This was an inevitable result of delaying the flag unnecessarily and the writing has been on the wall for months. Hope this isn’t as serious as it looks and Patricio makes a quick recovery.Also have to add - the head injury was a direct result of the late flag... I recall someone posting something about that risk on here. Horrible to see this.
Disagree in this instance. Yes that argument is there to be made but even with an instant flag, there’s less than 3 seconds between the pass and the contact. A referee can’t physically get his whistle to his mouth and stop play instantly in that time so that contact was happening regardlessThis was an inevitable result of delaying the flag unnecessarily and the writing has been on the wall for months. Hope this isn’t as serious as it looks and Patricio makes a quick recovery.
Disagree in this instance. Yes that argument is there to be made but even with an instant flag, there’s less than 3 seconds between the pass and the contact. A referee can’t physically get his whistle to his mouth and stop play instantly in that time so that contact was happening regardless
As I said, the argument is there to be made but I don’t agree this particular instance is an example of that.But we could try to stop potentially career threatening injuries?
That’s a penalty for me as well. I’m very surprised that wasn’t givenWhat are people’s opinions on the 2’ penalty incident?
I am (clearly) biased, but I am wondering why VAR didn’t intervene.
Interested to hear other non-biased opinions.
I thought it was a good game though - end to end!That’s a penalty for me as well. I’m very surprised that wasn’t given
On initial viewing, and having not yet seen a replay, I thought it was a late flag (and it was), but on reflection I’m not sure there was enough time for it to have an impact.Disagree in this instance. Yes that argument is there to be made but even with an instant flag, there’s less than 3 seconds between the pass and the contact. A referee can’t physically get his whistle to his mouth and stop play instantly in that time so that contact was happening regardless
That has ways carried a caveat of unless there is potential for a collision just chuck the flag up.The thing with the "VAR late flag" is that you also need to remember that even before that, referees have more and more been instructed not to flag until the player becomes active, which 99% of the time is when they actually touch the ball. So even in a pre-VAR world, the earliest the AR could have flagged is when Salah took his first touch, whereas in the post-VAR world, the correct point to flag is when the ball hits the back of the net.
In both situations, to discuss if a collision could have been avoided, you also have to account for the time Pawson would take to register the signal and blow, plus the reaction time of the defender. Unfortunately, in this particular situation, I don't think there was enough of a gap that even a perfectly timed flag could have made much of a difference.
I'm not saying that I don't see it as a genuine issue with the system, as it clearly is. It's just that this one example isn't the one to use to make the point.That has ways carried a caveat of unless there is potential for a collision just chuck the flag up.
There is also comms to help too, AR shouts Salah off, Pawson can blow the whistle and then AR can flag. It will look simultaneous, no one would know.
I haven't seen this clip soaybe it was truly unavoidable but pre VAR there are extra fail safes in the process.
The thing with the "VAR late flag" is that you also need to remember that even before that, referees have more and more been instructed not to flag until the player becomes active, which 99% of the time is when they actually touch the ball. So even in a pre-VAR world, the earliest the AR could have flagged is when Salah took his first touch, whereas in the post-VAR world, the correct point to flag is when the ball hits the back of the net.
I disagree only with one word in your final sentence - flag when it becomes apparent that Salah is the only player with a chance to get the ball. If a defender gets in and intercepts, or even makes a deliberate play on the ball, the offside is reset. So as an AR, you have to at least wait until it is also clear no defender is going to get involved.I think you are overstating the instruction. Diagram 4 hasn't changed in many years, and explains:
A player in an offside position (A) may be penalised before playing or touching the ball, if, in the opinion of the referee, no other team-mate in an onside position has the opportunity to play the ball.
So even without a possible collision, where only an OSP attacker is chasing the ball and is likely to get it, the flag would go up. While the idea of collision avoidance has certainly been taught (at least at lower levels), I don't believe it has ever been in the LOTG or other formal pronouncements from IFAB.
So absent VAR, the proper time for the AR to flag would have been when it was apparent that Salah was the only attacker with a chance to get to the ball.
I disagree only with one word in your final sentence - flag when it becomes apparent that Salah is the only player with a chance to get the ball. If a defender gets in and intercepts, or even makes a deliberate play on the ball, the offside is reset. So as an AR, you have to at least wait until it is also clear no defender is going to get involved.
Being in an offside position isn't an offense. And if a defender might get to the ball and reset the offside, penalising a player for their position alone directly contradicts the very strict definition of what an offside offence actually is.Nope, that isn't right as the law exert that social lurker posted clearly states that you can flag early if no other team-mate of the player in an offside position has the opportunity to play the ball. There is no mention in there about defenders.