This is exactly what I believe too. VAR would work nicely if common sense was applied too it. Those in the office seemingly forget football’s about goals and excitement, it’s currently sucking the life out of matches with these debatably paper thin calls ruling goals out.
A delay of 5 minutes isn't a check, its a forensic analysis. The entire point of VAR was to provide clarity about 'clear and obvious errors', not to overturn microscopically marginal errors which almost everyone accepts is just part of the game and what makes it so unpredictable and enjoyable to watch. They put that terminology in because they realised that overstretching VAR's remit to correct even unclear and not obvious errors would suck the enjoyment out of the game, which is exactly what is happening now. By your argument, there is no end to the matter. What technically would be wrong with a 1 hour delay, if at the end of it clarity was reached? Should we be analysing offside calls at an atomic level? Where do we draw the line? To my mind, the line is drawn in a fair midway point between delivering accuracy and securing fan enjoyment. Football ultimately is not a science documentary, it's a meaningless sport that exists to entertain fans. Simple as that.
When VAR was introduced it was made clear that Offside and line calls were supposed to be either right or wrong and would be called as such. On Wednesday that bit took a few seconds and the goal could have been immediately disallowed. But the fact that Kane was in an offside position immediately brought into play another factor that the on field officials didn't even have to consider. Namely did the Sporting player play the ball deliberately or commit a handball offence. I don't think having an arbitrary time limit to sort this out helps anyone. It certainly wouldn't have helped Spurs because with your suggested rule they would have had to disallow the goal because the only thing they were sure about after 60s was that Kane was offside. I actually think the right solution is the rugby one where the referee gets replays of his/her choice on the big screen. Then everyone can see what is going on and why.
Agreed. But it's daft that intent is even mentioned in the Offside Law. The Law would be much simpler if you were only Offside if the ball had last been touched by one of your own players before you touched or tried to play it or impeded an opponent.
Would it? It's quite a hard skill to recognise your team mate is offside and then deliberately play the ball to him/her off an opponent. But if intent is in the Law it ought to be symmetrical....you shouldn't be offside if a team mate unintentionally touches the ball to you.
Imagine the uproar if an opponent was lying down injured and a player kicked the ball off them to an offside teammate who then scored a goal
I'm sure something similar to that happened once IIRC it was in a Holland match, given the likes of van Nistelrooy and van Persie always seemed to have the knack to be three or four yards offside yet a fortuitous deflection played them onside
Highlights for anyone that wants them: Shorter ones from the BBC: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/63455745
Anyone a fan of James Corden? (Probably not) Might make the most of his career while you can as he may not be around much longer!
Corden dropped in it by his writers. It's a very famous clip, I guess one of the writers was given 2 weeks notice.
