DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 14252--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Irishref1985
Date: December 30, 2019, 4:35 am
---------------------------------------------------------
So once again - I think the fourth game running VAR has gotten
Mr Taylor out of trouble.
If there was no VAR, people on this site and supporters of
Liverpool would be slating him, rightly so, for disallowing a
perfectly good goal for handball.... how has he even thought
that was handball????
And the equaliser is offside and another poor decision from Mr
Berwick, who is normally a top assistant, but sadly continues to
get key decisions wrong lately... time for the powers that be to
start splitting Taylor with this individual
#Post#: 14253--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: ajb95
Date: December 30, 2019, 5:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Irishref1985 link ---
>
> So once again - I think the fourth game running VAR has gotten
Mr Taylor out of trouble.
>
> If there was no VAR, people on this site and supporters of
Liverpool would be slating him, rightly so, for disallowing a
perfectly good goal for handball.... how has he even thought
that was handball????
>
> And the equaliser is offside and another poor decision from Mr
Berwick, who is normally a top assistant, but sadly continues to
get key decisions wrong lately... time for the powers that be to
start splitting Taylor with this individual
>
--- End Quote ---
1. It’s beswick who is a very top linesman
2. It is not a ‘poor’ decision as you entail. Based on his
position, he has made a split second judgement on whether a
player is offside. At full speed quite a reasonable decision I
grant. It’s only when the farcical VAR with it’s debatable 3D
lines is it adjudged to be offside.
#Post#: 14256--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: December 30, 2019, 6:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> There is no intrinsic merit in law or Laws, they are to serve
a utilitarian purpose of justice which is a virtue in its own
right. The offside Law was brought in to serve a purpose, that
purpose in my opinion is not being served by making
adjudications of millimetres based on dubious camera angles.
There is a view currently held by some in the game that the
offside Law should be changed in that if any part of an
attacker's body is level with any part of the last defender then
it is onside. That is a view I wholeheartedly support and I hope
such a revision to the Law will be made.
>
--- End Quote ---
The overlapping approach would be an improvement on the current
position, personally I would prefer accepting that there is a
margin error (and in truth subjectivity) about the curent
application of VAR technology and that it shouold only be
decisions that fall outwith that margin that should be reversed
from the on field judgement. I also worry about an anonymous
"Hawkeye" technician effectively determining offside decisions.
On a wider front I think that IFAB, with the new "handball in
the build up to a goal" and in their understanding of the nature
of VAR in relation to offside and how it affects the way the
offside law is understood and applied, have failed the game
miserably. This has been compounded in England by the way VAR
has been implemented. There is a real need for changes in the
senior personnel in both IFAB and PGMOL.
#Post#: 14259--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: December 30, 2019, 6:33 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Even if it hit Van Djik's hand, personally I don't think it was
handball. I don't think you can say that a goal scoring
opportunity has been created that far away from goal (which
seemingly is what Taylor said to Wolves afterwards.)
#Post#: 14276--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: LateTackle
Date: December 30, 2019, 11:21 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> [quote author=Irishref1985 link=topic=1267.msg14252#msg14252
date=1577702124]
> So once again - I think the fourth game running VAR has gotten
Mr Taylor out of trouble.
>
> If there was no VAR, people on this site and supporters of
Liverpool would be slating him, rightly so, for disallowing a
perfectly good goal for handball.... how has he even thought
that was handball????
>
> And the equaliser is offside and another poor decision from Mr
Berwick, who is normally a top assistant, but sadly continues to
get key decisions wrong lately... time for the powers that be to
start splitting Taylor with this individual
>
--- End Quote ---
1. It’s beswick who is a very top linesman
2. It is not a ‘poor’ decision as you entail. Based on his
position, he has made a split second judgement on whether a
player is offside. At full speed quite a reasonable decision I
grant. It’s only when the farcical VAR with it’s debatable 3D
lines is it adjudged to be offside.
[/quote]
I absolutely agree about the 'debatable 3Dlines'. Watching
where the lines are imposed, they don't seem to be where they
should be at all, and as far as I can see the Wolves goal should
clearly have stood. However, we wouldn't want to upset the
touchy 'Mr Teeth and Glasses' would we!
I was even less convinced by the disallowed goal in the Norwich
game where the blue dotted vertical line on the defender was
clearly wrong too. Based on this nonsense, perhaps we should
remove offside from VAR altogether, at least until the
technology is up to it. Week after week we saw offsides
replayed on Refwatch and in virtually every case the linesmen
got them right. They are actually far more reliable than the
men in the middle.
I am not convinced that VAR is being used efficiently at all,
and I have always supported it in the past. IT took cricket a
while to get to a point where DRS is trusted, and even there we
have a margin for error with 'Umpire's Call' where only obvious
errors are overturned. If that were the case in football both
the Wolves and Norwich goals would have stood based on the
on-field decisions not being howlers.
#Post#: 14285--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Ref Fan
Date: December 30, 2019, 12:00 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In RefWatch, Gallagher was asked which part of the Wolves
player's body was offside as the Sky presenter, like me,
couldn't tell. Dermot didn't appear to give a proper answer
except along the lines of "I'd never convince you anyway".
Incidentally Readingfan, thanks for that link on the VAR thread
to the Dale Johnson twitter blog. I found it informative.
#Post#: 14287--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: December 30, 2019, 12:07 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> Even if it hit Van Djik's hand, personally I don't think it
was handball. I don't think you can say that a goal scoring
opportunity has been created that far away from goal (which
seemingly is what Taylor said to Wolves afterwards.)
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, the man's hand is raised to head level and it would appear
to help the control of the ball. I don't think the distance per
se should be an issue, suppose the goalkeeper had been off his
line and there had been a direct shot into the goal? The
handball seems far more convincing than the one against Laporte
in the Spurs game and there were a similar number of touches
after the handball before the ball was in the net. So I don't
buy that the Van Djik's "handball" was irrelevant - in the real
world at least - although in the Lewis Carrol type world that
has been created with VAR, who knows?
#Post#: 14305--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Matt
Date: December 30, 2019, 4:35 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Microscopist link ---
>
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=1267.msg14259#msg14259
date=1577709200]
> Even if it hit Van Djik's hand, personally I don't think it
was handball. I don't think you can say that a goal scoring
opportunity has been created that far away from goal (which
seemingly is what Taylor said to Wolves afterwards.)
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, the man's hand is raised to head level and it would appear
to help the control of the ball. I don't think the distance per
se should be an issue, suppose the goalkeeper had been off his
line and there had been a direct shot into the goal? The
handball seems far more convincing than the one against Laporte
in the Spurs game and there were a similar number of touches
after the handball before the ball was in the net. So I don't
buy that the Van Djik's "handball" was irrelevant - in the real
world at least - although in the Lewis Carrol type world that
has been created with VAR, who knows?
[/quote]
Can you say with 100% certainty it touched his hand?
#Post#: 14308--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: December 30, 2019, 4:50 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Microscopist link ---
>
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=1267.msg14259#msg14259
date=1577709200]
> Even if it hit Van Djik's hand, personally I don't think it
was handball. I don't think you can say that a goal scoring
opportunity has been created that far away from goal (which
seemingly is what Taylor said to Wolves afterwards.)
>
--- End Quote ---
Well, the man's hand is raised to head level and it would appear
to help the control of the ball. I don't think the distance per
se should be an issue, suppose the goalkeeper had been off his
line and there had been a direct shot into the goal? The
handball seems far more convincing than the one against Laporte
in the Spurs game and there were a similar number of touches
after the handball before the ball was in the net. So I don't
buy that the Van Djik's "handball" was irrelevant - in the real
world at least - although in the Lewis Carrol type world that
has been created with VAR, who knows?
[/quote]
Even if touched the hand, I don't think it would be disallowed
for the creating a goal scoring opportunity clause. Van Djik
didn't score the goal or get an assist. I'd say Lallana created
the opportunity.
#Post#: 14310--------------------------------------------------
Re: A. Taylor: Liverpool v Wolves
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: December 30, 2019, 5:14 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> Can you say with 100% certainty it touched his hand?
--- End Quote ---
Not from that image, but then few things are 100%, and it looks
more certain to me than the Laporte decision, where I didn't see
any images that actually showed contact with the arm.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page