The Offside Goal vs St.J

[onlythestrongsurvive 1,007]

37 minutes ago, RealWorldRich said:

I don't think it's a "conspiracy" but i think ref's are scared of celtic, without a doubt.

 

Also a few weeks ago, Mike Dean was on a podcast discussing his decision not to send Anthony Taylor to the TV in a Spurs v Chelsea game last season, where the Spurs boy pulled the Chelsea wingbacks hair.  It was a clear red card but he said Taylor was. amate and didn't want to give him a hard decision to make.

 

And that's the PL, not the diddy SPFL. I think it's entirely possible the VAR guys today just guessed at some lines and went with offside to keep the game competitive at 1-0.

Think the rule had to be changed as before it wasn't an offence to pull someones hair (something to do with wasn't part of the body lol)

[graeme_4 34,808]

Some mental takes, and guys who really don’t understand the rules or VAR in this thread. 

[rossco87 692]

42 minutes ago, RealWorldRich said:

I don't think it's a "conspiracy" but i think ref's are scared of celtic, without a doubt.

 

Also a few weeks ago, Mike Dean was on a podcast discussing his decision not to send Anthony Taylor to the TV in a Spurs v Chelsea game last season, where the Spurs boy pulled the Chelsea wingbacks hair.  It was a clear red card but he said Taylor was. amate and didn't want to give him a hard decision to make.

 

And that's the PL, not the diddy SPFL. I think it's entirely possible the VAR guys today just guessed at some lines and went with offside to keep the game competitive at 1-0.

If that’s the case why not send the ref to the screen for the Lawrence penalty? The fact it is 2-0 and not 1-0 probably lessens the debate a little, but I am pretty sure they are going to start bringing it up as another example of the refs being in our favour and just dismissing or ignoring the offside goal.

[Drunk and disorderly. 14,555]

Was very close.

 

[Colin Traive 22,941]

Getting to the stage where you don’t/can’t celebrate a goal until some scum official hiding in a portakabin on some industrial estate in the arse end of nowhere decides he can’t keep ruling out legal and valid Rangers goals and - fuck it - better let this one stand.

Cue unrestrained joy for the good guys.

And this ruling that linesmen can’t put their flag up while the forward is OFFSIDE but they should put the kettle on and do a wee crossword first and then put his flag up by which time the forward is ONSIDE???

Which complete moron dreamt that shit up and is he willing to cover the wages of a defender who pulls a muscle running flat out unnecessarily chasing an offside player?

😡

[RFC55 109,474]

It was a fucking joke tbh 

[Drunk and disorderly. 14,555]

14 minutes ago, Colin Traive said:

Getting to the stage where you don’t/can’t celebrate a goal until some scum official hiding in a portakabin on some industrial estate in the arse end of nowhere decides he can’t keep ruling out legal and valid Rangers goals and - fuck it - better let this one stand.

Cue joy for the good guys.

And this ruling that linesmen can’t put their flag up while the forward is OFFSIDE but they should put the kettle on and do a wee crossword first and then put his flag up by which time the forward is ONSIDE???

Which complete moron dreamt that shit up and is he willing to cover the wages of a defender who pulls a muscle running flat out chasing an offside player?

😡

Someone will get a career ending injury due to that nonsensical rule.

Just a matter of time.

And it won't even be an infringement because it will be out of play!!!

Crazy rule.

 

[Jamie0202 12,401]

1 hour ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

To me that's a bigger issue than the offside call itself.

Aye. In amongst the noise in the match thread I had the same thought myself. 

[BlueThunder 8,454]

I think he was a tiny bit offside, a few inches maybe. At first the line looked weird to me as it bent towards Sina if you look closely (I actually checked with a ruler!) However I suppose there is a small variation in the height of the pitch that caused that.

A tough one but I think it was correct. I don’t know if the filth have that one chalked off l.

[KeyserSoze 14,633]

9 hours ago, onlythestrongsurvive said:

It's fuckin us over mate - they're making it up as they go along and picking and chosing which ones they are looking at and being 'subjective' in their decisions. 

First it was humans, now it’s humans and machines. 
We need to stop crying ffs. The vast majority of us welcomed VAR as a way of helping out our shite refs. Now we have it we are still moaning. 
I don’t believe we are being fucked over, there’s no conspiracy, there’s no secret ref meetings to fuck us over. 
 

[graeme_4 34,808]

9 hours ago, onlythestrongsurvive said:

you can't - they're level so goal should have stood.  It is also not clear and obvious which is supposed to be the whole point of VAR. 

Also, I swear they really wanted to give them 2 penalties today and that kain should have been booked for simulation then sent off as he picked up a booking after the Butland dive.

That’s not how VAR offside works  

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,923]

Are those lines touching or overlapping? Can we safely say its a close offside call?  Well bare in mind the ref DID raise his flag, then consider the below from the SFA site in relation to the actual outcome.

 

Are we using offside line technology and will the virtual offside lines be shown on TV/Broadcast?

Yes. In the case of a close offside call, the assistant referee will delay his/her flag. If a goal is scored and the assistant believes there was an offside offence, he/she will only raise the offside flag after the goal has been scored.

Using the virtual offside technology, the VAR will place a line on the second last defender and the attacking player who potentially committed the offside offence. If the lines do not overlap or touch and show the player was offside, the on-field decision to disallow the goal will stand. If the lines do not overlap or touch, showing the attacker was either behind or in line with the defender, and show that the player was onside, or if the two lines do overlap, the on-field decision will be overturned and the goal will stand.

[The Dude 20,026]

9 hours ago, onlythestrongsurvive said:

you can't - they're level so goal should have stood.  It is also not clear and obvious which is supposed to be the whole point of VAR. 

Also, I swear they really wanted to give them 2 penalties today and that kain should have been booked for simulation then sent off as he picked up a booking after the Butland dive.

Completely irrelevant. Every goal is checked as a matter of routine. 

[GOAT 30,449]

Angles shit.  They really need to have small cameras that run the length of the pitch on electronic boards at the side or something.  I’m sure there must be some modern technology that makes it ten times easier than drawing fucking lines from shite angles.

id be more concerned that the tarriers got a penalty for the exact same thing we got a goal disallowed for the other week. 

[Leighton loyal 336]

10 hours ago, Roy Hobbs said:

How can you even say which line is ahead of the other there?

I know it’s bullshit

[hawkfalcons 2,306]

12 hours ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Why the fuck did the linesman put his flag up when it was a bawhair in it and we progressed into attack and scored?

 

Good point 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,923]

1 minute ago, hawkfalcons said:

Good point 

We can debate the offside call as much as we want, but in raising his flag he went against their own SFA guidance and attempted to deny us an opportunity to score possibly a legit goal in doing so.

[GOAT 30,449]

Just seen a video of st Johnstone penalty incident.  Was a penalty btw. 

[murzo 7,447]

4 minutes ago, GOAT said:

Just seen a video of st Johnstone penalty incident.  Was a penalty btw. 

Butland or Lawrence one? Don’t think either were penalties. Lawrence one he’s got hands on him but there’s no force.

[Tiger Shaw 30,678]

No sure there’s any great conspiracy with refs meeting up to discuss ways to fuck us over that’s just stupid but think it’s clear as day that any of these tight calls that could go ether way the majority of time go against us, anybody denying that’s full of shite, the tramps across the city mostly get these decisions in their favour. 

 

[sassaaaa 11,406]

10 hours ago, Drunk and disorderly. said:

Was very close.

 

Anything that close is never going to go our way in this country.

[Craiggybear 6,192]

*tinfoil hat on* 

 

I don't think there's anything wrong with that decision. 

 

Looked level from the TV cameras which were at a high corner angle to the pitch, but think it would have looked different from the actual VAR calibration looking straight along the pitch. 

 

Was also good to see the ref actually telling the linesman to fuck off and letting play flow. 

[Moody Blue Legend 61,699]

Calibration needs calibrated.  

[GOAT 30,449]

19 minutes ago, murzo said:

Butland or Lawrence one? Don’t think either were penalties. Lawrence one he’s got hands on him but there’s no force.

Lawrence I think, hands all over him.  Stone wall penalty.  We’d be screaming for that other way about.  

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,698]

1 hour ago, GOAT said:

Angles shit.  They really need to have small cameras that run the length of the pitch on electronic boards at the side or something.  I’m sure there must be some modern technology that makes it ten times easier than drawing fucking lines from shite angles.

id be more concerned that the tarriers got a penalty for the exact same thing we got a goal disallowed for the other week. 

They didnt get a penalty for the exact same thing we had a goal chopped off of