DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 10070--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: August 18, 2019, 11:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: LateTackle link ---
>
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=933.msg10056#msg10056
date=1566138406]
> I’ve no problem with the goal yesterday being disallowed. Ball
travelled a long way before being flicked on by the hand and
giving a significant advantage. No way would Oliver have allowed
goal if reviewing it for himself. I think this is strength of
VAR, detecting something practically impossible to spot in real
time.
>
> Whilst the wording is new, I believe PL clubs agreed this
interpretation in 2016 and Mike Riley said over the summer that
the handball interpretation would be unchanged from last few
seasons.
>
--- End Quote ---
I absolutely disagree regarding Oliver looking at the replay.
Had he done so, you would hope he'd have spotted the shirt pull
on the player whose hand it hit. He was fouled before an
accidental handball. Yes, he could have disallowed the goal,
but could have then correctly awarded a penalty. The whole
thing has become farcical. I also feel that VAR should have
spotted the original offence, so it doesn't say much for them.
Poor all round.
[/quote]
In the opinion of the VAR, who is a PG1 official, the only
offence committed was a handball which, according to the new
interpretation of the Laws is punishable. I have always said
that VAR just introduces another opinion and this was what
happened in this case. He only saw the handball and only then
after slow motion replays, meanwhile the actual onfield
officials had given a goal and all the players had accepted that
because there was not even one appeal from a Spurs player that
there had been anything untoward.
The media and many fans wanted VAR so they will just have to
tolerate its use whether it is right or wrong. Remember that it
is to make the game better ---so they tell me ---so just accept
it and stop moaning ---because it is the future and gived the
pundits something to talk about rather than the really good game
which took place!
#Post#: 10081--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: LateTackle
Date: August 18, 2019, 1:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ashington46 link ---
>
> [quote author=LateTackle link=topic=933.msg10067#msg10067
date=1566143540]
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=933.msg10056#msg10056
date=1566138406]
> I’ve no problem with the goal yesterday being disallowed. Ball
travelled a long way before being flicked on by the hand and
giving a significant advantage. No way would Oliver have allowed
goal if reviewing it for himself. I think this is strength of
VAR, detecting something practically impossible to spot in real
time.
>
> Whilst the wording is new, I believe PL clubs agreed this
interpretation in 2016 and Mike Riley said over the summer that
the handball interpretation would be unchanged from last few
seasons.
>
--- End Quote ---
I absolutely disagree regarding Oliver looking at the replay.
Had he done so, you would hope he'd have spotted the shirt pull
on the player whose hand it hit. He was fouled before an
accidental handball. Yes, he could have disallowed the goal,
but could have then correctly awarded a penalty. The whole
thing has become farcical. I also feel that VAR should have
spotted the original offence, so it doesn't say much for them.
Poor all round.
[/quote]
In the opinion of the VAR, who is a PG1 official, the only
offence committed was a handball which, according to the new
interpretation of the Laws is punishable. I have always said
that VAR just introduces another opinion and this was what
happened in this case. He only saw the handball and only then
after slow motion replays, meanwhile the actual onfield
officials had given a goal and all the players had accepted that
because there was not even one appeal from a Spurs player that
there had been anything untoward.
The media and many fans wanted VAR so they will just have to
tolerate its use whether it is right or wrong. Remember that it
is to make the game better ---so they tell me ---so just accept
it and stop moaning ---because it is the future and gived the
pundits something to talk about rather than the really good game
which took place!
[/quote]
Yes, this is sort of the point though. Oliver missed the shirt
pull and the handball in real time, but came up with the correct
decision by default. Then VAR wades in, banging on about an
accidental handball, which Oliver took as fact. The VAR crew,
in their haste to alert the referee, presumably missed the foul
completely and therefore misled the referee.
VAR should give the on-field referee the chance to review his
decision, not re-referee incidents. I believe Oliver, if in
full possession of the facts would have either awarded a goal,
or - more correctly given this crazy rule - a penalty. I really
don't see how the VAR team can be defended in this case, they
only did half a job.
#Post#: 10087--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: nemesis
Date: August 18, 2019, 2:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RCG link ---
>
>
> ...
> Surprisingly inciteful punditry on MOTD about it is unfair to
penalise attacking teams for a handball you would not give
against the defender
> The law was changed to prevent goals being scored off arms
when the on field officials could not see (ireland being one i
remember)
> The handball law coupled with offside is reducing the number
of goals, not increasing them
>
--- End Quote ---
Sometimes their punditry seems just that. However on this
occasion I think I know what you meant to say. Homonyms eh !
#Post#: 10088--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: Ashington46
Date: August 18, 2019, 2:38 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: LateTackle link ---
>
> [quote author=Ashington46 link=topic=933.msg10070#msg10070
date=1566146546]
> [quote author=LateTackle link=topic=933.msg10067#msg10067
date=1566143540]
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=933.msg10056#msg10056
date=1566138406]
> I’ve no problem with the goal yesterday being disallowed. Ball
travelled a long way before being flicked on by the hand and
giving a significant advantage. No way would Oliver have allowed
goal if reviewing it for himself. I think this is strength of
VAR, detecting something practically impossible to spot in real
time.
>
> Whilst the wording is new, I believe PL clubs agreed this
interpretation in 2016 and Mike Riley said over the summer that
the handball interpretation would be unchanged from last few
seasons.
>
--- End Quote ---
I absolutely disagree regarding Oliver looking at the replay.
Had he done so, you would hope he'd have spotted the shirt pull
on the player whose hand it hit. He was fouled before an
accidental handball. Yes, he could have disallowed the goal,
but could have then correctly awarded a penalty. The whole
thing has become farcical. I also feel that VAR should have
spotted the original offence, so it doesn't say much for them.
Poor all round.
[/quote]
In the opinion of the VAR, who is a PG1 official, the only
offence committed was a handball which, according to the new
interpretation of the Laws is punishable. I have always said
that VAR just introduces another opinion and this was what
happened in this case. He only saw the handball and only then
after slow motion replays, meanwhile the actual onfield
officials had given a goal and all the players had accepted that
because there was not even one appeal from a Spurs player that
there had been anything untoward.
The media and many fans wanted VAR so they will just have to
tolerate its use whether it is right or wrong. Remember that it
is to make the game better ---so they tell me ---so just accept
it and stop moaning ---because it is the future and gived the
pundits something to talk about rather than the really good game
which took place!
[/quote]
Yes, this is sort of the point though. Oliver missed the shirt
pull and the handball in real time, but came up with the correct
decision by default. Then VAR wades in, banging on about an
accidental handball, which Oliver took as fact. The VAR crew,
in their haste to alert the referee, presumably missed the foul
completely and therefore misled the referee.
VAR should give the on-field referee the chance to review his
decision, not re-referee incidents. I believe Oliver, if in
full possession of the facts would have either awarded a goal,
or - more correctly given this crazy rule - a penalty. I really
don't see how the VAR team can be defended in this case, they
only did half a job.
[/quote]
I totally disagree!! VAR should be scrapped completely and there
would be no need for all this discussion because we would be
talking about quite a good game of football which Man City won
in added time. Not one player appealed for anything in this
whole incident and all were convinced that a goal had been
scored.
Spurs were dejected, City were elated and anybody who has loved
the game since way before the Premier League thought that they
invented it was totally mystified how such a goal could be
disallowed.
The media-driven Transfer Windows and media-driven VAR are the
two worst things introduced into football in modern times.
#Post#: 10089--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: August 18, 2019, 2:43 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
OK, a couple of views from an admittedly City biased perspective
- so I'll save you the trouble of posting to tell me that's the
case!
1)
IFAB - Law Changes
--- Quote ---
> Handball Law 12
> Changes
> •Deliberate handball remains an offence
> •The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will
be a free kick:
> a) the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking
player’s hand/arm
> b) a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has
touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a
goal-scoring opportunity
> c) the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their
body unnaturally bigger
> d) the ball touches a player’s hand/arm when it is above their
shoulder (unless the player has deliberately played the ball
which then touches their hand/ar
--- End Quote ---
We can ignore c) & d)
Does a) apply? Does the ball go into the goal from Laporte's
arm? I don't think so. If the goal scoring is delayed beyond
the immediate entry of the ball into the goal then b) is not
needed.
Does b) apply) Does Jesus handle the ball - No; does Laporte
gain possession of the ball? No.
So does this wording not cover the amendment suggested by RGC?
I think so.
2)
--- Quote ---
> ..Ball travelled a long way before being flicked on by the
hand..
--- End Quote ---
Unless you think that this contact constituted the hand ball
then the ball actually only moved about a foot before it may
have hit the forearm, and probably the arms of both players.
[img]
HTML https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ECM6gNHXYAAI4ui?format=jpg&name=medium[/img]
3) As Late Tackle says Oliver should have reviewed it himself
particularly in view of the IFAB wording and he could have found
two reasons to award a penalty the shirt pull and the handball.
It capped off a pretty sub-standard performance by the referee
and VAR.
The missed penalty for the attempted strangulation of Rodri was
just an example of the differential awarding of the "benefit of
the doubt" throughout the game - compounded by Sterling's yellow
card whilst at least two of the four free kicks awarded in
City's favour seemed equally deserving of yellow cards, and the
fourth actually disadvantaged City as they had regained control
of the ball.
Perhaps the most risible decision of all (fortunately of no
consequence) was just before half time when Bernardo was
flattened from behind by Rose and a free kick awarded to Spurs.
(You may be able to find this action by "Googling "BERNARDO
SILVA FAZ LANCE INCRÍVEL | BERNARDO SILVA ..." If I embed the
video it will almost certainly be challenged by the copyright
holder....)
VAR is not the problem itself but it is highlighting problems
both with refereeing consistency and the inadequacy of the
current laws to deal the change brought about by technology, and
to some extent the increased speed of the game.
#Post#: 10097--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: Ref Fan
Date: August 19, 2019, 3:19 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Microscopist - a biased City perspective - I'd never have
guessed (this where the funny emoticon should have gone!))
With regard to Law 12, if your analysis is correct, why was the
disallowed goal last week by Wolves and City's on Saturday
deemed to be correct decisions by most pundits and referees on
this forum irrespective of how much they don't like the law or
its interpretation?
Can anyone clarify what the VAR (Scott) is expected to tell
Oliver in that situation? Does he say something like "Michael,
you have to disallow the goal, there was a hand ball by Laporte
in the build up" giving Oliver little option or " there was a
handball that might mean the goal should be disallowed - you
might want to take a look yourself"? In which case, is it the
referee who decides whether to accept the VAR 'advice' or look
at the monitor himself. I'm confused on the protocol here.
With regard to your other points, I'm probably in a minority of
one who wasn't totally convinced by the first half penalty
appeal. There was certainly at least one arm by Lamela on the
attacker but whether that was sufficient contact to justify a
penalty to my eyes wasn't clear. What then happened was that the
second Spurs player pushed Lamela who went into the City player
and they all fell down. At least that was my viewing of it and
presumably VAR did not deem it an obvious error.
Question - would / could VAR have told Oliver, "I think that
should have been a penalty", and is the referee entitled to
reply that he had a good view of the incident and thought no
penalty without looking at the monitor?
However, Microscopist, I have to admit I too was puzzled by the
free kick award to Spurs when it appeared to be Rose who was the
offender.
With 30 attempts, City should surely have won that game without
the controversial intervention of VAR.
As far as VAR is concerned, just a personal opinion, but the
Sterling offside decision last week and the disallowed goal for
handball on Saturday just don't seem right whatever the current
law and interpretation. Like others, I feel further tweaks
would help the game.
#Post#: 10103--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: fatso
Date: August 19, 2019, 3:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I am against VAR as it takes away the spontaneous element of
celebrating the goal. As a Brighton fan my view was strengthened
by the offside goal on Saturday. Fortunately I called the
offside and was not celebrating but I believe it is making our
officials poorer as they no longer have to make those decisions
so become lazy. Although the offside looked closer on TV than at
the game I cannot understand why the assistant did not flag.
Brighton would have been several points better off last season,
the handall winner by Cardiff is one example, but I still would
rather they got rid of VAR although I know it won't happen. It
is great viewing for the TV viewers but not for those who pay
their money to experience the spontaneity and jubilation of
celebrating goals.
#Post#: 10112--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: kelxref
Date: August 19, 2019, 7:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Firstly, I thought that the EFL VAR protocol was to avoid on
field reviews except in very rare circumstances (I think I saw a
quote from Neil Swarbrick saying that in all the trials last
season there would have been only one OFR!), so I think Michael
Oliver had no choice but to take the VAR advice. However,
personally I think this EFL tweak to the system used abroad and
in international competitions is misguided.
On Saturday, whilst it may have taken a little longer it would
have been better if the referee had reviewed the incident on
screen for himself and taken into account how the the “handling”
had occurred. In this case (and I say this as a Spurs fan!) I
think there is sufficient wiggle room in the current law
(certainly around the word control) to have let the goal stand
or even if he did disallow it, to better sell the decision to
the players as he has reviewed the incident for himself.
Secondly, the other tweak to VAR that the EFL has made is to get
assistants to flag immediately for offside and then get the
referee to delay the whistle until any goal scoring opportunity
has finished. I cannot think of anything to commend this. You
can tell players until you’re blue in the face to play to the
whistle and not the flag but in practice it is unlikely to
happen. And even if they did, it does nothing to overcome the
criticism stated on these boards that late flags leading to
potential unnecessary injuries as the whistle is still delayed.
Late in the Chelsea v Leicester game yesterday, Leicester put
the ball in the net. The assistant flagged immediately the
player received the ball, the commentators called the flag
before he scored and the Chelsea goalkeeper seemed to me to make
a half hearted attempt to save presumably as the flag had been
raised. Oliver Langford did not blow until after the ball
entered the net (as the protocol dictates). Whilst VAR did
confirm the offside, I shudder to think of the protests if the
offside were overturned. I can’t see any advantage in this
change to VAR - although happy to be informed if my criticism is
misguided.
#Post#: 10125--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: LateTackle
Date: August 19, 2019, 10:57 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ashington46 link ---
>
> [quote author=LateTackle link=topic=933.msg10081#msg10081
date=1566154149]
> [quote author=Ashington46 link=topic=933.msg10070#msg10070
date=1566146546]
> [quote author=LateTackle link=topic=933.msg10067#msg10067
date=1566143540]
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=933.msg10056#msg10056
date=1566138406]
> I’ve no problem with the goal yesterday being disallowed. Ball
travelled a long way before being flicked on by the hand and
giving a significant advantage. No way would Oliver have allowed
goal if reviewing it for himself. I think this is strength of
VAR, detecting something practically impossible to spot in real
time.
>
> Whilst the wording is new, I believe PL clubs agreed this
interpretation in 2016 and Mike Riley said over the summer that
the handball interpretation would be unchanged from last few
seasons.
>
--- End Quote ---
I absolutely disagree regarding Oliver looking at the replay.
Had he done so, you would hope he'd have spotted the shirt pull
on the player whose hand it hit. He was fouled before an
accidental handball. Yes, he could have disallowed the goal,
but could have then correctly awarded a penalty. The whole
thing has become farcical. I also feel that VAR should have
spotted the original offence, so it doesn't say much for them.
Poor all round.
[/quote]
In the opinion of the VAR, who is a PG1 official, the only
offence committed was a handball which, according to the new
interpretation of the Laws is punishable. I have always said
that VAR just introduces another opinion and this was what
happened in this case. He only saw the handball and only then
after slow motion replays, meanwhile the actual onfield
officials had given a goal and all the players had accepted that
because there was not even one appeal from a Spurs player that
there had been anything untoward.
The media and many fans wanted VAR so they will just have to
tolerate its use whether it is right or wrong. Remember that it
is to make the game better ---so they tell me ---so just accept
it and stop moaning ---because it is the future and gived the
pundits something to talk about rather than the really good game
which took place!
[/quote]
Yes, this is sort of the point though. Oliver missed the shirt
pull and the handball in real time, but came up with the correct
decision by default. Then VAR wades in, banging on about an
accidental handball, which Oliver took as fact. The VAR crew,
in their haste to alert the referee, presumably missed the foul
completely and therefore misled the referee.
VAR should give the on-field referee the chance to review his
decision, not re-referee incidents. I believe Oliver, if in
full possession of the facts would have either awarded a goal,
or - more correctly given this crazy rule - a penalty. I really
don't see how the VAR team can be defended in this case, they
only did half a job.
[/quote]
I totally disagree!! VAR should be scrapped completely and there
would be no need for all this discussion because we would be
talking about quite a good game of football which Man City won
in added time. Not one player appealed for anything in this
whole incident and all were convinced that a goal had been
scored.
Spurs were dejected, City were elated and anybody who has loved
the game since way before the Premier League thought that they
invented it was totally mystified how such a goal could be
disallowed.
The media-driven Transfer Windows and media-driven VAR are the
two worst things introduced into football in modern times.
[/quote]
I think you are making a valid point. I was referring to the
situation as it stood, with VAR in play. However, if this is
the chaos and injustice that VAR is bringing to the game, I am
being persuaded that it contributes nothing useful. We are two
games into the Premier season and it is riven with controversy
already.
The whole point of it was to let officials review 'howlers'. It
is now seemingly being used to re-referee incidents without the
referee himself. That should never happen - VAR should invite
the referee to have another look and if necessary correct a
howler. If we are to have VAR the referee should always have
the final say. Otherwise you may as well call everything from a
portacabin 100 miles away.
We are not helped by ludicrous law tweaks like this handball
incident. As I have said before, the more they tinker the worse
it gets. I'm sure VAR wasn't intended to be like this.
#Post#: 10147--------------------------------------------------
Re: 1st ruled out goal by VAR in PL
DIR By: Microscopist
Date: August 19, 2019, 2:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi Ref Fan, always a pleasure to chat with you electronically.
I realise that it will come as a shock to you that behind this
balanced, thoughtful and logical facade lies a partisan spirit!
First half penalty - yes two Spurs players were involved but I
don't think that that is much of a defence.
[img]
HTML https://webeditor.one.com/api/v1/dail.me.uk/webspace/onewebmedia/Rodri.jpg?resize=450,300&etag=%2296efd9-5d5ae7b1%22&crop=center[/img]
I think this tackle would be outlawed in Rugby let alone
football. When you contrast this with the challenge for which
Sterling was shown a yellow card then it is hard not to think
that different standards were applied in each case.
--- Quote ---
> b) a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has
touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a
goal-scoring opportunity
--- End Quote ---
The comma introduces a slight ambiguity in meaning but that
still gives leeway for the law to be interpreted inthe spirit of
rewarding rather than punishing good football. The way VAR is
being used is like someone being given the tools to repair a run
down house and concentrating on oiling the door hinges rather
than tackling the damp and dry rot. So instead of looking for
mm offside decisions and near imperceptible ball to hand contact
it should be tackling evening out standards for penalties and
diving.
Talking of the spirit of the game I cannot understand how anyone
who loves football could reward the brilliant skill of Bernardo
before being clattered by giving a free kick against him. He
should have spent Saturday night wondering what on earth he is
doing.
*****************************************************
Page 4 of 12
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page