|
I'm still mystified as to how that counts as offside anyway. Obviously he's offside when the ball is crossed, but he's onside when the defender heads it away which is surely a new phase of play? So it shouldn't be offside?
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 02:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 04:18 |
|
|
webmeister posted:I'm still mystified as to how that counts as offside anyway. Obviously he's offside when the ball is crossed, but he's onside when the defender heads it away which is surely a new phase of play? So it shouldn't be offside? Recently, FIFA/IFAB seem to have back tracked some of the cutoff of what makes a “deliberate play”. The guidance 2-3 years ago would have 100% said this was a deliberate play and that the offside attacker was not involved or interfering until well after the deliberate play. More recent guidance seems to be more to giving the benefit to the defender for a longer period of time, so that plays like this do not negate offside. Edit: either way, colossal gently caress up by the center and VAR, and this could cost them games in the next rounds potentially. Nottherealaborn fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Dec 1, 2022 |
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 02:17
|
|
|
Nottherealaborn posted:Recently, FIFA/IFAB seem to have back tracked some of the cutoff of what makes a “deliberate play”. The guidance 2-3 years ago would have 100% said this was a deliberate play and that the offside attacker was not involved or interfering until well after the deliberate play. Yep. I would have even said before July, this is probably a good goal. I have heard two theories why this would be offside. I'm assuming the first one is probably it because I don't really buy into the second one personally, but it was one floated to me so I think it's at least worth considering. The first would be invoking Circular 26. The basic premise is that the challenge of the other French attacker meant that the Tunisian player didn't really get a deliberate play onto the ball. Because of how he was challenged, the header comes as he is falling down. I wouldn't say this contact rises to a foul, but it limits the ability of the defender to, as the circular says, coordinate his body movement. Combined with the ball being in the air makes this more of a deflection than a deliberate play because the falling down defender doesn't really have the ability to have much control on where the ball goes. It would be one thing if the defender were all alone and heading it away, but the nature of the challenge specifically makes this less likely to be a controlled action by the defender, so we have a deflection, and then we have gaining an advantage and offside. The other theory would be that, rather than a deflection or a deliberate play, this was a save. The Laws define a save as "when a player stops, or attempts to stop, a ball which is going into or very close to the goal with any part of the body except the hands/arms (unless the goalkeeper within the penalty area)". I think a ball coming down in the air about 8 yards away from goal probably does not count as "very close to the goal", but, without much further guidance on what that means, we're in the eye of the beholder on what "very close" is. A save does not reset offside, so under this theory the Tunisian player's touch on the ball is a save and then we have gaining an advantage and offside. Yeah, they're done. I thought at first the VAR might have saved his tournament after having a really poor intervention in Portugal Uruguay with this one but it looks like this is actually two poor interventions in a row by the Qatari VAR. If we see him again in the main chair (with 5 VARs on each match he can probably be elsewhere in the room for political reasons) I will be absolutely shocked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 02:41
|
|
|
That just seems kinda ludicrous to me, really. Like if Greasemann comes from offside to challenge for the ball and misses, sure that makes sense. But he doesn't challenge, he gets back onside and then tucks away the loose ball. As a side note, has there been a single instance at this tournament where the on-field ref has gone over the monitor for a second look, and then sticking with their original decision? I've only watched about 50% of the matches thanks to timezone issues, but I genuinely can't recall it happening.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 02:55
|
|
|
I think every VAR intervention so far has been accepted, technically at least. The closest thing to a rejection that I can think of was in Denmark Tunisia where the VAR interjected before a corner kick for a video review of a possible handball. However, before the handball, there was a foul on a defender by an attacker. The restart was changed, so I give it credit for an accepted VAR intervention rather than a reject. That said, Faghani absolutely should have rejected the send down in Portugal Uruguay, so we should have at least 1 at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 03:21
|
|
|
chaoslord posted:Here is something interesting pointed out in a ref forum I thought that was what happened but then it went to VAR and they restarted the game like everyone just forgot he blew for full time
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 03:24
|
|
|
webmeister posted:As a side note, has there been a single instance at this tournament where the on-field ref has gone over the monitor for a second look, and then sticking with their original decision? I've only watched about 50% of the matches thanks to timezone issues, but I genuinely can't recall it happening. Because of the way that VAR is designed, it’s very rare for the referee to stick with their original decision when told to review the monitor. VAR is meant to intervene for clear and obvious errors by the referee, meaning that anything that is just a slight difference in judgment shouldn’t be referred to the referee for further review. So when VAR does tell the referee to take a look, almost all the time it is for something that the referee either 1) did not see or 2) clearly got wrong. In some circumstances, the referee does end up sticking with their original decision, which is most of the time because they disagree with VAR’s interpretation of the play. On a couple occasions, I’ve seen the referee stick with his decision because he notices something that VAR did not originally see or check for. (For example, in an MLS game this year, the referee was told to check for a penalty, and it indeed was a penalty EXCEPT the referee then had VAR check for offside in the build up of play (which they’re supposed to do anyways), at which point they saw that an attacker had been offside in the build up before the penalty challenge. TLDR: it’s rare to overturn VAR’s recommendations because the threshold they work with to refer a play for review is high, which decreases the likelihood that the referee would disagree with VAR and stick with their original call.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 03:28
|
|
|
chaoslord posted:Here is something interesting pointed out in a ref forum The French Federation is indeed appealing the VAR call: https://www.lequipe.fr/Football/Actualites/Erreur-de-l-arbitre-sur-le-but-annule-de-griezmann-la-fff-pose-reclamation/1367785
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 10:19
|
|
|
VAR hottake: In a world with automated goal line and offside technology, VAR should not be allowed to look at slow motion or freeze-frames. If you cannot decide that something happened from looking at repeats of footage at real time speed, it's not bad enough to warrant a review. Slow motion makes everything look 10 times worse.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 10:34
|
|
|
chaoslord posted:Once they kicked off, VAR’s ability to intervene went out the window. Are you sure that's the case? I know it is in some sports, but I'm not sure I've seen it come up in football.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 10:38
|
|
|
TheRat posted:VAR hottake: In a world with automated goal line and offside technology, VAR should not be allowed to look at slow motion or freeze-frames. If you cannot decide that something happened from looking at repeats of footage at real time speed, it's not bad enough to warrant a review. Slow motion makes everything look 10 times worse. I don't watch a ton of soccer, so this is a question from a place of ignorance. Aren't a lot of illegal actions in soccer irrespective of their force or duration? Putting your cleats on someone after the ball is past, handling the ball, contact with someone's face, things of that nature.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 10:47
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:I don't watch a ton of soccer, so this is a question from a place of ignorance. Aren't a lot of illegal actions in soccer irrespective of their force or duration? Putting your cleats on someone after the ball is past, handling the ball, contact with someone's face, things of that nature. VAR isn't supposed to catch everything, it's supposed to catch major errors. For instance, VAR doesn't hand out freekicks or yellow cards for bad fouls. It doesn't fix a throw-in going the wrong way or corner awarded wrongly. It hands out penalties, red cards, disallows goals that shouldn't have stood etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 10:53
|
|
|
TheRat posted:VAR isn't supposed to catch everything, it's supposed to catch major errors. For instance, VAR doesn't hand out freekicks or yellow cards for bad fouls. It doesn't fix a throw-in going the wrong way or corner awarded wrongly. It hands out penalties, red cards, disallows goals that shouldn't have stood etc. I get that. But you also feel it shouldn't be correcting marginal calls like ones you need slo-mo for, just super clear ones? An obscured handball for a penalty is what comes to mind, heavily sanctioned conduct that's tough to spot from the wrong angle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 10:59
|
|
|
A ball touching a hand isn't automatically a foul. If it's so obscure you can't see it from multiple angles in real time, it's going to be hard to argue it's a foul. E: And I'd much rather miss a few that should probably be a foul than have the extreme slow motion shitshow we have now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 11:00
|
|
|
It'd be very funny if this got both of them banned for gambling. https://twitter.com/ESPNFC/status/1598248842591444992
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 12:48
|
|
|
That would hurt Poland a lot more than it would hurt Argentina. Szczesny has been possibly the best player in the tournament so far. Messi, on the other hand, very much hasn't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 12:51
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:Are you sure that's the case? I know it is in some sports, but I'm not sure I've seen it come up in football. Yeah. In the VAR section of the laws, in 1.10 it says “10. If play has stopped and been restarted, the referee may not undertake a ‘review’ except for a case of mistaken identity or for a potential sending-off offence relating to violent conduct, spitting, biting or extremely offensive, insulting and/or abusive action(s).” So we had the stop with the goal, the kickoff restarted, and then the game ends. Him having time to blow the three whistles and start shaking hands also gets rid of the possibility “they were telling me to stop it right as I blew for kickoff so I was trying to not restart the game” type line. If Conger has just ended the game after the goal, we have no problems here - as long as play didn’t restart, VAR can intervene as long as the referees haven’t left the field. But he kept to the tradition of “lets get the ball in play first” and it burned him. This might be the biggest technical referee mistake at a World Cup since Poll’s three yellow cards
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 14:27
|
|
|
That's interesting. I know they've given pens after the final whistle, thought that would be the same situation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 15:25
|
|
|
TheRat posted:VAR hottake: In a world with automated goal line and offside technology, VAR should not be allowed to look at slow motion or freeze-frames. If you cannot decide that something happened from looking at repeats of footage at real time speed, it's not bad enough to warrant a review. Slow motion makes everything look 10 times worse. This falls in line with my firm belief that regardless of the sport, if a replay review takes more than 30 seconds, the original call stands and you get back to the game. If you can't tell within 30 seconds, it wasn't obvious enough to change so leave it alone.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 16:08
|
|
|
Big Black Dick posted:This falls in line with my firm belief that regardless of the sport, if a replay review takes more than 30 seconds, the original call stands and you get back to the game. If you can't tell within 30 seconds, it wasn't obvious enough to change so leave it alone. the CFL does their video review at full speed. the refs can watch it multiple times but if they can't pick it out at full speed then no call
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 16:27
|
|
|
I would like to commend Japan for turning in a group stage performance that was incredibly funny and yet also objectively good
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
Now that the groups are over, the only red cards are for a keeper (lol), a coach (double lol) and That number seems low and only one of them was for a traditional bad tackle. Weird
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:04
|
|
|
The group stage finishes with England the best side in terms of points and goal difference. Lol.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:12
|
|
|
Only one team gave up 0 goals in open play during the group stage:  
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:14
|
|
|
whypick1 posted:Only one team gave up 0 goals in open play during the group stage: For teams that advanced, the USMNT tied for the fewest goals given up (1) with the Netherlands and Brazil. They also tied for the fewest goals scored (2) with Poland.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:21
|
|
|
2 goals, one ball, the Christian Pulisic story.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:23
|
|
|
Aggro posted:For teams that advanced, the USMNT tied for the fewest goals given up (1) with the Netherlands and Brazil. They also tied for the fewest goals scored (2) with Poland. ...you'll never sing that
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:30
|
|
|
When was the last time no team went perfect through the group stage? 1994?
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:31
|
|
|
A lot of this WC has been a mess but that group stage owned
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:32
|
|
|
When's the knockout stage thread getting posted? I'd love to make ideal brackets with people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:37
|
|
|
Ohtori Akio posted:When's the knockout stage thread getting posted? I'd love to make ideal brackets with people. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4018893
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 22:37
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Now that the groups are over, the only red cards are for a keeper (lol), a coach (double lol) and For comparison, 2018 Group Stage also had three red cards DOGSO-H https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4SeAfCg7-o Boateng second yellow (~1:18) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4e9a3KptfC0 Smolnikov second yellow https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_YrTEiOVGo Only one red in the knockouts (DOGSO) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=012FkPcI1uE Eagle eyed viewers may notice that both straight reds were from the same ref. There have been 96 group stage matches between 2018 and 2022 with VAR, no red for serious foul play or violent conduct given on the field (we had the one this year for the GK given by VAR).
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 23:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 04:18 |
|
|
thehoodie posted:When was the last time no team went perfect through the group stage? 1994? This is the only 32 team WC with no 3-0-0s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 2, 2022 23:20
|
|