.
yea lovely rule
might cost them first in the group
>>155576627should this be a goal?
>>155576627Would that be considered still in bounds?
>>155579766no but if more than half the ball is over the inside of the goal line, it should be.That is easily measurable now - and there'd be at least two extra goals in this tournament if so. well deserved goals.
>>155576627how, what absolute shit
>>155579827sadly yes
>>155579827It was in the Japan vs Spain game in 2022
>>155576627I really don't see how this is not considered a goal, it's beyond the post and fully on the ground beyond the line but they are saying a portion is not touching the line but hanging over it. dumb
>>155576627I'm against looking for reasons to rule goals out. Modern football is obsessed with fine combing to rule goals out, playing percentages leading to sterile football like Arsenal. Ruling goals out because someones face, toes, shoulder or hand is offside is madness and infuriating. Goal line technology usually works pretty well, but when its this narrow, is it even within tolerance technology wise.
>>155579842what if its exactly half? should partially in count as a full point? I think entirely in is best, much like in basketball.
>>155579962That's the rule, that's why (shrug).Interestingly (or not), it's the exact opposite of rugby, where you just have to touch the line (hence why it's called "the touchline" at the sides).
>>155580114Same thing in football (American) it just has to break the plane of the line with any part of the ball.
>>155580114>>155580156this would be better imo
>>155580156>>155580114But its the same as it is in soccer with hockey, the reason being theres a goalie
>>155580230no it wouldn't, half of the balls hitting the post would count as goals despite not going in
>>155576627TWOPIXELS
>>155576627What reliance on technology does to a once soulful sport
>>155579962How would you feel if you didn't have breakfast today?
>>155576627>>155579766>>155579842easlily solved by making the line not be as wide as the ball, should be 1/10 as wide as it is
>>155582376
>>155582450kek
>>155582376What would that solve? 1m thick or 1 cm. It still has to cross it completly.
>>155582450reduce the width from both sides equally until only the very middle portion remains
>>155576627They would have probably counted this as a goal before the technology was there
>>155576627So it happened again
>>155583474are you stupid? if you reduced the width from both sides equally it would work for this case, but for other cases it would still lead to the same problem.
>>155576627this is the only time I approve of the 0.01mm BSit's the only consistent use of any kind of technology in this sport
>>155579842You must have the same brainworm as the folks who think changing offside from any body part to the entire body ahead of the defender will fix that. No, there’s still going to be a hard cutoff and marginal decisions that technology needs to make and people aren’t happy with. You’ll just have balls that are 49.9% in and people will chimp and ask why those don’t count if 50% does. There has to be a line drawn somewhere and “full ball fully over line” is a much simpler rule and easier to judge esp in real time than “half the ball”. Do your neck in, you idiot.
>>155583508Wrong. Rules guidance (official commentary IFAB offers on laws) has always been a goal is only given if the referee is CERTAIN the ball fully crossed; refs are discouraged from awarding uncertain goals. With this one being almost impossible to judge with a person on the ball and some in the way, and being very close (not in) it’s likely a good ref would not have awarded it in real time with no technology aids.
>>155579962
the rule should be if the tangent point of the ball to the ground has PAST the white line, its a goal. its the only reliable way to tell if the ball is inside the goal or not. if the ball is not in the ground, then trace a vertical line across the center of the ball and touch the plane (ground) to make sure its center has passed the white line, then its a goal as well. having this rule of the whole sphere passing the white line is UTTERLY RETARDED. wtf do you mean 75% of the ball is across the white line and its not a goal? WHAT THE FUCK?
>>155585746Now think of any referee doing it without technology. You’re an assistant referee at an amateur game, on the end line, judging if a ball shot in the air goes inIs it easier to determine: a) when the whole of the ball is over (not in line) with the goal line - you see “daylight” between themb) the exact center point of the ball, comparing its position to the line? The current rule is the easier one to judge in real time because it creates visual separation when viewing from the side; judging proportions of volume is much harder than just seeing a gapBut of course a bramonkey probably can’t follow this line of argument
>>155576627If it were Riggi they'd give him the goal
>>155576627>>155585737make it depend on the center of the ball, there solved it, and fine lines should be done away with, it should all be based on feeling just like the good old days
>>155585786we are not in the 50s nigga
>>155585825If you’re going off of feeling and real time judgment then full ball is way more logical and easy to judge since you can use “daylight” as the decider vs needing to mentally weigh proportions of the ball. See >>155585786I actually agree with the going off sentiment and getting rid of tech. Anything that can be measured to the millimeter is going to have decisions that come down to the millimeter and the only way to avoid that is not measuring. Offside and goals should have “VAR” but it should just be the ref rewatching it live speed once or twice to make sure he REALLY didn’t miss something obvious; if it’s tight, you just go with your gut or initial decision
>>155582450jej
>>15558586299% of the game functionally is still in the 50s, retard. Soccer is more than just a top level pro sport. If you change the rules it affects every level of player. You can’t have radically different rules between pro/top level and regular amateurs and youths because it would create awkwardness and friction when players transition and move up/down levels. Unless you’re proposing someone with an iPhone stand on the end line and record every time a team gets close so they can watch back the video to make the judgment, then you need to base the Laws of the Game on what a human can judge; technology exists to reinforce and qualify these judgments, not make them on its own
>>155585929you are stupid as fuck DAMNwhat im proposing is not rocket science, you dont need any new technology. you can literally do this with VAR. the purpose is to change the rule from having the whole sphere cross the white line from having only the center of the ball crossing the white line because at least IT MAKES SENSE having most of the ball cross the line instead of 99,999999..%. at ground level that would mean the tangent part of the ball would cross the white line. ITS EASIER to make a decision in a game with VAR if most of the ball has crossed the white line rather than if 1 ATOM of the ball isn't inside the goalnow if youre advocating for a game without any technology then do whatever you want, but the goal here is to be fair
