Stoke vs Arsenal (PL)


Regardless of freeze frames or that only limbs were offside, how the actual fck can we expect a referee to see this when no other human eyes physically can?
The tackle on Bellerin however was a clear penalty. I could see it and I was 2000km away!


We could have had a couple of penalties and the offside goal would normally be given but there was something about our display that wasn’t right.
If there is a problem within the club and players like Sanchez, Ozil and even Chamberlain start causing problems by not signing new contracts, then it’s going to be more of the same.
Something needs to be sorted out before the end of the transfer window or we could see a few more below average performances.
I think we deserved a draw against Stoke, but no more.


My one word analysis of this game.



Blimey. One word and you spelt it wrong.


The moment the ball touches Giroud and an active play is made.


Isn’t it the moment the ball is leaving his boot (ie a pass is being made)? I’ve never been sure on this rule tbh, lol. Because if it were as you’re saying it could just as easily be a control, and his little flick was a bit of a continued touch as I recall.


A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:

^ no mention of the ball having to be released. The frame above is when the ball is both touched and played, not the one after.


Oh dear…

My spelling is also predictable


Indeed. How could we expect a VAR to make such a close call.


Well, pretty easily :wink: By knowing the exact rule (which I don’t) and finding the right freeze frame, which is relatively easy. Not rocket science in the least.

edit: @Oliver thinking about it I’m pretty sure it’s the moment the ball leaves the foot of the player making the pass, which wouldn’t make that the right freeze frame.


Ive rewatched the highlights and have to say we were extremely unlucky not to get something from this game.

We absolutely dominated the game from start to finish. We made a couple of errors that ultimately cost us but that’s going to happen from time to time.

Our team overall didnt play badly at all. We have definitely played far worse and won. We created a few chances and Stoke defended valiantly. The whole second half they practically had 11 men behind the ball.

On revision we should have had three penalties. The first was clear as day, the second Welbeck clearly gets kicked in the back of his leg forcing him to drag his shot - not only that he had arms on him too. The third is when Bellerin gets studded by Diouf (?) but is too honest and stays on his feet. Just fucking go down, scream, whatever. Tire of this honest shit.

The offside goal was not offside…dont care if his shoe lace was ahead of play. No lino could see that and he took a wild guess. What happened to giving attackers benefit of the doubt. Ridiculous decision.

I feel like the Wenger haters are just using this as a springboard to lay some more shit down and its pathetic. At least try and analyse the game subjectively.

On another day this was 4 nil to us.


Still relying on a naked eye decision and in a scenario such as this one I’m just not convinced it removes the doubt. Knowing the rule or not I can still absolutely see two different VARs giving two different decisions.

I love goaline tech cos it does remove all doubt but in a situation as tight as this I’m not convinced.



Offside position

It is not an offence to be in an offside position.

A player is in an offside position if:any part of the head, body or feet is in the opponents’ half (excluding the halfway line) andany part of the head, body or feet is nearer to the opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponentThe hands and arms of all players, including the goalkeepers, are not considered.A player is not in an offside position if level with the:
second-last opponent orlast two opponents

Offside offence

A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:interfering with play by playing or touching a ball passed or touched by a team-mate orinterfering with an opponent by:preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision orchallenging an opponent for the ball orclearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent ormaking an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ballor
gaining an advantage by playing the ball or interfering with an opponent when it has:rebounded or been deflected off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponentbeen deliberately saved by any opponentA player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save by any opponent) is not considered to have gained an advantage.

A ‘save’ is when a player stops, or attempts to stop, a ball which is going into or very close to the goal with any part of the body except the hands/arms (unless the goalkeeper within the penalty area).

In situations where:

a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball; if the player moves into the way of an opponent and impedes the opponent’s progress (e.g blocks the opponent) the offence should be penalised under Law 12a player in an offisde position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offencean offence is committed against a player in an offside position who is already playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the offside offence is penalised as it has occurred before the foul challenge

No offence

There is no offside offence if a player receives the ball directly from:
a goal kicka throw-ina corner kick

Offences and sanctions

If an offside offence occurs, the referee awards an indirect free kick where the offence occurred, including if it is in the player’s own half of the field of play.

A defending player who leaves the field of play without the referee’s permission shall be considered to be on the goal line or touchline for the purposes of offside until the next stoppage in play or until the defending team has played the ball towards the halfway line and it is outside their penalty area. If the player left the field of play deliberately, the player must be cautioned when the ball is next out of play.

An attacking player may step or stay off the field of play not to be involved in active play. If the player re-enters from the goal line and becomes involved in play before the next stoppage in play, or the defending team has played the ball towards the halfway line and it is outside their penalty area, the player shall be considered to be positioned on the goal line for the purposes of offside. A player who deliberately leaves the field of play and re-enters without the referee’s permission and is not penalised for offside and gains an advantage, must be cautioned.

If an attacking player remains stationary between the goalposts and inside the goal as the ball enters the goal, a goal must be awarded unless the player commits an offside offence or Law 12 offence in which case play is restarted with an indirect or direct free kick.


What you see in NFL is that the rulebook becomes really confusing. If you look up that offside rule the exact wording is going to become an issue in situations like this. Is the rule that as soon as the ball is touched, or when it’s released, a player is deemed to be offside or not. Trust me VAR will just muddy the waters. Even though it hurt us last week I’d still rather not see VAR.


Right, the moment the ball is played makes me think it’s right when it leaves his foot, because that is the moment you are playing the ball.

Eh, first of all it isn’t a complicated technology to supply them with that line drawing thingy which removes most if not all doubt, and second of all even if there are very rare instances like this one where even with the help of replay it’s hard to say with 100% certainty that’s still a massive improvement over the status quo.


the wording is ‘played or touched’, no mention of the ball having left the players foot or body so that isnt the rule.

It quite literally is the moment the ball is touched, the goal is legitimate.


How do you know that? Cos you see it on TV most weeks? Has any actual analysis of how accurate those lines actually are ever been done?

And I don’t disagree with your second point really but its worth pointing out that technology isn’t going to fix all bad/debatable decisions.


Played in the case of a normal pass, touched in the case of a first time pass/deflection, is how I’d understand it.

Hence why it’s likely to be what we’ve seen all these years: the moment the ball is leaving the foot (being played or being touched, in the case of the latter it’s the same moment really) of the player. Not at the beginning of a dragged flick like where you’ve frozen it.

It’s just common sense, really. Human society does much more complicated things every day, and uses much more complicated technologies every day, than drawing a straight line which accurately depicts a point of latitude on a football pitch.

Even if it doesn’t fix all debatable decisions–which of course it can’t because there is still a manner of judgment in most decisions–it’s undeniably representing a massive, massive, massive improvement on the current state of affairs.


It is when it leaves the foot, otherwise you could just juggle or drag (elastico for instance) the ball along which beats the purpose of the rule.


The definition of ‘played’ in this context refers to the moment the ball is struck. It has always been the moment a player makes contact with a ball, I am not sure what has led you to believe otherwise.