Football’s new offside law explained

[@rohannalawade3227]

2022 : Morata wins Balon d'or

[@henokhboanerges3252]

Lol

[@Ceob]

3el444rr

[@MrMooemoney]

😁😆😅😂🤣

[@horaceroyal5289]

Euros 2021 finals : Morata scores the winners to take Spain to the title

[@MbisonBalrog]

Morata become all time leading goal scorer in just a few seasons

[@Swordopolis]

This change doesn't actually fix the problems with VAR, it's just here to increase goals scored per game

[@cypher50]

If you reduce the VAR opportunities then that definitely helps. This law would directly limit VAR opportunities by making offside rulings more binary: body part is in line, it isn't offsides. That means that a VAR event is also shorter since the VAR official and ref only need to verify if a player has a body part in line. Even if you hate VAR, the benefit of this role change is obvious.

[@thisIsFunnyLolz]

This like people suggesting a super league or the World Cup every 2 years, it’s just about more goals and saturating the market with high scoring games like American sports which would ruin it all. Just get rid of VAR

[@cityslacker6221]

Ethan Avec , that is a bit of an over reaction.

[@dipthongthathongthongthong9691]

@@cypher50 Exactly, it's much easier to read with the naked eye any overlap between the body of the defender and the attacker. With various freeze framed angles it should be even easier. Any overlap likely means onside. And it should eliminate VAR taking up too much time. Even should have remained "ON."

[@tamagonbagel6569]

I don’t understand how this rule would change VAR use either. It just changes what you’re measuring.

[@Tomwithnonumbers]

I'm not convinced this encourages a higher defensive line. It gives the striker a major headstart in chasing for the ball, so the best way to defend it is to defend deeper where it matters less

[@joejoe1337]

This is my feeling too. Or at least, taking the PL as an example, I think it will deepen the divide between most and least "talented" teams and reward more teams with a low block. That being said, I think football should be more ready to give new things a try for a season and move back if it's not working. You see it quite often in American sports and it tends to work. Clearly something is wrong with the current rule/interpretation, so a bit of trial and error may be necessary.

[@mikehank2896]

@@joejoe1337 i dislike this idea too. I think it should be about teaching the referees. A cm offside isn't offside, a shoulder or torso leaning in isn't offside, if its really close, then it shouldn't be offside. it should be about where the feet are, not a slightly bended knee. any check that requires 1+ minute to check a goal should probably stand if there's. so minimal info to reverse it.

[@tizioincognito1238]

@@mikehank2896 But how do you define close? It's always the same problem. The offside rule is not open to interpretations, so we have to accept that even a mm offside is still offside.

[@joejoe1337]

@@mikehank2896 I think the way out of this is to find a technological solution that still "looks" like an offside to the naked eye. My suggestion (I've heard this before but can't remember who first said it) would be to continue to use the lines, but make them thicker and say they can't overlap. Therefore, rather than a whole body like Wenger is suggesting, it would give the attacking player 3-6 inches of advantage. For everyone watching in real time, an offside will really look offside but there will be a way to check it with precision.

[@danpreston564]

@@mikehank2896 the referees don’t need teaching. They know the laws. They are applying them.

[@CCullen95]

"Lessening the need for geometric crosshairs..." But, it doesn't at all? All we're doing is shifting the crosshairs to the other side of the defender? Offside decisions will still go to the millimetre. The only legitimately plausible offside solution is the Eredivisie, who have just created a larger margin of error. Also limiting offside to just the feet is a decent idea.

[@hux2000]

It would be even worse than the current law because it's much more difficult for an assistant to accurately spot "minute gap between attacker and defender" than it is to spot "attacker ahead of defender", which means VAR would be called upon more than it already is and, therefore, the number of irritating, millimetre-based "what exactly *is* a shoulder anyway" decisions would increase. Enough with the obsession with precise measurements. Let VAR draw the lines, make them accurate enough to help but not accurate enough to turn it into a discussion about the width of a human hair, don't let them say "offside" or "onside", give the refs the authority to make that decision and make it the rule that if it's too close to call, the attacker gets the benefit of the doubt. Done.

[@samfuel]

I believe the logic is: there’s a finite amount of pitch, so by shifting the rule in the attackers favour then there’ll be less pitch in which the attacker can be offside, thus reducing the potential for offside.

[@Christopher_TG]

Or just do what MLS does: don't even bother with the artificial lines and just have the ref eyeball it when reviewing. If it's not "clear and obvious" that an error was made, then let the on-field decision stand.

[@5TA1KR]

Honestly, that makes sense

[@logan_nowicki]

It doesn’t surprise me to hear MLS does this. It mirrors baseball where the ump calls the and (for the most part) if they’re then the teams just need to adapt to that. Specifically when calling pitches

[@alahiri2002]

@@logan_nowicki Hate on the MLS and the way American sports are handled all you want, but this is the way. It’s really not that hard. I always grew up knowing that the referee has the final say no matter what, and that should hold true at the highest level. We have the technology to give them a chance to rewatch the scenario if need be, but that basic principle is a fundamental part of this sport’s identity.

[@user-nu6ie7ti7g]

What is clearl and obvious? There is no way to define it. Offside is Offside. End of Story.

[@why772]

This seems best. More responsibility should be given to the ref on the pitch, too in handball/red-card/penalty situations. Some things are meant to be up for interpretation

[@homosapien5156]

1) This is just changing where the lines are drawn and where the millimetres are measured. 2) It makes an already unfair game even more unfair for defenders. And then people will moan that there no good defenders like years gone by. Guess what genius you were applauding the laws designed to discourage defending. At this point why not pass laws to eradicate defending from the game entirely.

[@Nifava]

USA style. Screw defense over with new rules and automatically see an increase in satitstics for offensive players, generating more superstars and more money. The problem is the sport itself becomes a joke, like we've seen happen in the NBA and NFL where defense barely exists anymore.

[@Jjb398]

@@Nifava it’s not that defense doesn’t exist it’s that rules favor offense. Defenders are actually the best they have ever been. More athletic and skilled in both sports than any other era ever

[@Jake-hw9kp]

Yeah it sounds like they are just moving the lines to me. They just shouldn’t use VAR for offside unless it’s totally clear and obvious, that’s the easy solution. It wasn’t brought in for minute offside calls. It should just be for big refereeing errors same is it is for as pens and stuff like that. They check offside far more strictly than anything else, even clear penalty shouts don’t always get VAR’d but every single offsides checked down to the millimetre!

[@Jake-hw9kp]

I disagree about the defenders though, there is a real lack of high quality ones around these days. In my opinion that’s more down to the game being played in a more attacking style rather than the offside rule. There was a ton of good defenders all over Europe 10-15 years ago and the rules not changed since then?

[@homosapien5156]

@@Jake-hw9kp That is exactly what I am saying mate. You are in agreement with me. Exactly mate rules did not change but their implementation certainly did. That's why it's stupid when say but the decision was right because the rule says so. If you looked at the game 15 years ago you would think we have a completely different set of rules if you didn't know that the rules actually haven't changed. 10-15 years ago, strength was actually an advantage and you could push attackers off the ball but now you can't do that it's given as foul and the rules have not changed one bit but their implementation has. Earlier if you got the ball, generally that was a clean tackle but now a defender is supposed to magically steal the ball from the attacker without touching him, if you touch the attacker it's a foul, most of the times it doesn't matter if you got the ball or not.

[@Smonserratm]

This is just moving the problem to another place. This has always been a matter of precision. You can't call mm offsides with a technology that has an uncertainty of 10? 20? cm.

[@TheArsenal21]

You also can't make wrong decisions on purpose

[@geoemm]

Are you sure the tolerance of the offside system is 10-20cm. if so the thickness of the defender line should be 10-20cm

[@alahiri2002]

@@TheArsenal21 You say on purpose, but I highly doubt most of these errors are intentional. Part of it is due to the fact that these howlers seem to have no correlation with each other-the idiocy is continuous from match to match. It may seem incomprehensible to you that people can make such stupid decisions without them being intentional (and you wouldn’t be crazy for thinking that, some of them have been horrific), but the truth is that they can. Firstly, there is an alarming shortage of professional referees. With how much abuse they get at the highest level, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what might deter someone from taking up refereeing. But I digress. The point is that the shortage causes the referees that make it to the top to be less competent than if there was a larger sample size. When referees are admitting to making decisions based on what they believe will cause less backlash as opposed to following the laws of the game, that tells you all you need to know. For one, we need our referees to actually know what the fucking laws are. And for another, we need the laws to not be vague and unclear. And as a side note, I’m using “referee” as an umbrella term for all kinds of match officials responsible for making match decisions based on the laws of the game. This would include the head referee, assistant referees as well as anyone working with the VAR team.

[@TheArsenal21]

@@alahiri2002 No I'm saying if you allow tolerance to the VAR checks you will be giving wrong decisions knowingly

[@alahiri2002]

@@TheArsenal21 I think that reflects more on how arbitrary the rules are than it does on decision making. There would be no issues with VAR checks if they had a definitive system (can be thought of as a checklist) to make the call in an efficient manner. We don’t have that because the people working VAR are bad at their job, and the people who wrote the laws left them too open-ended.

[@FootballAndSuch]

Imagine youve finally managed to explain to your girlfriend 'The Offside Rule' & now they go and change it.

[@void4993]

i feel bad for you 🤣

[@FootballAndSuch]

@@void4993 just a hypothetical bro lol

[@alexarango]

Hahaha, I feel you bro!

[@lebohangmabitle1619]

🤣🤣

[@piyushshukla3812]

Lmao

[@OlieWoli]

This change wouldn't change anything with VAR it would basically just flip the line to the otherside of the defender but will still be as finicky, it should just be based on boots as you can have clear colour difference from socks and will only be up to 1m off the ground at most so easier for the lines to be drawn

[@corpclarke]

Exactly. The video doesn't explain why it would actually make any difference. It just moves the pedantic replays to another part of the body.

[@Tomwithnonumbers]

Boots make so much sense. They're the only part of the body that gives you a tangible advantage at beating the defenders to the ball.

[@Impetum7]

My thoughts exactly. The biggest problem of VAR is identifying a thin and vague border between shoulder and arm. It's not consistent at all.

[@-Filip]

The new rule would give less offsides in general, but your idea with the boots is genius . I'd love to see that . I remember so many stupid offsides where the player has his feet behind the line, but not the body .

[@corpclarke]

@@-Filip Not sure it would cause less offside as attackers would just push further forward in response to the rule change to gain the extra advantage and hope a part of them is still onside. Just as they did when it was changed to in-line with the last defender.

[@tomastheboss5939]

What a rubbish new rule. I want more goals in football but at the same time I dont want to ruin the game for defenders. In my personal opinion they should pick between the foot or the head as the only part of the body that can be counted as offside. I couldn't care less if a players hand was offside or not

[@DongusKongus]

For me it should 100% be by the striker and defender's foot closest to the respective goal, and any other part of the body is ignored.

[@TheBullet0012]

A players hand can't be considered offside, because he can't score with his hand (except Maradona, R.I.P.). So even if his hand is offside, that doesn't matter. It doesn't count as being offside.

[@AltoCalibreOP7]

@@TheBullet0012 Tell that to Patrick Bamford

[@andytc4840]

@@TheBullet0012 Then tell that to Timo Werner (your point while technically correct is de facto wrong unfortunately).

[@TheBullet0012]

@@AltoCalibreOP7 I know there have been some crazy cases, the whole scenario where it was measured in their armpits, if they were offside.. that was ridiculous.. but according to the football, as I remember, it only counts if a body part, which is eligible for scoring goals, is offside.. meaning if your hand is offside, that doesn’t matter. You are not offside in that regard.

[@cathoderaytube1613]

I cant believe people are actually applauding this idea for being a solution to the VAR slowdowns. This just shifts the line from the attackers front to the attackera back. We will still be drawing lines for days. Just use the boots as the only part of the body used to determine offside and place tracking dots on them or something.

[@Electricdreams21]

Yea but it will be way less often, as a forward it's much easier to stay onside when you don't have to judge if you're level. The reason there are so many offsides that get reviewed is forwards want the advantage of being as level as possible to get the run/jump on a forward. This will mean they can get an extra half a yard and be onside

[@rithulrakesh6469]

@@Electricdreams21 but doesn't that make it too easy for forwards.. for defenders this new role would be a pain in the ass lmao

[@samizayn5666]

The quality defenders in this era are less compared to the previous era's defenders. If this offside rule is implemented then the quality defenders will be a scarcity. Yes, people like attacking football and it is entertaining but we are shifting from "The best team wins" to "The best attack wins". Anyways, people are supporting it now but then as soon as their team concedes a goal they would want the old rule back. Fickle.

[@jgunner94]

@@samizayn5666 The rule would apply to everyone and they will all have to adapt so this doesn’t make sense. The best will stand out.

[@rickymetz869]

@@Electricdreams21 I think it still just shifts things. Forwards will adjust runs to be as ahead of the defender as possible now and will be offside around as much.

[@ishaandw]

Doesn't solve the problem though. Instead of the scrutiny being at the front half of an attacker, the scrutiny has moved to the back half. There will still be offside calls decided by those 2mm

[@markwebb7576]

Exactly. Whatever parameters you set for offside, wherever and however you draws the lines, there will always be scenarios where a player will be a millimeter over that line. Maybe we just need to accept there is no perfect system. Every system throughout football history has had it's issues. There are no easy answers.

[@kockorzo]

I am not sure if you understand. It solves the problem.

[@arroe8386]

​@@kockorzoNo, it simply doesn't in any way...

[@sebastiandalpozzo5362]

Doesn't it still come down to millimetres, what's the difference?

[@necromax13]

...it does. Stoppages for VAR decisions will be the same and then some.

[@uzairhussain8885]

Think about it you can't be offside if you are pointing where you want the ball now

[@uzairhussain8885]

@DJ Barrett a lot of coaches will actually try to push higher for an offside plus it doesn't actually change that much it's maybe a yard extra head start for attackers

[@uzairhussain8885]

@DJ Barrett there's a lot of fast defenders as well so trans with fast defenders will risk it but also with a low block which you are suggesting it will show for more wingplay i.e. more crosses so there is still more stack that way as well

[@uzairhussain8885]

@DJ Barrett honestly all of it has value a yard won't change the game that drastically I just think that this could be good as it would reduce those bad offside calls like bamford's goal and van dink's injury (Pickford should have seen red)

[@zsht]

This doesn’t solve nipple hairs and nanometers making players offside. MLS or Eredivisie methods allow a margin of error, which mean that if it is too close to call by eye, then it isn’t deemed a significant advantage to be offside.

[@hihihi1q23]

Whoever made that Wenger drawing was clearly very Wenger-out.

[@angryman132]

He looks demonic

[@VictorvanRossum]

The change that should be made is with the var. Look at tennis, field hockey or volleyball. If players feel that the referee mist a call than they can ask a referral and the var look at the situation again. The var comes with a final decision. If the player is right than they keep the referral, if they are wrong the lose the referral for the rest of the game. Problem solved, thank you.

[@xpoints8693]

WTF ! The smart defenders who rely on closing gaps beforehand than running would be screwed because an attacker would be already a foot ahead of them. They'd just need their part of heel to be in line with Defender. According to this rule only defender to survive this would be the athletic and quicker ones.

[@sij748]

Or defensive lines would sit deeper, where speed and athleticism of defenders would be less of an issue

[@azrrrrrrrr]

thank god. i am sick of those 1.90m 90kg monsters that have zero flare. just pure aggresiness. every play they make is on the edge of foul. same goes for pogba and rabiot

[@xpoints8693]

@@sij748 Wasn't the main motive of this rule to make game bit more attacking ? In future Players like Pique, Mascherano, Thiago Silva who coped well with high line would get screwed next moment. Even faster defenders would have problems. CBs would have to retire early from bigger clubs. Ramos,34 Chiellini,36 Boating,32 who still are heart of RM, Juve & Bayern defence would no longer have same impact. Still VAR would spend time checking heel instead of player's nose

[@xpoints8693]

@@azrrrrrrrr Adama Traore would be better defender than Canavaro if this rule is applied. Just revovery pace and vibes.

[@BenjaminKeller]

@@xpoints8693 you say all of this as if it was a bad thing 🤔

[@greyafrodude]

Wenger's idea is so stupid. Of all the proposed changes to the rule I've seen, this is the worst BY FAR. It might actually be worse than the current system

[@lonestarr1490]

What other proposed changes do you have seen?

[@BT-kc3ee]

Its an excellent idea

[@mcbrodz1663]

I agree it’s the exact opposite of what it is rn and it’s worse

[@mali.mrwetyana5656]

@@lonestarr1490 van Basten wants to cancel the entire offside rule

[@thabosibiya1457]

Offside rules are changing Alvaro Morata: say what

[@fahada1921]

😂😂😂😂

[@jesseadjei741]

The death of the art of defending 💔

[@FreshdumbledoreMC]

Can someone explain to me why this actually solves the problem ? Seems to me like you’re just changing the location of the line from the front of the player to the back.

[@homosapien5156]

You are exactly right

[@bardockobama5495]

It makes an offside more obvious, will this rule, there will be less need of the var checking millimeters of a striker being offside.

[@thomazprimoalves7025]

Because with VAR being in "the same line" as the defender is virtually impossible. You are either before it or after it, making so every atacking player has to wait for the past for a second longer in order to move and catch the pass. This has made the rule virtually change back to where it was before the "same line" change, good for defenses and bad for attackers. The proposed change takes the spirit of the same line change and apply it to modern technologu, privileging attackers.

[@JohnAdams-ks4qo]

there would only need one line to be drawn now... much better than before and much clearer to see

[@bewareofsnow]

@@JohnAdams-ks4qo Would we not still need two lines - one for the furthest-back point on the attacker's body and one for the furthest-forward point on the defender's body?

[@williamstarck6863]

Defenses will probably more often sit deep because of this new rule. They'd rather just defend than try with an offside trap.

[@williamstarck6863]

@Antisocial Freak it'll least to less attacking football though. So less goals.

[@Account.for.Comment]

@@williamstarck6863 Defenders don' t even do offside trap. Even The Arsenal Back Four that is known for the offside trap, said they never did it, it simply the dumb striker who run too quick. The point is to remove the time wasted trying to determine if it really a goal. They may sit deep, or they try to go higher when they have the ball and getting involve with the play. I can see the point, should to test it out in some leagues.

[@accobra4272]

Which is proven in this WC. More teams just sit back and defend.

[@the_konando]

Still doesn't account for 2 key things: 1. Who decides (upon reviewing) what "frame" is the official moment the ball is being played? Alot can change between the ball touching and leaving the foot/head. 2. Whether you're using the current or the proposed rule, you'll still have the VAR officials checking down to the millimeter. This rule change just makes it more of an attacking game...which isn't really the issue. There will always be clear and tight offsides...how does this change anything?

[@G5U5]

On #1, would be nice to see their exact ruling on that one, since they can't even keep consistent line with handballs. On #2, exactly! checking if attacker is in front of the defender is same as checking if the attacker is completely in front of the defender. And extra, how can they say accuracy down to millimeters, if those pictures can't distinguish 1cm. For fast VAR offside decisions, we need totally different ruling, something along the lines of: Was the attacker offside x frames ago (10ms ago or something).

[@riccardostopazzola7931]

Good luck chasing Haaland or Mbappe if they're even given 4 feet of advantage

[@schoolboymakhaba7462]

Nah this law would screw the defenders over ffs

[@dvd08270]

More goals..

[@kauswekazilimani3736]

@@dvd08270 It's not necessary.

[@danpreston564]

That’s what they said when they made it the second last defender, when they made level mean onside. Every change they’ve said this.

[@branthall1787]

@@kauswekazilimani3736 Prove it. Wenger has a solid case backed by evidence. You have nothing.

[@anibalrodriguez2626]

@@branthall1787 Because the problem stays the same, it's not changing anything. The mm offside will still be there, just from a different perspective now

[@thataaronb]

Slow defenders must be sweating right now. Harry Maguire, I'm looking at you.

[@MrMooemoney]

😁😄😆😅😂🤣

[@sameerbrown673]

Legend has it He is still busy turning that massive head of his, to look back at you.

[@internetenjoyer1044]

slower defenders will find a niche in low blocks that will spring up due to this change. It's the van dijks of the world who specialise in the high lines with their pace that'll suffer.

[@lisashhotwife2732]

Hi I'm Harry maguire and I'm sweating

[@afiq358]

@@internetenjoyer1044 van dijk will never have back that pace after he did his acl.

[@mattg5878]

This just means people would be onside by an arsehair. Make it on field decision unless there is daylight between the defender and attacker

[@dvd08270]

Which probably would result in more goals beeing scored.. I think that's good

[@RD-wg9em]

@@dvd08270 minute offsides are still gonna be a think tho, it’s just making the game even harder for defenders and making playing high lines borderline impossible

[@lebronjohnson6735]

Poor reporting by Tifo. This obviously wouldn't change anything with VAR because its still a decision that's gonna come down to a few centimeters and the eyeballing of the var.

[@MitchWebb94]

I return back to your previous video on the issues of VAR, primarily the application of the tech. Under this proposed new rule, the issues would still remain - geometric lines would still be required often to assess if the last part of an attacker is in line with the first part of a defender. VAR needs to be for clear and obvious errors - I.e if you need to drag out the lines, it’s no longer clear and obvious and the decision of the ref should stay.

[@LNRT11]

This is quit similar to the way the NBA handles it. A call can be callanged or reviewed but it won‘t Be changed unless it‘s clearly wrong.

[@RahadianKelikPrayoga]

It’s simple: “An Offside should be the foot.” Not hand, head, hair, etc. it’s football not a sprint race. End of discussion.

[@Storiaron]

So everything should stay as it is. Tifo football seems to hate var, it's not their first video where they take a stance against it for no reason

[@Aeterna71]

Exactly

[@meetbhatt7330]

I don't agree with this, because defending is also an integral part of football. This rule totally favours attackers and would not solve the issue we have with VAR.

[@retrorami]

And that's their idea. They're not worried about fixing VAR or anything. They're just using people's ignorance and hatred towards VAR to push for a change to make football more "entertaining" and "more exciting" to their new target audience: americans. How do they do that? By doing exactly what the NFL and the NBA did, by changing the rules to favor the offense, as casuals only care about scoring. People like this aren't interested in the sport and it's nuances, they see it just as another entertaining tv show. They have the WWE as a model for what they call "sports entertainment". These people don't care about the integrity of the sport, they just care about larger profit margins.

[@samoso6979]

@@retrorami spot on.

[@PlaymobilusMaximus]

I don't understand how anyone can be against more attacking football? With very few exceptions, high scoring games are more fun to watch than low scoring ones. But I agree that it doesn't affect VAR at all.

[@_MrMoney]

Imagine strikers now Naruto running to the goal so they can be cleared by their hands

[@aymanbenbaha]

Hands aren't counted for when judging an offside situation. Only body parts that are allowed to touch the ball.

[@AlexThePlatypus]

I really don't see how this would help with VAR. This only would move the line slightly forward and we would still have the same line drawing and measuring the line from someones nose. If we would want to make the line drawing easier we just could just move the offside line to start from the whicever part that the player is touching the ground.

[@realog868]

Offside Rule Should Be Like This - if The Part you used to score the goal was offside , then it's an offside & if not , then it shouldn't . Not hard & sounds fine

[@tevorspace8812]

When Tifo uploads, you know it’s time to learn something very valuable.

[@Nyante]

Amen

[@lebronjohnson6735]

Not this time.

[@CCullen95]

Except, they're wrong this time.

[@KindredBrujah]

Not so much here, honestly. It's a pretty bad take without much real critical analysis. I'd expect better.

[@cillianfitzmaurice4147]

This wouldn’t change the VAR situation either as they will still be checking to the finest detail if they are onside or not

[@laoganmafootballclub6632]

So do we know if you're Kieran Gibbs or not yet?

[@xomifred]

He's either Kieran Gibbs or not and that's okay.

[@darthhades80]

No, you are Kieran Gibbs

[@Muzlightyear]

What? Sound snothing like him. Not nearly london enough.

[@dreamjackson5483]

GPS sensors or something similar? I agree. I see it as the same problem. They need to go full in with the technology and use technology to instantly determine offside. Much like the goal line technology. Make it as simple as possible. GPS sensor on your boots, or back or whatever

[@sij748]

Arsene Wenger: “We need to change the offside law” Ibrahim Sangaré: “I am the offside law”

[@thebiasedreview5432]

I don't understand.

[@makchot3263]

@@thebiasedreview5432 it's just a dumb and overused meme

[@TheatypicalLife]

Are you threatening me, master Wenger?

[@turosfagyi]

Offside rules: change Filippo Inzaghi: I shall now return to the pitch

[@jasneshbhullar2858]

I'm here so early that I'm offside and the video did not play.

[@ggmu4656]

🤣🤣

[@sakiaung]

you won the best comment award

[@nadadur]

VAR checking dub Decision: Dub awarded

[@mathres17]

I feel like this would make pace more important for center backs, as they would have to track back on infiltrating strikers more often. But I dont know if we need it. I dont feel like games are boring rn

[@luke1081]

Does this not just change where the line is?

[@Raul-ed3di]

Or we could just use common sense and say if you can’t determine if they’re offside just by looking at it, then the call on the field stands

[@rezaarmeynaldo7372]

Why manage another club when you can 'manage' the entire football game

[@thisIsFunnyLolz]

And manage both into the ground

[@hegeliandianetik2009]

@@thisIsFunnyLolz yeah finishing twice outside the top 4 after 22 years and 7 FA Cups and 3 league titles is "into the ground". Your sanity is in the ground mate

[@rezaarmeynaldo7372]

@@thisIsFunnyLolz ooo we got a disatisfied 'arsenal fans' here, or a sp*rs fans i reckon lol

[@vishweshjoshi4681]

@@hegeliandianetik2009 not to mention building them a world class stadium along the way

[@hegeliandianetik2009]

@@vishweshjoshi4681 right, before Wenger Arsenal had no training ground and used to share a wonky pitch with University students. These people have no understanding of what that man did for that club. Him and Ken Friar built the modern Arsenal

[@15Monkeylord10]

Arsene wengers proposal doesn’t end the argument of uncertainty it just flips it. The leading foot comparison narrows in and simplifies everything. It will take less time to look at and it’s nowhere near as harsh as the current offside rule. All the while not putting defenders at a huge disadvantage

[@OverAbsol410]

Wenger looks like a villain in the thumbnail lmao

[@djpalme11]

I mean he kinda is in this situation

[@A-Grat-A]

He is villain. They gonna ruin the football with his crazy ideas.

[@Bill-qw4hs]

Your intelligent way of slagging var off with such subtlety and class is so admirable, keep it up guys

[@MisterFreak579]

It will reduce offsides being called and create more Goals, I'm all in for it, and I hope he gets the green light for it.

[@yankeefanbryson19]

Wenger's change doesn't get at the root of the problem. People aren't complaining about how many goals are getting called back, they're upset about the millimeter-accurate examination that leads to the goals getting called back. Wenger's "solution" merely moves the crosshairs to the player's back foot instead of their front foot. Just do what MLS still does: have the referee make their judgement unaided by the lines. If it's close enough to need a crosshair, it's not "clear and obvious" and the decision stands.

[@jopearson6321]

I think it will be a largely positive change because it will shift some of the burden off of the striker (currently hesitating in their runs to stay onside) onto the defender (now forced to go with a moving striker or else forfeit keeping up with them). That will make it much harder to maintain a disciplined line, which will likely mean defenders dropping deeper much more rapidly. I'd expect the defensive winners to be more athletic defenders with good tackling ability, and the losers to be slower defenders, especially those that relied primarily on disciplined positional play. So the overall play is likely to be somewhat more frantic and counter attacking, with pacy attacking players who run off the shoulder of the last defender the biggest beneficiaries. Personally, I'm very for this, but I can see why others might be sceptical. Whilst I think that football as a team sport is fairly weighted towards defending, all of the momentum in recent years is making things harder for defenders (and centrebacks in particular), especially when it comes to individual duels.

[@istvanmiko4082]

I think teams are going to park the bus, because strikers are simply way faster than defenders. Counter attacks will be unstoppable with this rule too, which gives more of a reason as to why a team should never actually attack and instead wait until they get a counter.

[@aerogamer3549]

I don't understand because the lines will still exist except now they would be drawn at the back of the attacker. Same stuff if you ask me

[@Ben-nr2rm]

I dont think its trying to solve the VAR issue. Its trying to give advantage to the attacking team.

[@lukitas207]

Wenger’s original idea of making the offside line thicker was better I think. This offside law gives attackers way too much advantage.

[@markfish1113]

His proposed law gives strikers even more advantage to stand behind the defender to time the runs easily. He is an attacking coach. No surprise here. There will be no chance to park bus with this law when the attackers keep making successful runs.

[@lukitas207]

@@markfish1113 no, his original offside law idea was to make the offside line thicker by a few inches. This new one is to make someone onside as long the last part of their body is in line with the last part of the defender which is even more aggressive than the original rule he proposed

[@markfish1113]

@@lukitas207 both proposals still very aggressive favour the attacker, i will see what the defensive coaches say. I think its not easy to be passed.

[@Pedri009]

Not considering if this measure helps to have more goals or not, I think one of the problems still remains: the problem of time wasted during VAR checking to see which part of the attacker or the defender is closer to the goal. I think a change is necessary, but i would prefer something like taking only the feet (or the part of the body on the floor) so on the majority of cases there wouldn't be necessary to waste so much time (and making mistakes) trying to decide which part of the body is more advanced

[@jackkelly6251]

They should just measure Offside with the player's boots. Would make things much simpler without having to handicap defenders so much.

[@LeeH688]

That’s effectively what this rule does. The furthest back body part of each player is usually always the feet when running. The current rule is usually measuring from shoulders because it’s the furthest body part forward. This rule is literally bringing in what you’re suggesting.

[@ritchierich2793]

This illustration of the video (VAR of certain Wenger body parts) is absolutely priceless..

[@JasonRennie]

The real problem seems to be perceptions that "new" and "change" equals fewer VAR checks. If you don't want offsides VAR checks, get rid of offsides.

[@jackbrownio3]

It would probably cause delays still, but the benefit is that it will be attacker friendly, so massively reduces disallowed goals. Without VAR the attacker was always given the benefit of the doubt so will feel more like back to the old but with better accuracy.

[@kreigers8465]

2:27 FFS, "Thats a knee hair". I lost it there

[@car9melo]

They should just go off the feet,as long as both attackers feet are behind one of the defenders feet you're all good

[@dannyausteen8115]

arsene wenger still has an impact on the english game, even when not a manager

[@hegeliandianetik2009]

FIFA, the game in general

[@anandaputramahendra]

the new law in my opinion is just tell the linesman to sit in front of big monitor watch the defense line but without the zoom functionality just rely on naked eyes, he still can replay the video, so if the linesman happen to "saw" the offside the decisions should already been made from the linesman. no extra discussion needed.

[@thomazprimoalves7025]

I really like this proposed change. With the arrival of VAR, being in "the same line" as the defender is virtually impossible. You are either before it or after it, making so every atacking player has to wait for the pass for a milisecond longer in order to move and catch the pass without being offside. This has made the rule virtually change back to where it was before the "same line" change, good for defenses and bad for attackers. The proposed change takes the spirit of the same line change and apply it to modern technology, privileging attackers and the goal of the sport itself, which is to score goals.

[@manh385]

It is better to take Head, Torso and Thigh to be on side. Also avoid Arms, Stud and Shank ( lower part of legs [ upper part of legs is Thigh ] ) to being considered for on side.

[@pablomenabarrios5666]

i don't like it at all

[@Arto91]

This really doesn't change anything, just moves the point from which VAR draws the lines.

[@pradyumnaerankar8391]

It's amusing how football laws are updated almost ignoring that the defenders exists and they too are human!!! 💯😶

[@lisashhotwife2732]

Defender's lives matter

[@KeizerrO]

I had an idea on how to fix VAR: give both lines a certain width (let's say 5cm) and when both lines overlap eachother the attacker is considered level and thus onside.

[@frankm.d1479]

Breaking News: PIppo Inzaghi has announced his un-retirement and will be joining Juventus on a free deal 😂😂😂

[@harrisonwilson5319]

Why can’t we just say that if you have to use technology and lines to decided if something is offside, treat it as offside

[@williamhawkins3670]

the last time i was this early alex hadn't discovered ibrahim sangare

[@jacobalexander1815]

It encourages a deeper line but gives more advantage to attackers and I think the rule he's suggested actually might make the decisions more consistent and less contentious because the same rules are applied the same way every time. It seems less subjective to me.

[@pulproman6892]

Just adding more chaos. Wenger at his finest smh.

[@josiahwardrosebuddies]

I'm not sure if this would make offside any less controversial because officials using VAR will still be encouraged to analyse by the millimetre, just the other side of the striker. Surely the best way to change is not use such finicky lines and go by the naked eye

[@ConstantineJoseph]

I still prefer the old days where the linesmen and referees just make the decisions. Makes the game faster, more controversial and more passion all around.

[@ATB_8986]

This would mean huge changes to set pieces. All the forwards can sit in behind the defensive line and just leave a trailing foot to be onside.

[@RMLLcrazy]

Actually massive, really.

[@4LIFEACMILANFAN]

WENGER OUT AGAIN

[@andyhalliday3103]

We should adopt a Cricket style review system for offside: the linesman calls it on the pitch and the VAR check would determine it a goal, no goal or "umpires call" if it's too marginal to be overruled by VAR

[@pavelr4752]

I personally don't think that that would change a lot - it just would move the line(s) that still would need to be drawn closer to the goal. I think it requieres a different type of change: 1. Offside should only be determined by the the FEET of the players. This has the benefit, that we don't need a line drawn from a players armpit or nose, where the chosen spot on the body from where the line is drawn often feels random to me.. 2. Only draw ONE line, along the foot of the defender. If then you cannot clearly determine, wether the attackers foot is closer to goal than that line (can you see any of the foot behind the line?), it shall not be called offside

[@olicrook4292]

This problem with this is that it's going to lead to pace becoming even more of an important factor. This will just encourage teams to fill their sides with fast players and play on the counter even more than is the case now instead of trying to play a more technical, passing game. Which is fine if you like watching that kind of frenetic, back and forth football that is common in the PL now, but I prefer to watch teams pass the ball and try to control games.

[@MbisonBalrog]

PL is best in world 🌎

[@theHippiecat15]

I am actually a fan of the current offside rule and VAR used in the EPL.

[@Guesswhokk]

It a much more contrasting (entertaining) method: it will either increase tighter defense with more possession for the attacking team OR giving sprinters a bigger advantage attacking those with weak defense due to recovery position from far side of the pitch.

[@meson2439]

It won't be long until we have the same rules as NBA and score tallies exceeding a hundred in a single game. What a farce.

[@CianMcCabe98]

People are supporting making football more attack friendly when defenders are already crippled by barely being allowed to make contact with a player in and around the box, and basically having to play with their arms behind their backs

[@justinparrish3704]

Next we need them to fix the handball rule

[@bladechild2449]

The best way is just to judge offside by attackers feet and all of the defenders body. If a defenders head/shoulder/ or feet is playing the attackers feet onside, it's onside. Gets rid of attackers pointlessly being offside when they're running forward with their shoulders out, while defenders try to spring out to get them offside, when they never score with said shoulder anyway

[@MrEgor31]

Great Thank You for this interesting work. Change rule is inevitable

[@Nebulous-YT]

I can’t see how this would stop the use of lines, they are just measuring it from a different place.

[@pezushka]

The most important change is needed is fact that most penaltys rewarded are not proportionate to the foul committed. 7/10 of fouls committed in the box are completely inproportionate to the advantage given by the penalty. The box needs to be smaller, probably a semi circle.

[@quyc6720]

This change will benefit the defending teams as counter attacks will be insanely op. The obvious answer to this is to leave more players to defend when you possess the ball leaving your attackers in a huge number disadvantage which will lead to an extremely boring football

[@neerkoli]

I think people are confused about why this is considered an improvement. Old rule - Offside line is behind the forward most part of attacker's body - offside New rule - Offside line is behind the backward most part of attacker's body - offside I guess the reason officials are giving it a positive response is because they think the chances of 2nd case happening is much less compared to the first. That means the linesman will give the right call most of the time, thereby reducing VAR checkup and thus game stoppages.

[@TheFilmFella]

The Bamford bit at the beginning 😂. Excellent work!

[@JosephMeme]

Big up Alice Devine, her illustrations make this channel so satisfying and clear 😀

[@alextutton3887]

It's a relatively simple fix, instead of one line, you have two, if the attacker is touching the second line which is behind the first it is deemed offside, this allows for margin of error. Secondly, body parts that cannot be used to score a goal (sleeves, arms etc.) are not considered as offside if they are touching this second line. Ez.

[@15Monkeylord10]

Offside should compare the attackers leading foot to the defenders foot (nearest to the goal). Just to confirm the foot is not the knee or the head or any other body part other than the foot

[@harley.digital]

Honestly, if the VAR gave a larger margin like instead of of 1-2mm, just make it an inch or 2 tolerance level there wouldn't even be any talks.

[@KFC-rl9wr]

Offsides should be measured from the boot. this will avoid drawing those verticals lines. even when attacking players time their run, they look at the defenders boot not their shoulder or whatever. and i think most who play an attacking position will agree with me. even in the old offside replays on TV before VAR, the offsides line is always drawn at the boot

[@distilledwill]

I don't understand how changing where the line is will stop the debate about whether a player is within or outside said line. Either we'll be measuring whether X part of player is in an offside position (as we do now) or we'll be measuring whether X part of player is in an onside position (as this suggests). How does that remove the lengthy checks?

[@vrt1718]

As many of you have already remarked, this doesn’t change the VAR wait, it just changes the things being measured. Until precise measurement is a possibility, lose the lines and make an immediate call when reviewing the footage (when necessary). The other option, would be to only measure using the feet? Maybe even put chips into footballers’ boots?

[@MrRodzilla]

i dont see how it lessens the need for time consuming stoppages, it will now just be replaced with a stoppage finding out if a piece of the players body is in line with the defender