[LanceH]

> I'm not sure VAR is the net-benefit we think it is.

It is for offside. Offside calls were so egregiously bad it was painful to watch. Any time a defense got burned badly, the flag would go up.

Early 2000's someone watched an entire world cup and found that 25% of offside calls were obviously wrong.

I just rewatched the US v Germany match from 1998, and Kobi Jones was called offside on a breakaway when he was onside by 4 yards when the ball was kicked.

Also, goal line and maybe handball seems to be handled pretty well.

[redwoolf]

Then perhaps it’s the offsides rule that needs revision. Do you think the spirit of the rule is captured by foot position analysis? If two players bodies are in alignment and the attackers leg is just beyond the leg of the defender, does that really matter? The rule was designed to stop attackers from sitting deep between the defenders and the goalie.

[LanceH]

Ok, I agree with this. The offside rule is just weird. A person with a wide stance would simultaneously be close to be both endlines. In any normal sense if one person is further south, the other person is further north -- not so with the offside rule.

It also used to be that "even with was onside". Now there is no such thing as even with.

At this point with this tech, they could view both torses and say an entire torso has to be clear.

None of this helps soccer below the level with VAR.

The rule was designed to keep attackers from being "offside". For practical purposes, the offside trap has turned into a right for the defense.

At least the current rule is deterministic, rather than erring on the side of the defense over and over.