Leeds (A) - verdict

[The Saturday Boy]

VAR: Attacking possession phase explained

For all the latest Premier League information including news and stats, visit the official website of the Premier League.

www.premierleague.com

 

[Johnny75]

Cheers for that.

Clear as mud from the PL.

 

[Tony Towner]

I don't overly care about what the rules are or aren't. The bottom line is Podence was offside, but that didn't gain an advantage. 2 years ago it wouldn't have been flagged, no Leeds players appealed and it wouldn't have been highlighted afterwards. It detracts from the game. It's as much a pile of bollocks now as it was at the start of last season when Riley and co decided the game needed 'improving'.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

There's no way that is a separate phase of play, it's all one thing. They go and clear it 30-40 yards up the park and we recycle it, fair enough.

Pretty clear though that Podence's cross creates the goal. Shame for Romain though as it was a beautiful strike.

 

[The Saturday Boy]

Cheers for that.

Clear as mud from the PL.

Indeed. Offside is a binary decision, the player is either on or off. Except when there is a subjective decision about whether a phase of play has ended, a subjective decision that is taken by someone who isn’t at the game.

I know VAR is here to stay but I just can’t see it getting any better.

 

[Johnny75]

There's no way that is a separate phase of play, it's all one thing. They go and clear it 30-40 yards up the park and we recycle it, fair enough.

Pretty clear though that Podence's cross creates the goal. Shame for Romain though as it was a beautiful strike.

It's absolutely certain Podence's cross didn't create the goal. The cross's target was Raul. He didn't get it and it was cleared.

Saiss then spanks it first time. If he had taken a touch, put a cross in and Raul scores it's a goal isn't it?

Seems very little difference to me.

 

[Premier Quality]

The whole thing is bollocks anyway - VAR was sold as fixing “clear and obvious” errors, not millimetres when looking at multiple replays over several minutes that no one in the ground had a clue about.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

You only needed one replay there, he was offside.

People are being silly on this one, there wasn't any serious debate about it.

 

[PuntsWolf]

It was offside. The goal shouldn’t have stood.

a) Podence shouldn’t have been offside
b) it wasn’t particularly close, the linesman should have flagged live
c) not sure why it took VAR so long when Podence was clearly beyond the blue line they put down.
d) I’m not sure why we feel it shouldn’t be offside. It’s not like it’s properly cleared.

 

[The Bear]

There is a case to say it was headed away so should be a different phase of play, but it doesn't really stand up in this specific case. The header went directly to the goalscorer, so the cross did influence the goal. The defender made the "assist" as it were from the cross.

 

[t3ch]

I wouldn't mind seeing a cap on time allowed to review, or time back allowed to go. you can't just let play go on for 20 seconds when you know it's an offside call, and as mentioned if you have to spend minutes and numerous camera angles to tell, it's time to move on.

As mentioned it should've been flagged live-- this particular series is another instance of the VAR implementation being the problem

 

[Trips]

They have been instructed not to flag live though, until the move comes to an end. Stops some linesman flagging incorrectly and a possible goal not occurring

 

[t3ch]

.... yes, exactly.

 

[Johnny75]

The issue with that though is if the linesman had raised his flag when Saiss struck the ball in. He didn't which is where the confusion begins.

If the officials have a conversation, give a decision and then ask a question this would solve a lot of problems.

If the ref had said the goal is given but can you check an offside to Podence in the build up then everybody would be aware of what they're giving a decision on. It works for other sports and I have no idea why it doesn't work for Riley (the arrogant prick)

 

[Deleted Cyber]

I have no idea why it doesn't work for Riley (the arrogant prick)
I think you may have answered your own question there mate.

 

[PuntsWolf]

They have been instructed not to flag live though, until the move comes to an end. Stops some linesman flagging incorrectly and a possible goal not occurring

Yes but then they flag at the end of the play. This was genuinely missed and then correctly fixed by VAR. The actual reason it was brought in for. So Not sure why we are still moaning about it.

 

[Kenny]

Don't think folk are moaning as such just pointing out the blurred lines on phases and how similar goals have stood

The right decision was given but its not a bad thing to highlight instances like this. If nothing else it makes us look the rules and get a better understanding of the game, especially in a time where it seems to be a confused mess (although if actual refs have no clue what hope do we have)

 

[pavlosmacwolf]

To be offside by a pubic hair, or two toes, is bollocks whoever is the judge, linesman or var, daylight is the best rule, but only people not in power see it.

 

[PuntsWolf]

Ive mentioned it before...but daylight would be a terrible rule on every level.

1) just moves the line you are using
2) much harder/impossible to judge
3) punishes good defending

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

It's also never been a thing, it has never appeared in any directive or regulation ever.