VAR and penalties seems to be a difficult one to me! Offside decisions have to be correct to the millimetre but for some reasons rules concerning penalties only have to be correct within a few yards.
I believe the goalkeeper may move but has to be on his line at the moment the ball is kicked. But this rule is never enforced although it could be with VAR.
Similarly penalties should be retaken if there is any encroachment - that means any player is touching or within the lines forming the penalty area. Again this rule could be enforced strictly with VAR.
"Feinting in the run-up to take a penalty kick to confuse opponents is permitted as part of football. However, feinting to kick the ball once the player has completed his run-up is considered an infringement of Law 14 and an act of unsporting behaviour for which the player must be cautioned."
Son did not break any rules with his run up ("feinting in the run up ... is permitted as part of football") but it should probably have been retaken because there were so many players from both sides inside the penalty area by the time he struck the ball.
The clarification is meant to distinguish the kind of thing that Son did last night from the example below where Messi waits for the keeper to dive and then sticks it in the other corner.
I never knew a foul could be committed when taking a penalty.
Your not allowed to run up in stages, i.e. it has to be a continuous run when taking a penalty.
Apparently Son stopped his run up half way to try and feint the Goalkeeper yet the above was brought in a good few years agk after nearly ever penalty taker started to do that.
Just watched the highlights and I thought that was the rule about a continuous run up.
Robbie Savage the kept going on about 'whats wrong with that' in his foghorn voice.
Maybe these commentators should get to know the rules before being allowed behind the mike.
Savage also mentioned about a dozen references to Alli falling over in his little cameo too.
Perhaps he seems to forget he got Justin Edinburgh sent off in the '99 Worthington Cup Final with his play acting.
The clarification is meant to distinguish the kind of thing that Son did last night from the example below where Messi waits for the keeper to dive and then sticks it in the other corner.
Wonder if there are any refs out there that can clarify the decision of no re-take - the yellow would have been for unsportsman like behaviour I assume? Does that automatically overturn a decision like a foul throw does? keepers who get booked for timewasting on a goal kick/free kick don't give away a free kick to the other side so what is the distinction? (I missed the game so i'm unsure if play restarted with a drop ball or a free kick to dale? which may impact the answer here)
Also I've seen bookings before for players consistently not taking a f/k in the right place (ie throwing the ball further forward) and again, that doesn't give the other side possession of the f/k or a drop ball either. In fact after 5 or so minutes thought I can come up with a number of examples where a player gets booked but that doesn't impact the original call - another i've seen - f/k awarded, the two players involved have a bit of afters and the original "victim" of the challenge ends up booked but it doesn't change the original f/k decision.
Is this an inconsistency thing again or an interpretation of the law thing?
Why did every goal get reviewed last night? Is that a VAR requirement?
Works fine in Rugby where it's only reviewed if the referee is unsure.
I disagree - a bit. There was a Scotland try on Saturday where they reviewed it, just in case the player's foot was in touch, when it certainly wasn't - the touch judge was just a few metres away and had a totally clear view. The ref called for a review because he could, not because he needed to.
Wonder if there are any refs out there that can clarify the decision of no re-take - the yellow would have been for unsportsman like behaviour I assume? Does that automatically overturn a decision like a foul throw does? keepers who get booked for timewasting on a goal kick/free kick don't give away a free kick to the other side so what is the distinction? (I missed the game so i'm unsure if play restarted with a drop ball or a free kick to dale? which may impact the answer here)
Also I've seen bookings before for players consistently not taking a f/k in the right place (ie throwing the ball further forward) and again, that doesn't give the other side possession of the f/k or a drop ball either. In fact after 5 or so minutes thought I can come up with a number of examples where a player gets booked but that doesn't impact the original call - another i've seen - f/k awarded, the two players involved have a bit of afters and the original "victim" of the challenge ends up booked but it doesn't change the original f/k decision.
Is this an inconsistency thing again or an interpretation of the law thing?
Let me try and answer your questions. So far as the penalty is concerned (a) The law clearly states that penalty takers can stutter on the run in to the penalty being taken, except that he /she cannot pause at the point of taking the penalty; (b) the reason for the awarding of a free kick to the opposing side is due to the fact that the game restarts at the point the referee blows his whistle and therefore the ball is technically in play when the offence has been committed. The difference being with other examples you have quoted (eg goalkeeper time wasting) is that no offence has taken place whilst the ball is in play, so the keeper is warned or cautioned and the game is restarted for the earlier law transgression (ball out of play - goal kick). Hope I have covered all your points.
Why did every goal get reviewed last night? Is that a VAR requirement?
Works fine in Rugby where it's only reviewed if the referee is unsure.
It seems that VAR is automatically used for all major incidents, which includes goals even if there is no suggestion of any problem. When you consider the time it takes for the scoring team to celebrate and slowly make their way back to their own half, doing a VAR review doesn't slow things down in this instance
thanks @PeterGage very illuminating appreciate you taking the time to respond mate. So in summary the above Messi case was re-taken incorrectly.
Does seem odd to me that the ball is considered in play when the ref blows his whistle for a penalty, but not when he blows for a goal kick or free kick - particularly in the time wasting case - being as the ref will have usually whistled (perhaps more than once on some occasions!) in that scenario as well. Seems like a massive grey area to me!
Edit to clarify I mean when he blows to restart play via goal kick not the actual awarding of the goal kick etc
Why did every goal get reviewed last night? Is that a VAR requirement?
Works fine in Rugby where it's only reviewed if the referee is unsure.
It seems that VAR is automatically used for all major incidents, which includes goals even if there is no suggestion of any problem. When you consider the time it takes for the scoring team to celebrate and slowly make their way back to their own half, doing a VAR review doesn't slow things down in this instance
I am sure it will once the team knows VAR has bern called.
Premier League not going to introduce it next season after all, apparently...
I think that's a good call, it needs a lot more work on it technically and also on communications and scope. Keep it in the FA Cup, extend it to League Cup.
Well it's going to be interesting to say the least. Or it will bore the life out of everyone. Personally I think the World Cup will be destroyed by this nonsense. What a bunch of total twats we have running the game these days.
VAR shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the biggest football tournament in the world until they have actually got it working as it should be.
The first disallowed Spurs goal shows exactly a situation where VAR shouldn't have been used to change the decision
In cricket, the DRS technology was introduced to help prevent umpire howlers, blatant mistakes where TV replays make the decision look ridiculous. Instead we had a goal disallowed for a minuscule shirt tug, where it can just be easily argued that the Rochdale defender committed the first infringement with another minor shirt tug. Or that both were just part of the normal level of shirt tugging that goes unpunished.
If every marginal decision gets overruled like that, what's the point of having a referee?
VAR sucks all the joy out of football, you go mad because your side score a last minute winner? Oh no lets wait to look at it for 5mins to try and think of every reason possible not to give it.
But it is only because the people who run football are clueless. Look at Cricket and Tennis that implement the technology far more logically. The simple solution is refs make the decisions, each side has one review per game that can only be used for significant decisions. If the review is wrong then they lose it. If right they keep it. If a team makes three consecutive wrong reviews, they lose them (that counts as a wrong review if they make a right one and a wrong one in the same game). Simples and sorted!
The worst thing about VAR at the World Cup is the standard of referees that'll be there... I said it in 2014 and after the Confederations Cup.
The problem is the Referees will be coming from all over the world so as per the last World Cup we had them from Gambia and El Salvador
Am not being prejudice as am sure they're good officials yet the standard of Football they must referee each week cant be to the level of International Football - Would be like getting someone from League Two here in England to take charge of a Premier League game for the weekend. They wont be able to keep up with the speed of matches, not to mention they'll over rely on VAR to help them out with decisions that dont need reviewing!!
VAR is long overdue: The amount of times that a foul is given out side the box when the infringement continues into the penalty area is a constant issue. Why it took longer than 20 seconds in the Spurs game when it was patently clear the defenders arm was still around the neck in the area said more about the ability of the person chosen to oversee VAR than any failings in the system. The official in the warm office should be ahead of the Ref not behind him, With the constant cheating of players to win decisions not to have VAR would be a retrograde step.
But it is only because the people who run football are clueless. Look at Cricket and Tennis that implement the technology far more logically. The simple solution is refs make the decisions, each side has one review per game that can only be used for significant decisions. If the review is wrong then they lose it. If right they keep it. If a team makes three consecutive wrong reviews, they lose them (that counts as a wrong review if they make a right one and a wrong one in the same game). Simples and sorted!
Confused of Albufeira here... You mention one review per game, and then three consecutive wrong reviews, Mutters. Do you mean if they have wrong reviews in three consecutive matches, they lose the right to review for the rest of the season? Because if they are only entitled to one review per game, after the first one is deemed wrong, they wouldn't get a second or third anyway?
As far as I know in tennis the question is black and white - was the ball out or not - logical that the player calls for the review I grant you, but it is like goal line technology, a matter of fact, not opinion. Even with the system you suggest, the same (allegedly) erroneous review decisions that we have seen recently will apply. Then an even bigger howler occurs later in the game, and the advocates of VAR will be lining up to say "How ridiculous that there are not [insert number here] reviews allowed, if we have the technology, why not use it to it's full potential?".
I was never an advocate of VAR, but I accepted the inevitability of it's usage because a majority (certainly on here) seem to want it. Although I did caution that it was still down to one person's opinion, and that what we see happening now would happen - after all we have all been in the pub where we have seen all the replays the VAR official sees, and there's still a 50/50 split on was it a penalty or not. In it's present form it is proving problematic, and you will never, ever get away from the fact that ultimately it's still down to an opinion. If yours happens to differ from that of the man in the box, tough...
But it is only because the people who run football are clueless. Look at Cricket and Tennis that implement the technology far more logically. The simple solution is refs make the decisions, each side has one review per game that can only be used for significant decisions. If the review is wrong then they lose it. If right they keep it. If a team makes three consecutive wrong reviews, they lose them (that counts as a wrong review if they make a right one and a wrong one in the same game). Simples and sorted!
Confused of Albufeira here... You mention one review per game, and then three consecutive wrong reviews, Mutters. Do you mean if they have wrong reviews in three consecutive matches, they lose the right to review for the rest of the season? Because if they are only entitled to one review per game, after the first one is deemed wrong, they wouldn't get a second or third anyway?
As far as I know in tennis the question is black and white - was the ball out or not - logical that the player calls for the review I grant you, but it is like goal line technology, a matter of fact, not opinion. Even with the system you suggest, the same (allegedly) erroneous review decisions that we have seen recently will apply. Then an even bigger howler occurs later in the game, and the advocates of VAR will be lining up to say "How ridiculous that there are not [insert number here] reviews allowed, if we have the technology, why not use it to it's full potential?".
I was never an advocate of VAR, but I accepted the inevitability of it's usage because a majority (certainly on here) seem to want it. Although I did caution that it was still down to one person's opinion, and that what we see happening now would happen - after all we have all been in the pub where we have seen all the replays the VAR official sees, and there's still a 50/50 split on was it a penalty or not. In it's present form it is proving problematic, and you will never, ever get away from the fact that ultimately it's still down to an opinion. If yours happens to differ from that of the man in the box, tough...
Other concerns about reviewing! Can a team actually stop play for a review (after a ref fails to give a penalty)? Home team will have better access to instant video replays to assess whether to risk a review. Unused reviews will be called in injury time simply to slow the game down (like pointless substitutions).
And also! Teams may call a review of a goal pointing to a foul earlier in the build up. The VAR will be forced to say something like "Yes that was a foul and the goal should really have been disallowed. But it was more than 10 seconds before so the goal stands and you cannot have any more reviews!".
Comments
Offside decisions have to be correct to the millimetre but for some reasons rules concerning penalties only have to be correct within a few yards.
I believe the goalkeeper may move but has to be on his line at the moment the ball is kicked. But this rule is never enforced although it could be with VAR.
Similarly penalties should be retaken if there is any encroachment - that means any player is touching or within the lines forming the penalty area. Again this rule could be enforced strictly with VAR.
http://www.thefa.com/~/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/laws-of-the-game/11-v-11/interpretation-of-laws---2013-14/law-14---interpretations-of-the-laws-of-the-game.ashx
"Feinting in the run-up to take a penalty kick to confuse opponents is permitted as part of football. However, feinting to kick the ball once the player has completed his run-up is considered an infringement of Law 14 and an act of unsporting behaviour for which the player must be cautioned."
Son did not break any rules with his run up ("feinting in the run up ... is permitted as part of football") but it should probably have been retaken because there were so many players from both sides inside the penalty area by the time he struck the ball.
Perhaps he seems to forget he got Justin Edinburgh sent off in the '99 Worthington Cup Final with his play acting.
Works fine in Rugby where it's only reviewed if the referee is unsure.
Also I've seen bookings before for players consistently not taking a f/k in the right place (ie throwing the ball further forward) and again, that doesn't give the other side possession of the f/k or a drop ball either. In fact after 5 or so minutes thought I can come up with a number of examples where a player gets booked but that doesn't impact the original call - another i've seen - f/k awarded, the two players involved have a bit of afters and the original "victim" of the challenge ends up booked but it doesn't change the original f/k decision.
Is this an inconsistency thing again or an interpretation of the law thing?
Does seem odd to me that the ball is considered in play when the ref blows his whistle for a penalty, but not when he blows for a goal kick or free kick - particularly in the time wasting case - being as the ref will have usually whistled (perhaps more than once on some occasions!) in that scenario as well. Seems like a massive grey area to me!
Edit to clarify I mean when he blows to restart play via goal kick not the actual awarding of the goal kick etc
“And now another what the fuck is going on break......sponsored by Tampax”
VAR shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the biggest football tournament in the world until they have actually got it working as it should be.
In cricket, the DRS technology was introduced to help prevent umpire howlers, blatant mistakes where TV replays make the decision look ridiculous. Instead we had a goal disallowed for a minuscule shirt tug, where it can just be easily argued that the Rochdale defender committed the first infringement with another minor shirt tug. Or that both were just part of the normal level of shirt tugging that goes unpunished.
If every marginal decision gets overruled like that, what's the point of having a referee?
The problem is the Referees will be coming from all over the world so as per the last World Cup we had them from Gambia and El Salvador
Am not being prejudice as am sure they're good officials yet the standard of Football they must referee each week cant be to the level of International Football - Would be like getting someone from League Two here in England to take charge of a Premier League game for the weekend. They wont be able to keep up with the speed of matches, not to mention they'll over rely on VAR to help them out with decisions that dont need reviewing!!
Hoping that showing off a smooth VAR system at the World Cup, such as how it works in the Bundesliga, will change some minds.
As far as I know in tennis the question is black and white - was the ball out or not - logical that the player calls for the review I grant you, but it is like goal line technology, a matter of fact, not opinion. Even with the system you suggest, the same (allegedly) erroneous review decisions that we have seen recently will apply. Then an even bigger howler occurs later in the game, and the advocates of VAR will be lining up to say "How ridiculous that there are not [insert number here] reviews allowed, if we have the technology, why not use it to it's full potential?".
I was never an advocate of VAR, but I accepted the inevitability of it's usage because a majority (certainly on here) seem to want it. Although I did caution that it was still down to one person's opinion, and that what we see happening now would happen - after all we have all been in the pub where we have seen all the replays the VAR official sees, and there's still a 50/50 split on was it a penalty or not. In it's present form it is proving problematic, and you will never, ever get away from the fact that ultimately it's still down to an opinion. If yours happens to differ from that of the man in the box, tough...
Other concerns about reviewing!
Can a team actually stop play for a review (after a ref fails to give a penalty)?
Home team will have better access to instant video replays to assess whether to risk a review.
Unused reviews will be called in injury time simply to slow the game down (like pointless substitutions).
Teams may call a review of a goal pointing to a foul earlier in the build up.
The VAR will be forced to say something like "Yes that was a foul and the goal should really have been disallowed. But it was more than 10 seconds before so the goal stands and you cannot have any more reviews!".