Third goal vs France called offside?

This looks pretty even. Or are they expecting calls within inches or centimeters. That seems like an NFL rules lawyering thing.

Hmmmm 🧐 pic.twitter.com/EpjbEXNBTA

— FOX Soccer (@FOXSoccer) June 28, 2019

 

It got a serious review. It was off. Close, certainly, but still off.

Yes, with VAR, it is now an objective decision, and even "just barely" offside is still offside. It's not the first close call this WWC. Go talk to Cameroon about it.

 

Yes, it happened to France and Cameroon also, earlier in the torunament. It sucks, but it's football at the times of VAR.

 

It's not even and yes, the calls have to be made to the highest level of precision that is available to the VAR technology. If it was even, the blue and red lines would be on top of each other. However they're not, the red line marking where Dunn's front foot is closer to the opponent's goal than the blue line marking the defender's position. Only marginally, but it is closer and has to be called.

It's just like the calls made in tennis. I saw one the other day where the ball was only 3mm out. The player who challenged, thinking it was in, still lost the point.

 

It was off, clearly off on review. However the way VAR has evolved makes me think that we would be better off if we abandoned it except for the "Goal line technology" part and that is really separate from VAR.

But VAR is in and I highly doubt that it will be dropped in the future but it "might" get refined and for me it is very very clear that it badly needs refinement. For me the interference and delay VAR produces is not offset by the "getting it right" factor. Perfection in calls does not make soccer better or more fun it just makes it slower.

 

Part of the problem is the line created shortly after the play was not the same as the line shown later.

 

I thought it was funny how "goal line technology" was a thing during the last World Cups and then it kinda just disappeared and hasn't been referenced again since.... I wonder what happened to it. Too much money to sustain? VAR is the newer and improved version of it?

 

I'm not sure what two lines you're talking about, but the above picture is the one from the VAR. An earlier picture might be the one that the TV production crew does?

 

Goal line technology is still active and being used in this WWC. I can't remember which games its been in, but I've definitely seen it being used.

 

Actually it has been used regularly alongside of VAR. In this WWC there really has not been many "close" calls that needed it. In fact I think there has been only one case, at least I only remember only one, where there was any chance that a ball that was/was not clearly in the goal needed the goal line tech to be sure and that was shown to not be a goal. I think that was even in France's first match. I know it was quite early in the tournament.

VAR is simply too invasive to be effective the way it is currently being used but goal line technology is nearly invisible and nearly 100% reliable and therefore only seen when it is needed which is VERY rare, thankfully.

 

I'm not sure that the frozen frame is the correct one - matching to when the ball is kicked is hard. I don't think VAR should have overturned the call but I think the call was wrong. And, of course, had the goal stood, the match was over.

 

It may be hard but it's one of the things that the VAR team have been extensively trained to do, for which special technology has been developed (including the so-called '3D' technology) and for which the IFAB has made specific provision in the Laws of the Game. The laws now contain the stipulation that when it comes to deciding on offside position, "The first point of contact of the ‘play’ or ‘touch’ of the ball should be used."

Once the VAR has chosen the frame that shows the first point of contact and inserted the lines that mark the relative positions of the defender and attacker, the decision is clear and pretty much incontrovertible.

 

Agree that it was off.

But I HATE how FIFA applies this rule. Too precise. Off by an eyelash is functionally even to me. Functionally even should be a good goal.

Problem is, how do you apply functionally even? A foot? Six inches? Daylight between? It becomes subjective.

This way, it is at least objective.

 

Got to say I think the VAR is improving the game quite a bit; I'm not finding it all that obtrusive, and I think it will get less obtrusive yet as people get better at it.

It may be that the offside rule would be better for a slight tweak, though I can't see how to do it without confusing the machines... But if that and the Cameroon goal are off sides-- and I agree, they were-- it is going to be even harder to score without PKs...