R3 vs Sydney | Sun 23 Oct | 7:00pm | ROF

Don't agree that it didn't cost us the game!

don't we want the attacking team to get the benefit of the doubt in tight calls?

So I painted two lines: the one that starts at the top on the right is what is the correct angle of the offside line given the angles of the other straight lines on the pitch and he's clearly onside. The other line is a distorted angle which shows that even at that angle which clearly doesn't line up with the grass lines he is still not offside. 

I think that's the most reasonable point.

The lino can't watch the ball and the player out of eye frame at the same time as at that split second that's the time offside is determined.  So she has to watch the ball get played THEN determine if we are onside and with such a minor amount onside I get her not knowing that exact moment when she turns to Krishna that he was, just.

  The question becomes who she gives the benefit of the doubt there.  obviously I'd prefer the Nix but if it was the other way around and Sydney got the call but was a foot offside we'd be just as outraged.

Not a fault with professional skills but with the crappy human body with two forward pointing eyes.

Clearly not offside, he had a solid half a metre to spare. Problem solved.

lines and mown lines not parallel to penalty box line?  Split second decision..win some lose some hopefully.

Hmm pick up sticks. Your turn

Straight lines eventually join in the distance in 2D even if they're parallel in 3D. The straight lines on this road would be parallel in real life but in 2D they aren't when simulating 3D:

Is this diagram (with the three lines) the perspective from row N?

Please see my post with the road to get at what I'm saying. Road lines are parallel but we can only see so far and so lines eventually join together despite them actually being parallel in real life.

Wow.... I went away just for an hour or so and this topic seems to have escalated rather nicely in the meantime!

the game didn't rest on this decision

the idea is to be good enough to influence the game to the point where it doesn't matter what outside influences may or may not come your way

Whats the point bloody score is still going to be 1-0 to them.

Your second sentence doesn't apply to a team like the Phoenix really. If Barcelona or Bayern Munich get one decision not go their way, sure they'll probably go on to win anyway. But a team like Phoenix any one decision will make or break whether they can get a result that week because we're not as good at putting our chances away, so if instead of 0 goals we get 1, yeah that's a massive difference that could've given us some points given how our defense has conceded less than the majority of A-League teams.

could have
would've
would've
don't believe
would've
possibility
would've
probably
could've

If you answer with another troll comment, I'm not gonna respond.

Biggest issue for me is in a game we dominated for 65 minutes we only created 4 or 5 chances and only forced one save (plus two in the net). Some nice play but we're still a soft touch. Three matches in and I'm sure we havent had a shot from outside the box (apart from the odd wild hack)? It doesn't feel right still across the park

Don't agree with your point about the refs but the shape of the front six is bang on. It worked with Burns because one on one he could beat players easily but having Krishna attacking from wide just leaves us lacking any presence in the box. Teams can defend tight and deep and it just shuts us down

Probably a little harsh to criticise them for creating 'only' 5 chances. They were great chances and on another day with a scrap of luck in our favour we would've comfortably won that game and the season would've achieved lift off. 

The apparent lack of match fitness does worry me though.

The lines are parallel, they exist to help the linesmen. If they were crooked you'd clearly see them on TV and it would be a huge embarrassment for the club, stadium, and groundsman.

Lines meet as they go into the distance (and things shrink), but also the angle of the lens causes distortion in the field of view which further distorts the lines.

The mown strips are parallel where they coincide with the goal line, edge of the box, and the halfway line, so why would you think they wouldn't be parallel(despite looking parallel to the naked eye) at other points on the pitch

There are lots of things that cost teams a result in a one-nil loss. Impotence in front of goal, conceding the winner, not creating enough chances, inaccurate passing, poor tactics etc etc etc... to spend all this time picking an AR's performance apart and not addressing the other factors as much is not focusing on what the team can control. This tight call wasn't the reason for the loss!

Marco Rossi needs to have a look at the way he marked on the goal.

3rd form Tech Drawing: A- Penalty box line,  B- Mown strip, C- other mown strip,  D- Krishna Knee through AR sightline

Vanishing point found for perspective - It was 1/2 a boot on side.  Who can at full speed with any amount of experience get that 100% right 100% of the time even in Europes top leagues.

Some of these offside lines are more accurate than Fox Sports.

I actually don't personally blame the AR for getting it wrong because in real time it's impossible to have a clear view of exactly when the ball was passed and where the attacker was. You can see one but the other will only be in your peripheral vision. Having said that I do think that it was the wrong call and it cost us. That's just football sometimes. If we won anyway or Sydney tonked us we probably would never have mentioned that incident again. As it is it was a close game so the marginal calls were important.

The point is it was a performance that could have had us win against the top team in the competition, rather than single out the linesman. The team probably doesn't deserve the level of vitriol thrown at them as it was a winning performance on any other day. 

Wait a minute, people are actually suggesting that the offside call didn't affect the game? Fudgeing hell.

If the goal had counted then Sydney would have been chasing the game and may have left themselves open for more goals against them. The decision kept it balanced. Not allowing the goal DID make a difference. Our guys would have had their confidence up to a higher level too.

Not to mention the other dodgy call where Kosta was in 1on1.

kewl.

Yeah, he was on the daily football show today saying that he's commentating this season.

Finally realised what this offside debate reminded me of