Thread by @DaleJohnsonESPN

So, it's the Monday VAR thread which, as you might expect, starts with a chunk about offside.

This should explain how we've got to where we are now, and the issues behind various solutions.

But let's be clear at the start, offside will not change before next season.

Before early in 2019, the only offside tech available was the use of one line, across a pitch, which did not take into account camera angle.

This meant that offside decisions with VAR could be totally down to luck, depending on the position of the camera.

Take this Harry Kane offside from the FA Cup last season.

Kane was adjudged to be ONSIDE from the VAR image.

After the game, Chelsea produced their own camera angle which told a different story and suggested he was OFFSIDE.

So the position of the camera decided offside.

Hawkeye had been developing a new method of calculating offside, to remove this inconsistency.

Hence, early in 2019 the 3D crosshair system arrived.

This enabled VAR operators to calculate the position of all players on the pitch accurately, creating a virtual offside line.

The crosshair system meant that it was no longer relevant where the cameras were positioned, because it automatically accounted for the angle as well as where players were releative to the pitch and to each other.

Hence, you get much greater accuracy on offside decisions.

Obviously, what we have found is that accuracy is pretty abhorrent. But it is NOT a problem just for the Premier League.

This system is in almost all major leagues and comps. They have the exact same problem. This one is not down to Mike Riley.

Here's some non-Prem examples.

So, how do we fix it?

This is difficult, because the key overriding consideration here is that a general law change will affect ALL of football, not just leagues with VAR.

Any change will affect all of football for a full season, so it has to be completely thought through.

It might be that the only viable change here is to add a margin of error, as determined by Hawkeye who will know after a year of use what these parameters are.

Obviously, we just create a new "decision point" for people to argue over. But no solution can remove this.

The IFAB will not want to make a fundamental change to the laws because of VAR - and some suggestions would change the fabric of the game at all levels.

It is crucial that VAR does not rule the Laws of the Game, which is why margin of error on tech may be the best option.

Let's take a few solutions.

"Any whole part of the player’s body is onside, then it's onside"

First, we do not get rid of the marginal calls. They still exist, but they move back two feet. Players will still be off marginally.

Secondly, while this will bring more goals, it will have a far more marked effect on non-VAR leagues where linesman are now keeping their flags down a great deal more.

Good at first, then you find that teams start to defend much deeper to negate being caught out.

Free-kicks would also change immeasurably, with attackers able to have a full-body advantage (as long as they have a heel level with the defender they are on) when the ball is delivered.

Teams would defend free-kicks on the six-yard box every time to remove the space in behind.

Another suggestion has been to take two frames from the camera, but you will simply have to make the calculation decision twice. It will take twice as long, and we don't want to get into that.

But make no mistake, Hawkeye will not have been sat watching on through this. While we're talking about it, they may already have a new method for offside ready to go for next season. But it cannot be introduced mid-season.

We will find out in February what may happen.

Also, and contrary to what you may read, MLS doesn't use "clear and obvious" on offside due to some kind of romantic notion.

It's because MLS stadia did not have enough cameras to make the previous "one line on a pitch" system viable across all of its grounds.

Added to that, the crosshair system was not available before the start of the 2019 MLS season.

MLS had been testing it at the end of the 2019 season with a view to bringing it in for 2020. If the tech works, MLS will likely use it.

"Clear and obvious" for VAR offside (using no lines) has many flaws anyway. A-League used this, but switched to the crosshairs as TV would show decisions to be wrong.

This was offside on the pitch, VAR did not overturn as not clear and obvious. TV adds the line, and....

Short bit on encroachment, which confused many in Wolves v Man City.

The key thing to remember is that, on a penalty, the D belongs to the box. So Conor Coady is, without a doubt, encroaching and then plays the ball.

Silva being ahead of him is irrelevant.

Compare this to West Ham v Leicester, and the West Ham defender deliberately starting his run from further back to make sure he was not encroaching when the pen was taken.

Even though he was outside the D, he was still first to the rebound to clear. Players will have to adapt.

Let's have another moan about the lack of use of pitchside monitors and how it's undermining match officials and affecting the trust of fans.

Referees HAVE to start using them. I doubt they will this season, but it is a key change.

The Premier League says by not using the monitors, it will "protect the tempo of matches by reducing time delays."

That's clearly not working, is it.

The delays are extended because the VAR has to interpret what the ref has seen. With the monitors, this isn't necessary.

Take a look at this from the A-League, broadcast by Fox after the game. Quick and simple.

Obviously, long-term the live broadcast should be in all VAR grounds (IFAB doesn't allow it now). But A-League is leading the way in VAR transparency like this.

It's great.

The Andy Carroll pen appeal is the exact kind of incident when the monitor should be used.

Ref is in a great position. He will likely have told the VAR that he saw the contact but didn't think it was sufficient.

So VAR will not overturn. But what if the ref watched it himself?

Last two...

The Virgil van Dijk handball in the goal move is only relevant if it is deliberate.

Why? Because the "attacking handball" law only applies if that player then directly sets up a goal-scoring chance. And it was Adam Lallana who did (goal correctly awarded by VAR).

Finally, there's nothing Chris Kavanagh could do about the Man City goal v Sheff United, because the ball did not hit him.

It's just bad luck here. Player and ref collide regularly, and IFAB will not tweak a law based on this one isolated example.