Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Football died a little bit yesterday (VAR)

1404143454651

Comments

  • Mowbury comes across as a dick in that conversation 
  • How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
  • I honestly think that would be given if it was someone like Villa or Southampton v Man City and not Liverpool. 
    And if Liverpool hadn't gone down the other and and scored.
  • Off_it said:
    How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
    It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given. 
  • Off_it said:
    How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
    It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given. 
    But they've been giving them all season. 
  • Just change the fecking law......either its ALWAYS handball or its not. None of this "un-natural position" bollox. 
  • don't understand the point about "trying to work out what is and isn't clear and obvious"

    If a player was 5 yards offside and the ref hasn't spotted it, it's obvious.  If you need to draw lines on the screen it aint obvious.  Pretty simple really
  • Offside should mean that a player is definitely offside based on one reasonable view of the incident. If VAR or anyone else needs to see it twice or isn't 99.9% sure whether it's offside - then it isn't offside. Simples.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Off_it said:
    How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
    It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given. 
    Yet theyll spend 5mins drawing diagrams to show someone is a 1mm offside? It's nothing to do with clear and obvious, it's refs covering each other arses.
  • Off_it said:
    How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
    It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given. 
    Yet theyll spend 5mins drawing diagrams to show someone is a 1mm offside? It's nothing to do with clear and obvious, it's refs covering each other arses.
    And they are using “clear and obvious” to do it.

    Offsides are not subject to the clear and obvious clause since it’s a measurable decision. Thus you see instances like Spurs/Sheff U yesterday where they are offside by a toe.

    Anything like fouls, penalties, cards, handballs aren’t getting overturned while “clear and obvious” remains in the rule book.
  • Ah I didn't know clear and obvious didn't apply to offside but it kinda makes sense.

    The whole thing is a farce and needs scrapping, it's not suited to football as proven during the world cup。

    Sadly people have a problem accepting they're wrong so FIFA will stick to their guns.
  • Off_it said:
    How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
    It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given. 
    Yet theyll spend 5mins drawing diagrams to show someone is a 1mm offside? It's nothing to do with clear and obvious, it's refs covering each other arses.
    And they are using “clear and obvious” to do it.

    Offsides are not subject to the clear and obvious clause since it’s a measurable decision. Thus you see instances like Spurs/Sheff U yesterday where they are offside by a toe.

    Anything like fouls, penalties, cards, handballs aren’t getting overturned while “clear and obvious” remains in the rule book.
    Don't believe offside is actually measurable. Cameras just cannot pick up the "moment the ball strikes the foot". There's no definition in football (or physics) what this actually means. 
  • edited November 2019
    Every week there is more evidence it should be done away with. But the rules don't help if what I was told yesterday is correct. 

    Apparently any touch of the hand by an attacker in the build up to a goal counts as handball, no matter how accidental, so the goal should be disallowed. The same does not apply to a defender, accidental handball does not count.

    So a couple of things spring to mind if that is the case. As Liverpool went up the other end and scored, the handball resulted in a goal, so surely it should be chalked off? That being the case, how does the referee re-start the game? If it's handball, he has to give a penalty - yes?

    Funnily enough, in a very similar situation in Madrid last June, Liverpool were awarded a penalty. Of course the rules may have changed since then. They seem to change more often than the seasons now.

    Finally, if handballs by a defenders don't count, Charlton should just do away with shirt numbers seven to eleven and claim that we don't actually have any attackers (insert your own joke here) ... ;)        
  • But it should apply.

    marginal offsides should be left to the on field officials, if the player was miles offside and they didn't spot it, obvious mistake, then VAR comes into play.  Because that was the reason we needed VAR.  Technology should be there to help the refs, not interfere and officiate games
  • Should be ditched.  3 pundits in a studio with all the angles available to them regularly argue what decision should be given.  Football is a game of opinion.  Was bought in because of money and bad losers.  
  • I'm going to be alone here, but I don't think it was a penalty, in the Champions League, then UEFA would want that given, but it's not how it's being interpreted in the Premier League, so no pen for me. 
  • Off_it said:
    How was that not a penalty for Man City?  His hand was out to the side and it stops the ball going through to the other City player.

    VAR check it, but say no pen. Unbelievable.
    It’s given in any other league but because we have the silly “clear and obvious” clause in this country, it’s not given. 
    That was clear and obvious. That decision (or lack of) is indefensible
  • That's fine @Rothko. The fact remains that the "handball" lead to a goal. The Premier League says that is a no-no... 

    Rock and a hard place for the ref and the VAR dudes. Need to change the law (or standard interpretation thereof).  
  • Sponsored links:


  • The current law governing handball is a minefield but it is close to becoming a friggin obsession. A huge amount of hysteria over nothing.

    The question of a handball being accidental or not is entirely SUBJECTIVE.

    Adding the interpretation of a further official via VAR merely adds a different SUBJECTIVE OPINION.

    Was the defenders' arm in an unnatural position? No. Was it deliberately positioned to block the ball? Unknown it could have been a natural or an unnatural movement. There is no way of knowing.

    In this situation however it is a mute point.

    I disagree with the official interpretation. 

    The complication here is you have two handballs. The first handball cannot be seen in isolation. 

    The handball by the attacking Man City player was accidental. However it cannot be allowed to play a part in the scoring of a goal.

    The first handball was instrumental in the deflection of the ball to the point it within seconds and within the same play struck the arm of a Liverpool defender. If you award a penalty then it would mean the attacking team had prospered from the creation of a goalscoring opportunity via an accidental handball.

    So M. Guardiola can run around waving as many fingers as he likes but once the ball strikes the hand of his attacking player his side cannot prosper from the outcome.

    There is an argument the referee should have stopped the game and awarded a free lick for the first (handball) offence but there is no law requiring referee to stop the game for any such incident.

    The referee is allowed to allow play advantage as he sees fit. Players are required to play to the whistle.

    Even if the referee had awarded a free kick to Liverpool then a quick restart may well have resulted in the same outcome.

    The response from Manchester City is weak. What happened to RESPECT. They lost the game because they conceded 3 goals and wasted 4 or 5 very good scoring opportunities. 

    No need to ring Mr Riley M. Guardiola just read the laws of the game.
  • That's fine @Rothko. The fact remains that the "handball" lead to a goal. The Premier League says that is a no-no... 

    Rock and a hard place for the ref and the VAR dudes. Need to change the law (or standard interpretation thereof).  
    From my understanding is that once the ball came off Sliva arm, then that's the moment where TAA handball isn't a thing, and the offence is City gaining an advantage from a handball, so Oliver got it right as did VAR. 

    If it makes City happy that was the issue, and no one pressing Fabinho for the goal 20 seconds later, then Pep can have that. 
  • That's fine @Rothko. The fact remains that the "handball" lead to a goal. The Premier League says that is a no-no... 

    Rock and a hard place for the ref and the VAR dudes. Need to change the law (or standard interpretation thereof).  
    Is the handball thing not 'in the box'  rather tha just leading to a goal? Maybe @Callumcafc would know he seems clued up on this kinda thing.


  • There is an argument the referee should have stopped the game and awarded a free lick for the first (handball) offence but there is no law requiring referee to stop the game for any such incident.


    Dirty boy!
  • Would have been funny if the Liverpool goal were disallowed and they got a free kick for Silvas handball in their own penalty area instead!

    VAR is an infinite loop of stupidity. Like most things these days.
  • VAR chief Neil Swarbrick marks new system as 'seven out of 10' despite criticism - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641
  • Seven out of 10?!?


  • Talal said:
    VAR chief Neil Swarbrick marks new system as 'seven out of 10' despite criticism - http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/50380641
    What a melon.
  • I'm really good at my job, I give myself around 8-9 out of 10
  • edited November 2019
    Excellent use of VAR to award that Chelsea goal.

    https://www.clippituser.tv/c/gegkzy

    https://www.clippituser.tv/c/xanbpz
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!