When judges sit to decide how statutes are to be interpreted, they often look at the mischief behind the law – it means that they look to see what behaviour it is that the new law is designed to prevent. If they did this with the offside rule in football, they’d decide that it was to outlaw goal-hanging, and to give the defenders a fair chance of competing – to prevent the attacker from having an unfair advantage. We can perhaps all agree that a toe-nail offside is not an unfair advantage. Now that VAR has made these ridiculous decisions possible, it is time to change the rule, to revert to what its original purpose set out to achieve.
Consider this for a rule change: there has to be clear air between the attacker and the defender.
In this instance we can see that if the attacker is so far in front of the defender that there is space between them, he will, most often, achieve an unfair advantage. Inside that distance, and the advantage is debatable, it’s at the margin around which defenders and attackers alike gamble with offside.
That seems to be a step towards something that feels just and would leave behind the seemingly arbitrary calls, measured to the centimetre, currently presided over by VAR and its officials. BUT, despite this, VAR will still have its say; we cannot un-invent its perceived ability to ‘measure accurately’ and so, VAR will still be used, to measure whether or not there is a morsel of space between the attacker and defender.
So, we’d be no better off? Hold on, all is not lost, because NOW, under the new rule, if the tiniest part of the attacker is still in line with the defender, he’ll be called, ONSIDE – even if it’s by the very tip of each of the players’ fingers. The attacker gets the benefit of the doubt; the game wins. If those tiny measurements go the other way, and, by an infinitesimal amount, the attacker is called offside, then they’ll be easier to bear, because we’ll think, ‘he was morally off, anyway.’
Sure, it will favour the gangly-armed attackers. Peter Crouch may come out of retirement for his arm prowess alone, but it won’t amount to a Lanky’s Charter. No, for in your own penalty area you need the opposite – short arms, or at least ones which fit nicely by your sides. This new rule would favour the dexterous, and would add another facet to the game. Aspects of football would turn into ballet. Finally, the theatre of the working class might live up to its billing.
This might, almost, if we’re lucky, herald the beginning of the end of VAR. For surely, once accepted, new rules would develop in its wake. Graded-offsides, whereby, the further away from goal you are, the more of a gap you’re allowed between you and the defender? Think of them like this: a small head start is worth more the closer you are to goal. At the half-way line, a few inches, is of negligible benefit. It makes sense from the perspective of preventing the attacker from achieving an unfair advantage, and, crucially, it means that most judgments can then be made by eye. You would need to invoke VAR only for offenses inside the six-yard box. For all over decisions a second VAR-man-ref on the pitch who was trained so that he could make instant graded-offside calls, without recourse to computers, would suffice.
Dickie White's Diary 
That’s all right mate, but why don’t you try it out in the women’s game first? They could do with revving it up a bit. Mind you, half of them can’t tell their right from their left if they’re anything like my missus. Sometimes she makes me watch them lionesses when they come on the tele, but I get too nervous. It’s like driving behind one in a 4×4 – you never know when they’re going to slow down and stop without letting you know. And I nearly soil my strides when they run towards the centre circle, in case they think it’s a roundabout and wait for someone else to go first 😉 You always have to be ready to slam the breaks on when you’re behind one don’t you? You can’t always tell by looking at them, but I always know when there’s one driving in front of me. I’m not sexist or nothing, but you got to say what you see isn’t it? What about when they pull out to overtake, then go slower than the car they’re overtaking? There was one once right, and she’d stopped at a roundabout, then suddenly come out as soon as the cars started coming. Then she lost her rag with me, who had only been watching. I must have shown what I was thinking all over me boat, isn’t it? LOL
LikeLike
Yas, is right. Many peoples are understimating mathematicals in deciding all important decisions. Always they are think, mathematicry is the measurement. Never is it measureing, no, it is always the principles. With Math any matter will be decided, from frying an egg to making a woman pregnant. What you do is to shake them up before, then get the good bit in the middle which is easy to aim for. All mathematicians will tell you this
LikeLiked by 1 person