Wolves - v - Leeds United ***Matchday Thread***

[WTF11]

To simplify the "offside" rule, and make it an easy decision for the Ref/VAR, why not introduce a simple understandable definition - ie - If Either foot, or part of a foot is beyond the last defender then you are offside. End of - no elbows, backsides, forearms above the sleeve, kneecaps etc etc etc - who could argue then?

Too obvious to ever happen though spose

Precisely.

[Orgoner]

I guess what I’m really questioning is whether their equipment is precise enough enough to support the levels of accuracy they’re claiming.

And I’m still not bitter.

[Orgoner]

To simplify the "offside" rule, and make it an easy decision for the Ref/VAR, why not introduce a simple understandable definition - ie - If Either foot, or part of a foot is beyond the last defender then you are offside. End of - no elbows, backsides, forearms above the sleeve, kneecaps etc etc etc - who could argue then?

Too obvious to ever happen though spose

Their definition is fine (other than the stupid bit about including shirt sleeves), it just doesn’t always seem to be applied properly.

The biggest hole in your argument above would obviously be a well-timed diving header.

Still not bitter.

[hopelesslyoptimistic]

Their definition is fine (other than the stupid bit about including shirt sleeves), it just doesn’t always seem to be applied properly.

The biggest hole in your argument above would obviously be a well-timed diving header.

Still not bitter.

MOTD suggested it was his knee which was offside - his feet were clearly behind the defenders - unbelievable - that said it did look offside to the naked eye at normal speed.

[Orgoner]

Scabby own goals shouldn’t count either...

[LeedsFTW]

The problem imo opinion is that everyone wants the offside rule to be clearly defined, I.e. Black & white for all to comprehend. However the reality is that it will always be a rule which needs those grey areas to allow common sense to prevail.

Regrettably the biggest problem with the offside rule, is club managers whom also cry blue murder if their is anyway at all of claiming a decision has gone against them. You never here anything g about the 100's of offside decisions that called correctly.

[ozleeds]

To simplify the "offside" rule, and make it an easy decision for the Ref/VAR, why not introduce a simple understandable definition - ie - If Either foot, or part of a foot is beyond the last defender then you are offside. End of - no elbows, backsides, forearms above the sleeve, kneecaps etc etc etc - who could argue then?

Too obvious to ever happen though spose

To be fair it has always been in the rule book even back when I was playing. It states if any part of the body. That is the big one ANY PART.

[Orgoner]

To be fair it has always been in the rule book even back when I was playing. It states if any part of the body. That is the big one ANY PART.

Not true. It’s been all over the place.

As of now it is supposedly any part of the body you can lawfully score with.

Except the addition of the stupid shirt sleeves bit, which is bobbins - no goal should ever be allowed for any arm part below the top of the shoulder.

[Orgoner]

I always thought the “torso” definition was the most sensible.

[WTF11]

To be fair it has always been in the rule book even back when I was playing. It states if any part of the body. That is the big one ANY PART.

"Of the body".....not shirt sleeve, hem of shorts etc.