moomba
TheBrownDog
Looked offside to me.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Richmond v Melbourne - 7:25PM Wed
Squiggle tips Demons at 77% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
Recurring back injury. Sucks.Bloody hell that sucks, was showing some good form lately.
No. Reasonably certain also that there’s no ET. Straight to penalties if tiedDoes away goals count in the semis?
I don’t know, it was a better performance than the league game which shows he learnt something from that game. You are just seriously lacking firepower - I said to chef before it will start to make the natives restless (not to mention the owner) if he doesn’t fix that. Nothing more debilitating than following a team who can’t put goals on the boardSarri is pretty clueless TBH
He’s not utilising our two best players properly which is why we can’t score goals.I don’t know, it was a better performance than the league game which shows he learnt something from that game. You are just seriously lacking firepower - I said to chef before it will start to make the natives restless (not to mention the owner) if he doesn’t fix that. Nothing more debilitating than following a team who can’t put goals on the board
Looks can be deceiving.Looks offside to me, don't see how it was overturned.
Looks can be deceiving.
Agree. Thats why I was surprised the offside call was reversed. The only accurate way to review offside would be if there was a camera following the second last defender.
I think with offside its a black and white call and it starts from scratch. So its not an overrule, its whether in the opinion of the technology the player is offside or onside.
All the other decisions it comes down to the clear and obvious error thing
Based on the VAR image it is not offside.Agree. Thats why I was surprised the offside call was reversed. The only accurate way to review offside would be if there was a camera following the second last defender.
agreed, but with the technology as it stands that doesn't seem possible as i assume they cant do the shading and lines etc with a moving camera.It is a black and white rule but the camera angles often aren't. The offside this morning looked on from one angle but off from the other.
A camera in line with the second last defender would be the only 100% reliable way to review offside.
From the TV, feet in line with last defender but Kane's body was well forward. Unless the rule has changed, it's anything you can score from.
From the TV, feet in line with last defender but Kane's body was well forward. Unless the rule has changed, it's anything you can score from.
Maybe the original decision was I think he might be offside rather than a definitive offside.No you are correct with the rule. It seems like VAR images are only able to be determined by which part of the body is touching the ground. The grid on the above image is incorrect as the offside line is drawn at the feet of the striker. As you say his body is well forward of the second last defender.
Which makes the decision to overturn the offside all the more baffling.
Probably. That’s not the angle VAR had though.From the TV, feet in line with last defender but Kane's body was well forward. Unless the rule has changed, it's anything you can score from.