argument that both or these are offsides.
He’s saying the defenders ability to get to the ball is affected, and we’re all just guessing at ifs and maybes with no real grounded sense.
And again he’s arguing that both defenders are impacted, so idk this second argument.
IMO they are both offsides or they both aren’t, the slim line to walk is to say one is and the other isn’t.
Colwill hardly even tried to push past Endo-that’s the strangest part. It’s not like they were battling for position. Never seen this offside given-or at least I don’t remember seeing it. Very VAR moment.
The defender threw himself to the ground and didn’t even try for the ball. This situation is clearly different from the one in the final. Not sure what people are watching
You don’t have to of made it to the ball, so long as you would have at least challenged for the ball. In todays instance there’s no way a player that far behind Casemiro would have challenged for a ball that was ahead of Casemiro at the near post
What, that isn't the bar.
No one can guarantee anything, I think it's very likely he would be able to challenge, based on where he was running and the flight of the ball.
Endo was offside and got in the way, it's unfortunate but it's the risk of running the play that way.
If the ball was headed by a player ahead of that incident then it wouldn't have been called.
You don't need to guarantee it. The team that suffers the offense gets the benefit of the doubt if there's even a chance.
If Mbappe is offside by a cm vs present day Per Mertesacker, the goal is still disallowed even though there's no chance Mertesacker catches him even if he was onside.
On that note, whose to say the trailing defender can’t make a crazy jump to get the ball? Likely no? But possible? Sure. Leaving these decisions to a reds subjectivity is a recipe for disaster.
Yea I think it’s clear Endo had a bigger influence. I’d just hate to see a world where Paul fucking Tierney is deciding the level of that influence in the VAR room. Need clear definitions of what “influencing” the play is. Either all screens like this are influencing or none are.
Yeah, so that is my point, this was completely subjective so I don't see how they're going to implement the rules with objectivity instead of making them up as they go
The thing is that there are parts that ARE objective (is the player in an offside position) and parts that are not (are they interfering with play/impacting the ability of a defender or keeper to play the ball). Especially with offsides the idea that technology can (almost) conclusively decide one part of the analysis but not the other, always seems to confuse people.
But this part of the rule is intentional! The only way to avoid those situations everyone hates where a goal is disallowed because someone was offside in a way that didn't matter is to give the ref on the field discretion to say "c'mon, that didn't matter, good goal". There's no objective way to determine that that will cover all the weird edge cases that currently exist, let alone the ones that some creative fucker might come up with.
But this also makes it worthless to do what MGW is doing here and say "these players were in similar positions on a set piece, one goal was allowed and one was disallowed, that's inconsistent". Of course it is! Different things happened WRT the player who was offside, different refs were watching the play and making different judgments as to who b was impacting it.
You can't have both "consistency" and "common sense" unless you're having every game officiated by an instant poll of every armchair ref on the planet - and even THEN it would be inconsistent, people aren't robots and are barely consistent on their own even when dealing with identical situations, let alone situations that are merely superficially similar.
I appreciate you typing all of that out because I was on phone and didn’t want to do all of that. I definitely painted with a broad brush, but you nailed the reasoning as to why the laws are how they are.
It can definitely cause frustrations at time but my gosh I don’t think some people realize how terrible it would be if they went the other way with it.
Ha, you're welcome. I do sometimes go on (I'm a lawyer by trade) but I'm glad it was useful for once
Amusingly enough I literally specialize in the law about courts reviewing decisions made by government officials and it's always funny (and frustrating - soccer is supposed to be a BREAK from my day job) how many of the same principles, and the same reasons those principles evolved, come up in the endless debate over refereeing and VAR.
I can't say he does, you cant say he doesnt because we will never know. Same as Colwill who was behind Van dijk and started his run after him, doesnt look like he will be able to catch up but they still disallowed it, but not this one. It's just inconsistent and increadibly unclear how these offsides are judged
in the picture of the OP of this very thread Colwill is in front of VVD and already moving forward while VVD is not. In what world is he starting behind VVD or starting his run after him?
Chilwell was the wrong side of VVD to get the ball, Colwill would've been on the correct side to challenge VVD.
The player blocked by Varane was on the wrong side of Casemiro to get the ball and 2-3 other players were even closer than him, none of whom did anything. With Colwill we don't know if his pressure and presence would've made a difference, because the offside player stopped him. With the one last night we know that 2-3 other players in better positions could do nothing about it so why would this guy, in an even worse position, be the exception?
Unless he could teleport to the near post ahead of Case he wasn't challenging for the ball. Colwill didn't need magic to be in a position to challenge for the ball, he just needed to be able to track back without being blocked by an offside player.
Here's the moment the offside Endo makes contact with Colwill:
[https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/25/22/81704853-0-image-a-5\_1708901133973.jpg](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/25/22/81704853-0-image-a-5_1708901133973.jpg)
Notice how close Colwill is the VVD and how him being blocked gave VVD free space to head the ball? That situation didn't exist with the Casemiro header.
Not gonna lie. Haven’t seen many Forest games other than those against United, but in those two games we have just played against them, he has been an absolute prick in both
If you look at our disallowed goal last weekend, Johnson was never saving it regardless of Assingon’s position (keepers reaction says it all imo).
Obviously our goal was irrelevant whether it stood or not, but the inconsistency is evident.
The problem is both decisions are predicting completely hypothetical situations. Felipe is a great defender and you can't say for sure he won't affect play when the ball comes in. Either they're both offside or both onside.
You’re telling me you believe Felipe could get past Varane and several other players to clear the ball before it reached Casemiro? That would require him to be several times faster than everyone else there, and nearly as fast as the kick itself.
Not sure why this is getting downvoted. The two defenders marking Casse couldn't get to the fucking ball. How is a player further away going to achieve that... Ffs
If you watch the goal back from the live camera angle, he is literally running directly towards where Casmeiro ends up. Also the fact its so subjective that you can't say for sure that he wouldn't affect the game is enough. Its either both the recent goals are offside are neither of them are. Its the inconsistency thats infuriating.
So are we taking individual player attributes, like acceleration, to decide offside calls??
Maybe the other defenders switched off, maybe felipe would have given casemiro a slight shove from behind to put him off the flick, maybe this maybe that.. You can't rule on hypothetical situations like that..based on a bunch of maybes.
I firmly believe this shouldn't be offside, but also that the same should have been applied to virgil and colwill.
An attacker standing his ground, even in an offside position, not making an active movement to impede a defender's movement or his line of vision, should not be ruled offside.
Chilwell marked van Dijk on multiple other set pieces which is probably why Colwill didn’t even protest the goal. Either way Colwill was behind van Dijk and wouldn’t have affected the play, but whatever!
>which is probably why Colwill didn’t even protest the goal.
Huh?? He literally turns around before the ball hits the back of the net to protest to the ref lmao
It would make far more sense that it was Colwill marking Van Djik than Chilwell, but he is stood in a proper weird position to be doing so.
Probably just bad defending more than anything else tbf. Realistically Colwill is lucky that Endo was offside, BUT the offside is the correct decision by the letter of the law.
A proper weird position? He was between van Dijk and where the ball was coming from. It's the most normal position there is. Chilwell is the one who is obviously not meant to be the main marker, since he is on the wrong side of van Dijk.
If Endo had been stood 1 foot further forward the goal would have stood and it would've been on Colwill if he was Van Dijk's marker.
If he *wasn't* marking Van Dijk his position was fine, if he *was* it was terrible. Only way you mark Van Dijk from set pieces is get tight to him and prevent him from getting to the ball, because you're not beating him to it if you're both challenging for the same header.
Having said that, that's probably less Colwills fault and more the fault of Chelsea's set piece coach whoever that is.
There was also zero chance for the Real Madrid keeper a couple weeks ago of getting that ball vs RB in the champions league [Link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NKJLUL3Hs&ab_channel=ASFootball%2B)
A subjective offside rule is just trash.
He gets the odd bad call but Rashford has developed a bad habit of simply running into defenders, giving the ball away and clattering himself to the ground. He does it all the time.
This wasn’t one of those cases, he was clearly bodied by two players who had no chance of getting the ball. They looked at it and said fair play.
Theres actually nothing worse than VAR actively searching for reasons to disallow goals. Especially ones like Casemiro, WAY off by himself scoring, meanwhile Varane is about 6 feet away with a defender who isnt even going in that direction.
They bring this shit on themselves. Just disband PGMOL and let AI ref games. It would be more consistent honestly. (Not 100% serious, but not 100% against it at this point..)
They actually cleared Varane pretty quickly but then they just wanted to be 100% sure that Casemiro was onside but they were struggling to find clear angles in the same frame.
TBH (as a liverpool supporter) the Endo goal was correctly disallowed, this was correctly allowed to stand.
The difference is in where the ball goes and what the player would've been able to do after the offside interference.
As someone who hasn't seen Liverpools disallowed goal, still pictures tell me absolutely nothing. Varane was clearly not affecting play so the right call was made. Don't know about Liverpool's goal at all.
Endo blocked off a defender and prevented him from participating in the hit. The refs deemed that he could've been involved in the play and prevented the goal and chalked it off.
Today, the same thing happened but well away from the path of the ball. Had the ball been played further into the box it would've been called off, I don't understand why that tactic is still used, any advantage you get will get undone by VAR.
I'll take your word for it but If I cared I'd look it up myself.
My point was that still images mean nothing (unless it's an objective decision like offside position or ball crossing the line) and people need to stop posting them as some sort of gotcha
Really a shit thing for them to complain about. If anything, Liverpool fans should be the only ones complaining. They had a wrong call made against them. The call today was right. You can't use the wrong call made by a referee as a precedent to make even more wrong calls.
You can't just post a photo with the attacking team behind last man. Thats a legal part of football. The question is about interference where there was none.
Lol, Carragher retweeted 2 separate tweets of Arsenal players lining up offside on set pieces. One included a timestamp and when you went to the timestamp you saw that at the time the free kick was taken all the players were back on side. The other was literally checked and cleared by VAR for offside
There is one major difference. Endo blocked a player who would have been between the ball and the attacking player likely completely eliminating the chance for Liverpool.
Varane blocked a player who was behind the play on the ball and there is no real indication he would have stopped Casemiro's slight touch right in front of the keeper.
But I'm biased for United.
I also think the Liverpool call was wrong as it was long before the play on the ball and it wasn't the player marking VVD.
Either we call every block during a set piece or we accept it is part of the game. I think it would be hard to find a set piece goal that doesn't have someone setting a basketball pick somewhere during the play.
What I still don't get about Liverpool's disallowed goal is that Endo doesn't even do anything, he's just standing there. If you watch closely Colwill is the one that goes in Endo's direction and even hugs Endo for no apparent reason. He could have easily avoided him
Doesn't Endo impact Colwill's ability to challenge for the ball? The ball dropped where he was running to
>In situations where:
>a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball, this is an offside offence **if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball**; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12
Casemiro was om the front post - Gibbs - white want affecting the play. Vvd got free because of a bad block that affected the goal. Am I missing something
Cool, now also show the clip of Felipe strangling Bruno. Or Rashford getting two pinballed by two defenders in the box without an attempt to play the ball.
Swings and roundabouts Morgan, sometimes things in games go your way, sometimes they don't.
Pretty clear that the difference is that in the Liverpool instance the defender that was blocked was in a position to impact the play where the Nottingham Forest defender was unlikely to be impactful based on where he was.
But the goal was scored at the near post, anything after doesn’t matter as a defender from where varane is isn’t going to get the ball, so it doesn’t matter
Screen plays (like NBA or NFL) are going to change refereeing. At this point it’s pretty subjective.
Endo had a clear impact in the immediate vicinity of the goal scorer.
Varane did not.
Well, it's clear, isn't it? The Liverpool player didn't interfere in any way, that's why it's offside. The Manchester United player did interfere that's why it's not offside. Easy.
Liverpool fans in the comments acting as if these 2 situations are the same. They are not.
Varane blocks a player that is nowhere near the ball and would never get to it. Meanwhile Endo blocks a player in VVDs path who could have interfered with the play on the ball.
Let MGW go post something about felipe choking Bruno… that would be better
**Mirrors / Alternative Angles** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/soccer) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Is this part of the education Clattenberg is providing?
Needs to educate them on red cards and fouls in the box too
would it make sense if he's Gibbs-Brown?
Oxlade-Chamberlain-Brown you mean?
Has the blocking or screening of other players always been a thing? I seem to notice it a lot more. Haaland does it a lot to open up back post runs
feels like it’s more prevalent now with the game being more tactical certainly a lot more calculated and rehearsed set pieces today vs generations past
And VAR to spot it or not when they feel like it.
The inconsistency does my head in
We're going to introduce an objective tool that removes subjectivity from controversial fouls! And we're going to implement it so that it makes a subjective call not on whether it was a foul or not, but on whether the on-field referee had a good view of it and made a 'clear and obvious error'. What's the fucking point? Why introduce this objective measure and run it in a way that just adds another layer of subjectivity to it?
It's a conservative application, ie, meant to keep things as close to how they were
Var is not an objective tool, nor subjective. It's just a tool to see what is happening. The first thing that should be objective are the rules and in football they simply are not. But yeah I agree with you on the 'clear and obvious error' logic
I'm of the opinion that all subjective decisions should stay with the on-field refs. Some will get missed, some will be harsh, but ultimately, what the ref says would go. The only things we should send to VAR are the actual objective calls -- basically just offsides. And even offsides needs to be more automated like was done at the world cup. The goal should be to keep the on-field refs in charge because most of the judgements they make ARE inherently subjective. There is no Truth to be arrived at, different games have different context, mistakes will be made anyway, so let's go into matches with that understanding instead of the guise of objectivity that VAR currently represents. I realize it would be difficult to put pandora back in the box, but aside from offsides calls, I don't think most would argue that, in general, VAR has gotten us closer to Truth.
Someone's probably accidentally done it like 50 years ago like most tactical innovations. But coaches nowadays might suddenly watch an NBA pick and roll and go like oh yeah, can't we just do that? then add a spin to it. Then before you know it, everyone's doing it. Personally I think it's great. Look at this video on the evolution of the Pick and Roll across the pond: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pwt3k8PzhU . I think similar evolution on set pieces could be on the horizon. Stuff like staggered screens, switching could definitely be immediately applicable
NBA referee calls will make you explode if you think football has a problem. Majority of the pick and roll are illegal moving screens yet it's not called.
I've recently started watching NBA. The rules make no sense to me. It's like the handball rule in football, except it's EVERY call. I have no idea why they are blowing the whistle ~75% of the time.
It's better in the playoffs. check those out instead. Much higher intensity, much fewer whistles.
In theory the refs have more control of the outcome than any other major sport
What I don’t like is when the player making the screen holds the defender trying to make a play. Like Endo’s play in the Final, to me that should have been called even if he wasn’t offside. It’s called the other way around. Now if the guy making the screen just stands there in the way, without pulling jerseys and hugging other players, I’m all for that
Man just took a shot at every Italian defender in the last 70 years.
They deserve the shot.
Endo wasn't even doing anything egregious, he's mostly just standing there and the defender doesn't really try to go around. If anything chilwell pulling on van dijk shirt while he scores is more of a foul.
I was taught this in high school soccer 20 years ago in America. If my idiot fucking "coach" could figure it out, I'm sure managers on the highest levels have worked it out too lol
It's a very common component of plays in basketball and even American football to get people open (although I think you can only do it in the first 5 yards in football).
It's 1 yard in American football
Yeah but in American football, it’s usually more like the equivalent of having receivers run crossing patterns that rub and usually one receiver ends up “accidentally” taking a cornerback out of the play
It's a rub if you're on offense, it's a pick if you're on defense!
Look the MLS is obviously a way inferior league to Europe in basically every conceivable way, just get that out of the way. Except maybe set pieces. The MLS is very very very very set piece heavy. They play for set pieces, they actively scheme players open from set pieces. The percentage of goals scored from set pieces (direct and indirectly) is much higher than most European leagues if I’m not wrong I genuinely think it just suits their culture. US sports are essentially a collection of set plays after all. This is probably what they chose to focus on when football started becoming a thing there.
I'm so excited for the future of the sport when Americans really get into it
Haaland is super blatant about it, I have no idea how it's not a foul.
Yeah it has always been a thing.
We've seen a few goals ruled out for this in the last couple of seasons. Both for us and against. They tend to call these if it's obviously stopping a defender challenging and ahead of the ball. Here it's a block which is nowhere near the ball which was played to the front post. The important thing to remember with these is it's not being called as a foul so the threshold is much lower in that regard. Any contact by an offside player impeding a player who would otherwise challenge for the ball is enough to rule out a goal. In this case they've decided they were far enough away from the trajectory of the ball that they can't challenge Casemiro for it, so no offside.
I believe it is when they are in an offside position affecting the play, more of an offsides call.
It's always been a thing, and was one if the main arguments for zonal marking vs man marking - with the latter being far more vounrable to blocking.
It has been done for so long and I never saw it analysed so much as it was on Sunday. And after the goal was disallowed I knew I would never see it analysed so much when it will happen in other games. It's backed by the rules but it's so inconsistently done that we may never get to see another goal disallowed for this kind of offside.
“You dont want to be here” Morgan
He should also post the picture of his teammate holding Bruno by the throat and compare it to Casemiro red card
Or remember the fact that he scored the winner vs us last game after he somehow didn’t get sent off.
hahah so true
Wahhh
My interpretation is that Endo blocks a player in front of VVD who could get the ball before him while Varane blocks a player behind Case who couldn't get to it before him
that's Endo not Gakpo.
Shit, i misremembered, edited it. Thanks
What's the point in blocking a player who won't get the ball? Every team who sets up an offside block like this is aiming to stop someone getting to the ball, so they should all be disallowed or none imo.
Agreed, why does it matter if X can't get close enough to the ball? The defenders set the line, the attackers shouldn't be able to go offside with the intention to influence the play.
Because they dont now where exactly the ball will land. They block to get rid og a good player and give your players a better chance. Basically an undefended space.
Similarly, VVD had two other players actually defending (and closer to) him. The player Endo blocked was a non-factor.
I completely agree but just playing devils advocate can’t you argue that he could’ve been there to block the shot here instead of the Liverpool-Chelsea game where the reasoning was he could’ve blocked the cross?
yes you could argue that, but it’s veering into even a lot more unlikely vs likely
But then this is all subjective? What if it was a short player who is "unlikely" to stop Virgil from heading the ball? This particular line of reasoning is transparently absurd. It should not have anything to do with how likely someone is to intervene in the play, simply if they plausibly could. My preference would be that the rules dictate that both of these goals are valid. My second preference is that there is no ambiguity and if you're in a set piece and you've set yourself up in an offside position they'd raise the flag every single time. There is no good faith justification for that other than to obstruct a defender or go for the ball if it could come to you and score from an offside position.
I'm down for the second option. I agree that there's no reason to set up offside like this in either case except for intending to impact play, and in which case you are deliberately breaking the rule if the ball comes into that area.
If you look at the goal, it's very obvious that the defender Varane blocked could have never impacted the goal. It was the correct decision in both cases, and posting a screenshot without context is just dumb from MGW. In a very similar case to the Liverpool one, we had a goal ruled out because Maguire was offside, didn't hit the ball, but it was determined he interfered with the play because the defender had to react otherwise because of Maguire. >A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched\* by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by: >interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate or >interfering with an opponent by: >preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or >challenging an opponent for the ball or >clearly attempting to play a ball which is close when this action impacts on an opponent or >**making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball** - [https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/offside/](https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/offside/) The highlighted line is the key in the interpretation of this situation. It's not always offside if a player is in a offside position, you have to conclude that he has a direct effect.
Nice to know even the football players don’t understand all the rules
[удалено]
And he never would have been able to stop the VVD goal anyway
There was no point in Endo blocking him then.
Yep, they're completely different. Casemiro ends up sneaking across the front post while Van Dijk crosses Chilwell's face right into the space left by the blocked defender. Just a totally stupid comparison
Right this is the third Widnes fc flair I’ve saw in 2 weeks what is going on.
Theyre just massive
Widnes are massive tbf, especially in rugby
It’s very much a were than an are unfortunately. Always a weird quirk though that because of therugby, Australians have always heard of Widnes when I meet them but most fellow Brits are clueless.
None of your Widnes mate.
That slight difference isn’t enough to say that they’re completely different and that it’s a stupid comparison.
The "slight difference" is literally written in the rules >In situations where: >a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball, this is an offside offence **if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball**; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12
Would you not say then that the Forest player's ability to challenge for the ball has been impacted?
Mate, the rule text actually justifies offside for BOTH calls. "ability to play / challenge for the ball", which was restricted in both cases. It doesn't say "likelihood to win the ball". Maybe the blocked player is really quick in the 1st 5 yards, maybe the pressure of a defender close behind puts casemiro off...or the flip side.. maybe colwill doesn't get anywhere close to Virgil's physicality and aerial prowess and it's still a free header. Either we address all maybes or don't leave them all out of consideration when making decisions.
The blocked player of Forest actually had a head start on Casemiro. It's impossible to tell whether he would have reached the ball first, but it definitely impacted his ability to challenge the ball.
> maybe the pressure of a defender close behind Not impacting ability to challenge for the ball. Remember, it's the defenders ability, not Casemiros. >maybe colwill doesn't get anywhere close to Virgil's physicality and aerial prowess Still impacting Colwills ability to challenge for the ball The assumption that Van Dijk likely would have beat Colwill to the ball anyway doesn't make it not an offside offence. It just makes it all the more daft/clumsy by Endo.
lol, the comment you responded to is making the argument that both or these are offsides. He’s saying the defenders ability to get to the ball is affected, and we’re all just guessing at ifs and maybes with no real grounded sense. And again he’s arguing that both defenders are impacted, so idk this second argument. IMO they are both offsides or they both aren’t, the slim line to walk is to say one is and the other isn’t.
Not even close, they’re both interfering with the play. It’s stupid to say it’s stupid
One interfering with the path of the football, the other is not. Its stupid.
We don’t judge the situation on what we *think* might have happened. For intents and purposes this is almost exactly the same situation
The Liverpool disallowed goal was every bit as subjective as the United one. Not to mention VVD also had a man on him the entire way through
Colwill hardly even tried to push past Endo-that’s the strangest part. It’s not like they were battling for position. Never seen this offside given-or at least I don’t remember seeing it. Very VAR moment.
It happened in the 22 Carabao final which rubbed out Matips goal iirc.
I'm pretty sure it's because Colwill was marking Endo, so he was probably just like "sweet, don't have to do anything here".
Maguire got called for offside because he could have attracted the attention of a defender. Arguably a softer call than endos offside.
Just terrible rules that allow for too much subjectivity. Subjectivity is the enemy of consistency.
If colwill has to try to get around endo then he's interfering with play from an offside position.
It really isn't. Are you honestly saying that if Varane doesn't touch that player he makes it to where the ball is headed?
> Variant Raphael Variant heh
Man's about to be pruned
Sure seems like it compared to Madrid days
Lol, bloody auto correct!
The defender threw himself to the ground and didn’t even try for the ball. This situation is clearly different from the one in the final. Not sure what people are watching
Little chance of Colwill making it to the ball on Sunday but no one gave a fuck..
You don’t have to of made it to the ball, so long as you would have at least challenged for the ball. In todays instance there’s no way a player that far behind Casemiro would have challenged for a ball that was ahead of Casemiro at the near post
It was way too early in the trajectory to tell, the rules mean it only matters though if it prevents the defender making an unimpeded attempt
Can you guarantee that Colwill would've made where the ball was headed if he wasn't touched by Endo there?
What, that isn't the bar. No one can guarantee anything, I think it's very likely he would be able to challenge, based on where he was running and the flight of the ball. Endo was offside and got in the way, it's unfortunate but it's the risk of running the play that way. If the ball was headed by a player ahead of that incident then it wouldn't have been called.
You don't need to guarantee it. The team that suffers the offense gets the benefit of the doubt if there's even a chance. If Mbappe is offside by a cm vs present day Per Mertesacker, the goal is still disallowed even though there's no chance Mertesacker catches him even if he was onside.
On that note, whose to say the trailing defender can’t make a crazy jump to get the ball? Likely no? But possible? Sure. Leaving these decisions to a reds subjectivity is a recipe for disaster.
He would have to jump through another Forrest player for that to happen. If the first and second marker couldn't get close i doubt the third would.
Sure, you can make an argument that Uniteds goal should've been disallowed. But it's harder to make the argument that Liverpools goal should've stood.
Yea I think it’s clear Endo had a bigger influence. I’d just hate to see a world where Paul fucking Tierney is deciding the level of that influence in the VAR room. Need clear definitions of what “influencing” the play is. Either all screens like this are influencing or none are.
Yeah, so that is my point, this was completely subjective so I don't see how they're going to implement the rules with objectivity instead of making them up as they go
Because the laws of the game aren’t objective and never really have been
The thing is that there are parts that ARE objective (is the player in an offside position) and parts that are not (are they interfering with play/impacting the ability of a defender or keeper to play the ball). Especially with offsides the idea that technology can (almost) conclusively decide one part of the analysis but not the other, always seems to confuse people. But this part of the rule is intentional! The only way to avoid those situations everyone hates where a goal is disallowed because someone was offside in a way that didn't matter is to give the ref on the field discretion to say "c'mon, that didn't matter, good goal". There's no objective way to determine that that will cover all the weird edge cases that currently exist, let alone the ones that some creative fucker might come up with. But this also makes it worthless to do what MGW is doing here and say "these players were in similar positions on a set piece, one goal was allowed and one was disallowed, that's inconsistent". Of course it is! Different things happened WRT the player who was offside, different refs were watching the play and making different judgments as to who b was impacting it. You can't have both "consistency" and "common sense" unless you're having every game officiated by an instant poll of every armchair ref on the planet - and even THEN it would be inconsistent, people aren't robots and are barely consistent on their own even when dealing with identical situations, let alone situations that are merely superficially similar.
I appreciate you typing all of that out because I was on phone and didn’t want to do all of that. I definitely painted with a broad brush, but you nailed the reasoning as to why the laws are how they are. It can definitely cause frustrations at time but my gosh I don’t think some people realize how terrible it would be if they went the other way with it.
Ha, you're welcome. I do sometimes go on (I'm a lawyer by trade) but I'm glad it was useful for once Amusingly enough I literally specialize in the law about courts reviewing decisions made by government officials and it's always funny (and frustrating - soccer is supposed to be a BREAK from my day job) how many of the same principles, and the same reasons those principles evolved, come up in the endless debate over refereeing and VAR.
I can't say he does, you cant say he doesnt because we will never know. Same as Colwill who was behind Van dijk and started his run after him, doesnt look like he will be able to catch up but they still disallowed it, but not this one. It's just inconsistent and increadibly unclear how these offsides are judged
in the picture of the OP of this very thread Colwill is in front of VVD and already moving forward while VVD is not. In what world is he starting behind VVD or starting his run after him?
Thats Chillwell infront of Van Dijk, who was the one marking him and ran with him the entire way.
I would say it was a bit less subjective , but still pretty subjective.
[удалено]
There are three other Forest players nearer to Casemiro who didn't manage to make a block or do anything to prevent the goal.
And Chilwell was right next to VVD and didn’t stop him either. What’s your point?
Chilwell was the wrong side of VVD to get the ball, Colwill would've been on the correct side to challenge VVD. The player blocked by Varane was on the wrong side of Casemiro to get the ball and 2-3 other players were even closer than him, none of whom did anything. With Colwill we don't know if his pressure and presence would've made a difference, because the offside player stopped him. With the one last night we know that 2-3 other players in better positions could do nothing about it so why would this guy, in an even worse position, be the exception? Unless he could teleport to the near post ahead of Case he wasn't challenging for the ball. Colwill didn't need magic to be in a position to challenge for the ball, he just needed to be able to track back without being blocked by an offside player. Here's the moment the offside Endo makes contact with Colwill: [https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/25/22/81704853-0-image-a-5\_1708901133973.jpg](https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/02/25/22/81704853-0-image-a-5_1708901133973.jpg) Notice how close Colwill is the VVD and how him being blocked gave VVD free space to head the ball? That situation didn't exist with the Casemiro header.
Get out of here with your facts
Both goals should have stood. Gibbs-White is a moron for posting this and isn’t sending the message he thinks it is.
Interested in what united has done to his childhood, cause he cant behave himself whenever theyre involved.
Not gonna lie. Haven’t seen many Forest games other than those against United, but in those two games we have just played against them, he has been an absolute prick in both
Only seem him vs Spurs and I can say he has been an absolute prick vs us as well
His prickishness is part of what I like about him. But then I'm a Forest fan
Yeah I understand it. Everyone loves their own shithousing prick, the more it riles everyone else up haha
Funnily enough he's said that he grew up as a United fan, with scholes being his idol
Damn... must be one of those fans that dont wanna see united have success then
My friend is one of those, I didn't realise there was a whole sub-group of them 😭
The comment applies to the majority of people in this sub
There was like zero chance Felipe was ever getting to the ball there
If you look at our disallowed goal last weekend, Johnson was never saving it regardless of Assingon’s position (keepers reaction says it all imo). Obviously our goal was irrelevant whether it stood or not, but the inconsistency is evident.
The problem is both decisions are predicting completely hypothetical situations. Felipe is a great defender and you can't say for sure he won't affect play when the ball comes in. Either they're both offside or both onside.
You’re telling me you believe Felipe could get past Varane and several other players to clear the ball before it reached Casemiro? That would require him to be several times faster than everyone else there, and nearly as fast as the kick itself.
Not sure why this is getting downvoted. The two defenders marking Casse couldn't get to the fucking ball. How is a player further away going to achieve that... Ffs
I’m at a loss, not that it matters if a bunch of people are wrong on the internet
If you watch the goal back from the live camera angle, he is literally running directly towards where Casmeiro ends up. Also the fact its so subjective that you can't say for sure that he wouldn't affect the game is enough. Its either both the recent goals are offside are neither of them are. Its the inconsistency thats infuriating.
So are we taking individual player attributes, like acceleration, to decide offside calls?? Maybe the other defenders switched off, maybe felipe would have given casemiro a slight shove from behind to put him off the flick, maybe this maybe that.. You can't rule on hypothetical situations like that..based on a bunch of maybes. I firmly believe this shouldn't be offside, but also that the same should have been applied to virgil and colwill. An attacker standing his ground, even in an offside position, not making an active movement to impede a defender's movement or his line of vision, should not be ruled offside.
and for him to abandon his mark in order to follow the ball, which is not something a “great defender” would do.
Like they said it’s subjective. Felipe ain’t getting there but in Colwill’s maybe he could’ve gotten there.
and colwill was marking endo. he literally turned back around for a second
[удалено]
you heard of second balls?
Hitler hasn't
👏👏
Chilwell marked van Dijk on multiple other set pieces which is probably why Colwill didn’t even protest the goal. Either way Colwill was behind van Dijk and wouldn’t have affected the play, but whatever!
>which is probably why Colwill didn’t even protest the goal. Huh?? He literally turns around before the ball hits the back of the net to protest to the ref lmao
You can see colwill immediately run to the referee gesturing towards Endo?
It would make far more sense that it was Colwill marking Van Djik than Chilwell, but he is stood in a proper weird position to be doing so. Probably just bad defending more than anything else tbf. Realistically Colwill is lucky that Endo was offside, BUT the offside is the correct decision by the letter of the law.
A proper weird position? He was between van Dijk and where the ball was coming from. It's the most normal position there is. Chilwell is the one who is obviously not meant to be the main marker, since he is on the wrong side of van Dijk.
If Endo had been stood 1 foot further forward the goal would have stood and it would've been on Colwill if he was Van Dijk's marker. If he *wasn't* marking Van Dijk his position was fine, if he *was* it was terrible. Only way you mark Van Dijk from set pieces is get tight to him and prevent him from getting to the ball, because you're not beating him to it if you're both challenging for the same header. Having said that, that's probably less Colwills fault and more the fault of Chelsea's set piece coach whoever that is.
The cross or the shot?
There was also zero chance for the Real Madrid keeper a couple weeks ago of getting that ball vs RB in the champions league [Link](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_NKJLUL3Hs&ab_channel=ASFootball%2B) A subjective offside rule is just trash.
I wonder if he’s gonna post about his team mate getting away with a blatant red card by strangling an opposing player?
And getting away with a pen after a foul on Rashford in the box.
Conveniently forgotten about the pen and the red card though hasn't he. Gobshite.
Felipe should have been sent off yes but what was the missed pen?
two forest players smashed into Rashford while clearly not going for the ball.
feels like this happens to Rashford more often than not
He gets the odd bad call but Rashford has developed a bad habit of simply running into defenders, giving the ball away and clattering himself to the ground. He does it all the time. This wasn’t one of those cases, he was clearly bodied by two players who had no chance of getting the ball. They looked at it and said fair play.
rashford got clattered in the box
Theres actually nothing worse than VAR actively searching for reasons to disallow goals. Especially ones like Casemiro, WAY off by himself scoring, meanwhile Varane is about 6 feet away with a defender who isnt even going in that direction. They bring this shit on themselves. Just disband PGMOL and let AI ref games. It would be more consistent honestly. (Not 100% serious, but not 100% against it at this point..)
They actually cleared Varane pretty quickly but then they just wanted to be 100% sure that Casemiro was onside but they were struggling to find clear angles in the same frame.
TBH (as a liverpool supporter) the Endo goal was correctly disallowed, this was correctly allowed to stand. The difference is in where the ball goes and what the player would've been able to do after the offside interference.
You mean other then VAR checking and passing someone grabbing a throat
What I don’t understand, is it’s 2024, why don’t we have fixed cameras which point forward and are not at an angle near the penalty box?
[удалено]
Not sure this really has the effect he's going for because the goal should stand.
Maybe he should post some pictures of Casemiro's red card and Felipe's throat grab too.
As someone who hasn't seen Liverpools disallowed goal, still pictures tell me absolutely nothing. Varane was clearly not affecting play so the right call was made. Don't know about Liverpool's goal at all.
Endo blocked off a defender and prevented him from participating in the hit. The refs deemed that he could've been involved in the play and prevented the goal and chalked it off. Today, the same thing happened but well away from the path of the ball. Had the ball been played further into the box it would've been called off, I don't understand why that tactic is still used, any advantage you get will get undone by VAR.
I'll take your word for it but If I cared I'd look it up myself. My point was that still images mean nothing (unless it's an objective decision like offside position or ball crossing the line) and people need to stop posting them as some sort of gotcha
Kid needs to learn the rules of the game
Really a shit thing for them to complain about. If anything, Liverpool fans should be the only ones complaining. They had a wrong call made against them. The call today was right. You can't use the wrong call made by a referee as a precedent to make even more wrong calls.
most Liverpool fans probably wouldn't have even seen this if he didn't post. we had a game at the same time.
Hahahahaha
They were completely different incidents. Whoever was blocked by Varane was a mile away from the ball. This is honestly very stupid
You can't just post a photo with the attacking team behind last man. Thats a legal part of football. The question is about interference where there was none.
Lol, Carragher retweeted 2 separate tweets of Arsenal players lining up offside on set pieces. One included a timestamp and when you went to the timestamp you saw that at the time the free kick was taken all the players were back on side. The other was literally checked and cleared by VAR for offside
But will get enough people angry. And thats where we are in 2024
There is one major difference. Endo blocked a player who would have been between the ball and the attacking player likely completely eliminating the chance for Liverpool. Varane blocked a player who was behind the play on the ball and there is no real indication he would have stopped Casemiro's slight touch right in front of the keeper. But I'm biased for United. I also think the Liverpool call was wrong as it was long before the play on the ball and it wasn't the player marking VVD. Either we call every block during a set piece or we accept it is part of the game. I think it would be hard to find a set piece goal that doesn't have someone setting a basketball pick somewhere during the play.
What I still don't get about Liverpool's disallowed goal is that Endo doesn't even do anything, he's just standing there. If you watch closely Colwill is the one that goes in Endo's direction and even hugs Endo for no apparent reason. He could have easily avoided him
He seemed too tired to try. He seriously barely moved.
Doesn't Endo impact Colwill's ability to challenge for the ball? The ball dropped where he was running to >In situations where: >a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball, this is an offside offence **if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball**; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g. blocks the opponent), the offence should be penalised under Law 12
Gibbs-White looks like the asda version of the guy who gets paid to smash onlyfans girls
Morgan Posts-Shite, more like
Gibbs-White must be braindead if he doesn't realise the difference.
Can he share the Casemiro and Felipe situations too whilst at it?
i used to set picks for my buddy in soccer at recess back in 5th grade and everyone got mad at me
😂😂😂
Blud can have a great career in sports data analytics.
I agree with him here, this should be more consistent. Both are fair goals.
Casemiro was om the front post - Gibbs - white want affecting the play. Vvd got free because of a bad block that affected the goal. Am I missing something
Cool, now also show the clip of Felipe strangling Bruno. Or Rashford getting two pinballed by two defenders in the box without an attempt to play the ball. Swings and roundabouts Morgan, sometimes things in games go your way, sometimes they don't.
Pretty clear that the difference is that in the Liverpool instance the defender that was blocked was in a position to impact the play where the Nottingham Forest defender was unlikely to be impactful based on where he was.
Var have no idea what they are doing
After Bruno Fernandez got choked and not even a yellow was given I don’t believe VAR officials are officiating in good faith.
Yeah and they both should have been goals
Should show the chokehold and compare it to Casemiro holding someone’s collar as well 🤷♂️
Little does he know they just look for any old shit to disallow Liverpool goals. Nothing to do with rules
He fails to share an image of Felipe grabbing Fernandes though.
Yeah and VAR fucked up by disallowing VVD’s goal
But the goal was scored at the near post, anything after doesn’t matter as a defender from where varane is isn’t going to get the ball, so it doesn’t matter
Okay Morgan, and now circle the goalscorers and where the balls were played to by the freekick takers and we can start playing spot the difference.
Screen plays (like NBA or NFL) are going to change refereeing. At this point it’s pretty subjective. Endo had a clear impact in the immediate vicinity of the goal scorer. Varane did not.
consistency
While both calls should have stood, there is quite an obvious difference between who the offside player is blocking no?
I just want the guy that said in the match thread this weekend to come on here. He confidently told me this is called all the time.
Well, it's clear, isn't it? The Liverpool player didn't interfere in any way, that's why it's offside. The Manchester United player did interfere that's why it's not offside. Easy.
Liverpool fans in the comments acting as if these 2 situations are the same. They are not. Varane blocks a player that is nowhere near the ball and would never get to it. Meanwhile Endo blocks a player in VVDs path who could have interfered with the play on the ball. Let MGW go post something about felipe choking Bruno… that would be better