https://twitter.com/centregoals/status/1675097534518181890?s=61&t=CHnRQ3uRWoyAgq-tzUnftA
1 Like
Awful idea.
Why don’t we simply make automated offside a lot more effective.
1 Like
Pointless exercise really isn’t it? For the last 5 years they’ve failed miserably to crack offside to find part of the body that’s “deemed to be offside” (in favor of the defender) now they want to switch it to find part of the body that’s “deemed to be onside” (in favor of the attacker)…never ever gonna work.
Wenger proposed something like this a few years ago, saying it rewards attacking play, but it seems like it’s just going to encourage teams to fall deeper.
Also it obviously doesn’t solve anything in regards the application of the rule.
5 Likes
The only way to stop any debate on this matter as I see it… Would be if there was clear daylight between the attacker and defender… Blurred lines, overlapping lines just leads us to the nonsense we having to put up with…!
Whether it is a good idea to have clear daylight I have no inkling… They have made the game very complicated on certain issues…
Generally automated seems to work, work towards making that fail safe.
I think this is a retrograde step.
1 Like
Also continually changing this rule is the worst of all worlds. Football has huge governance issues but of course administrators are instead focused on fucking about with the rules.
2 Likes
Agree with this. The change is worse than simply keeping the rule and working on improving the decision-making.
The change won’t help the refs at all, but it could change football for the worse: as someone said, it will incite teams to fall back. Playing the offside trap will be a thing of the past, as if it fails, the forward will have a much bigger advantage on the defenders. Even quick defenders won’t be able to make up for it.
The end result will thus be football being played mostly without setting up an offside trap, and thus a much less interesting game to watch, with a ‘security first’ approach coming back into it.
2 Likes
It is WAY harder for the lino and so will almost certainly fail the tests its going through.
1 Like
What shit is this???
8 Likes
It all seems very American and I don’t like it!
Watching the NBA Final recently, I was struck by how intrusive it all was. When players were coming in and out they were interviewing them court-side while the game was going on behind them. Ugh.
I suppose it’s the natural progression of more and more money being paid by the media companies, so they will want more and more in return.
I don’t like it, but the players will do their bit and offer banal soundbites, as they know the broadcast revenue pays a good portion of their salaries.
2 Likes
The fuckers… as if the PL hadn’t already the highest income of all leagues… but they still want more.
This is the insanity though. This is being implemented by people who have seen it elsewhere, but somehow failed to observe that it is a pointless exercise that gives nothing to the viewers and adds nothing in entertainment value.
If this was a novel thing I didnt like I’d at least possibly offer them some credit for trying something. But they are implementing something that is shit and everyone thinks is shit. What the fuck are we doing here?
1 Like
Would prefer to be focussing on the match rather than listening to subs say “we just need to give it 110%, leave it all out on the pitch, it’s all about the 3 points, we go again etc’
4 Likes
It’s actually moving further away from what I want with TV coverage, which is something close to the stadium experience.
(OK, I could do without someone pissing down the back of my leg at half time, but stadiums have moved on since the 1980s.)
2 Likes
Well that’s impossible
2 Likes
Until they bring in woodwork that flashes every time you hit the post/crossbar (think T-20 bails) the game will continue to lose the kids.
7 Likes
This can be arranged… for a price.
1 Like
ahh, golden memories…
2 Likes