I hate to agree with the boy Lineker, but why not keep it simple and judge it on the position of the feet? The sport is called football, after all. Just plot the furthest-forward point of the attacker's foot and compare it with with the furthest-back point of the last defender's foot.

People who designed it say the prem lge have been using it wrong from the beginning , i agree offside should be by the foot same as cricket no ball , and the hand ball well unlucky but was goal bound and his arm was out , yes its hard to keep your arms down when jumping but his arm was fully out . and do they know what the term clear and obvious mistake means I dont think so

Agree there.

I would add if a shot is deemed 'likely' to be a goal then perhaps the penalty/foul is appropriate. However for that (was it Marc's) header, which was never likely to be going in, a defender jumping naturally, not even looking at the ball and it hitting the arm from a direct head what, a meter away? Not a pen for me.

The old man bemoaned Edouard standing offside before the ball was even kicked on Schlupp's disallowed goal but having seen the replays and VAR lines I am still not convinced. Am I alone there or is it just wild bias I am refusing to acknowledge?? Either way, as far as the match went I think 3-1 was an appropriate scoreline however later in the season, with more at stake in bigger games, emotions may run far higher.

I still cannot shake the feeling that referees and all other officials have never played football before in their lives when I read the rules of watch some match decisions. An absolute state.

To get back to the match - the team did well to recover from a slow start and a poorly conceded goal. We exposed Villa's defensive frailties throughout. Some of our link up play was quality. And Ebs had easily his best game since he returned from injury, he's getting close to being the player he was before that.

As regards the two big VAR talking points, they perfectly demonstrated the stupidity of the current offside and handball rules.

And even after a couple of years of VAR, I'm still not sure about its use - I thought it was to check for clear and obvious errors made by the referee ? Instead it appears to scrutinise anything and everything. And even then. they get it wrong on too many occasions.