The Emirates FA Cup 2020/21

[Baddar]

It's not even my team but this is great to see. Fans make it.

[Bobfoc]

It's good to see a club outside the usual suspects winning a trophy.

I'm glad for Notts County alumnus Kasper Schmeichel.

[Hobo]

I didn't even watch but this is the most attention I've paid to an FA Cup final since Liverpool were last in one on.

Good for Brendan! Honestly don't think he's really appreciated for how good he is as a manager.

[DavidMarrio]

3 minutes ago, Baddar said:

It's not even my team but this is great to see. Fans make it.

This season as a whole has shown what fans being there actually brings to the "product"

[MJB]

So happy for Schmeichel. What a career he's had.

[Szumi]

I can only imagine Jamie Vardy told Ben Chilwell after the match, given his celebrations against his boyhood club on the disallowed goal, in true Jamie Vardy fashion, "CHAT SHIT GET BANGED!"

He probably inexplicably followed it up by shouting at Thiago Silva, "BREXIT MEANS BREXIT!"

[FLiam]

I hate Chelsea but that was a fucking scandalous decision. Offside rule needs major change.

[Baddar]

4 minutes ago, FLiam said:

I hate Chelsea but that was a fucking scandalous decision. Offside rule needs major change.

Didn't clubs pretty much unanimously agree that they like it the way it is though?

I mean, what can get better is the assurance that the lines they draw are as close to 100% accurate as possible, but as for the rule, I don't see it altering much any time soon.

Edit: Ah, so this is what it's like to have an owner that cares?

[Benjamin]

Hoping for Leicester to do this again on Tuesday, please 🙏

[gunnar hendershow]

Hard not to enjoy what Leicester have been able to manage the past 6-7 years. A great run that their fans will remember and cherish forever.

[Liam]

9 minutes ago, FLiam said:

I hate Chelsea but that was a fucking scandalous decision. Offside rule needs major change.

It is difficult. Offside is (or should be) a binary decision. Therefore, if you have the means to work out whether someone is offside, be it by a toenail or whatever else, I feel like you have to use it. Therefore, you end up with these marginal decisions, but technically speaking correct ones.

What might be needed is an offside rule that works alongside this new technology, but I don't entirely know what that would look like.

[Colly]

You can't change the offside law for the tech though, it wouldn't suit the however many hundred competitions where it doesn't exist. All you can change is the way VAR interprets offside, which has to be to add some tolerance for "level" (i.e. impossible to judge with the tech whether you're off) being onside as it always has been.

[Adam]

It's a total mess. Genuine question, when did the offside rule stop acknowledging "level" and the sense of gaining an unfair advantage? Because it just makes no sense that someone should have a goal taken off of them because a tiny centimetre of their body is beyond the line of the defender. It is nonsense.

I hated the sound of it at first, but maybe Wenger's "daylight" offside rule is the way forward.

I'm happy for Leicester, and Tielemans' goal merits winning any final, but Chelsea's goal should have stood in my view.

[Baddar]

The reason I prefer 'offside is offside' is because if there was to be a tolerance for level, as you put it, I think we'd have examples of a goal being given because it's level, and one that looks almost identical being ruled out. At least when these lines are drawn, we're given an answer, even though they are tight calls.

[Bobfoc]

Maybe just get rid of offsides and bring back public park goal-hanging.

[Naitch]

I think it should be measured from the feet, personally. They're the most important body part in the sport, where the players will most likely be putting their force/body weight, and can be objectively measured against from the relevant angle. Chilwell's shoulder being a centimetre past Soyuncu's elbow doesn't have any bearing on how the ball ended up in the net 30 seconds later, much less so than the goal at the other end.

I've seen takes that the rules clearly dictate which goal should and shouldn't have stood, and that that's why Leicester won, but those rules (and the way they're implemented on the pitch) clearly need reassessing when every other game seems to result in these kind of discussions nowadays.

[Adam]

1 hour ago, Baddar said:

The reason I prefer 'offside is offside' is because if there was to be a tolerance for level, as you put it, I think we'd have examples of a goal being given because it's level, and one that looks almost identical being ruled out. At least when these lines are drawn, we're given an answer, even though they are tight calls.

But it makes no sense to me, how someone's arm being off by an inch means it's offside. There is no advantage to that for the attacker and it just feels like the rule has completely lost its meaning and intent.

Offside exists to essentially stop goal-hanging. Yet 98% of the goals VAR has chalked off are nothing of the sort and most of the time it actively discourages clever attacking play.

[Colly]

1 hour ago, Baddar said:

The reason I prefer 'offside is offside' is because if there was to be a tolerance for level, as you put it, I think we'd have examples of a goal being given because it's level, and one that looks almost identical being ruled out. At least when these lines are drawn, we're given an answer, even though they are tight calls.

That's exactly what we have now though. The idea of applying tolerance isn't to stop using the tech, it's to acknowledge a) the limitations of the tech and b) to get back a bit of the spirit of the rule. As Adam says a two inch advantage is no advantage, especially considering the reason for the rule in the first place. It's being done in the Dutch league already with a small tweak (if the lines touch the on field decision stands, for me if the lines touch I'd make it onside), and that feels perfect to me.

[FLiam]

2 hours ago, Adam said:

It's a total mess. Genuine question, when did the offside rule stop acknowledging "level" and the sense of gaining an unfair advantage? Because it just makes no sense that someone should have a goal taken off of them because a tiny centimetre of their body is beyond the line of the defender. It is nonsense.

I hated the sound of it at first, but maybe Wenger's "daylight" offside rule is the way forward.

I'm happy for Leicester, and Tielemans' goal merits winning any final, but Chelsea's goal should have stood in my view.

This is what I mean. Pre-VAR, that would be looked at by pundits and they wouldn't call it offside, they'd say that the attacker timed their run perfectly - and that's exactly what I see. the fact a part of his arm is offside is nonsense, he can't even score with his arm. 

Goalscorers like van Nistelrooy, Owen and Inzaghi would have scored half the goals they did in this era. 

Edited May 15, 2021 by FLiam

[britneyspearsisgod]

See, you all say we need to change the offside rule but then I see Chelsea fans cry and I'm just wondering why fix something that gives us so much joy?