Jump to content

Video Assistant Referee (VAR)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"Any goal scored or created with the use of the hand or arm will be disallowed this season, even if it is accidental," says the Premier League. Jesus' goal, technically, was created by the use of

Not a penalty??? Yeah right! 👍😁  

Liverpool almost lost their match against Villa due to VAR not being used consistently. For the Villa goal and the Firmino goal, and the Mane foul in the box.    Villa given a goal through V

Posted Images

Any goal scored or created with the use of the hand or arm will be disallowed this season even if it is accidental.

So now we know we're following the Premier League's interpretation / version (of this season's IFAB handball law) shown above. But in trying to amend the handball rule so there's no grey area (touch attackers hand/arm...= handball) they've now made a law which favours the defending team. Consider the following scenarios:

 

Laporte and Skippy go to head the ball, they miss it, and it brushes Laporte's arm and goes to Jesus who scores = Disallowed [if Jesus passes it to someone who scores would it be disallowed? If Jesus and others pass the ball 1, 2, 5, 10, or 44 times before scoring would it be disallowed?] FAVOURS THE DEFENDING TEAM

 

Laporte and Skippy go to head the ball, they miss it, and it brushes Laporte's arm and goes to a Spurs player at the back of the box who runs the length of the pitch and scores. It wouldn't be disallowed for Laporte's handball would it. FAVOURS THE DEFENDING TEAM

 

Laporte and Skippy go to head the ball, they miss it, and it brushes Skippy's arm, would they award a penalty? Debatable (probably not). FAVOURS THE DEFENDING TEAM.

 

Imagine Spurs have a corner. The ball is crossed to Kane outside the box who hits a goal of the season volley and just before it crosses the goal line it brushes Rose's arm and goes in with barely a change in it's trajectory. Disallowed yes. FAVOURS THE DEFENDING TEAM.

 

So in trying to improve the laws of the game there could be less (good) goals, benefiting the defending team.

 

Surely this not what we want is it?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Alfie, below is how it is presented in the Laws (i've added the bold and underline for you) and NOT as you have posted it. As you can see i did not leave out "a very small thing called a comma and the word OR" because they do not exist in the Law:

 

Handling the ball

It is an offence if a player:

  • deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball

  • gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:

    • scores in the opponents’ goal

    • creates a goal-scoring opportunity

  • scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

What i posted  was off the IFAB website which as far as i understand is the official website for law changes, and as you can see a comma and the word OR are included and do exist in the law.

 

  • A player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm•and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity
Edited by alfieconn
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, alfieconn said:

What i posted  was off the IFAB website which as far as i understand is the official website for law changes, and as you can see a comma and the word OR are included :

 

  • A player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm•and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity

Interesting  because i also copy and pasted from the IFAB website, anyway we moved on from that Alfie. Keep up.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Here's another one for you to *ponder, which has been the subject of several articles in the media. Why was Lamela's 'contact' on Rodri (arm around the neck, pulled him down to the ground) not given as a penalty and why was it not reviewed by VAR? 

Seems nobody responded, but our Dermot has cleared this one up.

 

DERMOT SAYS: "At the time, I wasn't convinced that it was a penalty. The more I see it, the more I'm leaning towards it being one. The dilemma there is that the referee didn't think it was a penalty and he would have fed to the VAR team what he had seen and why he's come to that conclusion. The dilemma is not whether it is a penalty or not, it is that VAR cannot do anything about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Dermot if there hadn't been any goals scored by players using their hand last season the law wouldn't have been changed and guess who scored one of them goals, yes Mr Arguero, couldn't make it up, strange that BB didn't mention that 😂

Edited by alfieconn
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Interesting  because i also copy and pasted from the IFAB website, anyway we moved on from that Alfie. Keep up.

 

Until i put the link up to the website you hadn't even mentioned the IFAB website.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, alfieconn said:

According to Dermot if there hadn't been any goals scored by players using their hand last season the law wouldn't have been changed and guess who scored one of them goals, yes Mr Arguero, couldn't make it up, strange that BB didn't mention that 😂

Here you go Alfie

 

"We saw three handball goals in the Premier League last year - Willy Boly [against Man City], Sergio Aguero [against Arsenal] and Nathan Redmond [against West Ham] - and everybody thought that it wasn't acceptable. Everybody had this notion that you can't have a goal scored by the hand or the arm so the law was brought into place by IFAB (International Football Association Board) for the start of the season."

 

I don't remember the Redmond one but the other two the ball went in off them, and yes to quote Dermot "Everybody had this notion that you can't have a goal scored by the hand or the arm so the law was brought into...", but now they have taken it a step too far.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, alfieconn said:

According to Dermot if there hadn't been any goals scored by players using their hand last season the law wouldn't have been changed and guess who scored one of them goals, yes Mr Arguero, couldn't make it up, strange that BB didn't mention that 😂

Former ref Halsey take on it: “Obviously to the letter of the law they were correct in what happened, and there’s only one person to blame for the change in the law of handling the ball, and that’s David Elleray and the IFAB.

“For me, in a situation like that we’ve got to be giving goals, you cannot see goals chalked of for those sort of incidents.

“I just think it’s an ass. The law now is an ass.

You could argue that there are two different rules – one for defenders and one for attackers.
“There’s no chance of a penalty being given there if it hits the defender’s arm – it wasn’t deliberate and that’s still there in the laws of the game.

“This law has been brought in for the absolute howlers. The Thierry Henry handball we saw many years ago against Ireland – that’s what it’s for.

“I think we’ve got to seriously sit down and look at it.

“Mike Riley said we’re raising the bar regarding handling the ball, we’re raising the bar with encroachment and goalkeepers coming off the line, but for me we’ve got to look at raising the bar on offsides and these situations.

“I think everybody had got to come together and have a discussion about that we’ve going to disallow, what is handball, what is controlling it, what is accidental.
If the ball drops down to Jesus, it hits his arm and then he puts it in the net, then yes, that’s what we want to see. But in these situations, incidents like that, we’ve got to be giving goals.

“I think they should come in a make their own little change to the law, a little minor tweak – like they did in the Champions League last season. If UEFA can do it…

Incidents like the one on Saturday, we shouldn’t be ruling those goals out.

“But we cannot blame VAR because with the law as it is written, you can’t say they’re incorrect.

“It’s the law makers who are to blame for what we’re seeing now.”


 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the biggest complaints from those in the stadiums watching live is that don't know, say in the case of Laporte handball, why a goal was disallowed - plenty left the Etihad not knowing why Jesus goal didn't stand.

 

A quick fix in this current VAR public relations disaster would be, after the sign that goes up with VARs decision, would be another sign "Handball - Laporte". Simple solution.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I stole this from a guy from the UK living in Hong Kong. Short and simple and expresses my misgivings about VAR:

 

Some people seem genuinely not to understand what others dislike about VAR, so here's the short summary: the VAR process is considerably more irritating to us than wrong decisions were. It's that simple.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Bredbury Blue said:

Andre Mariner doesn't  give a penalty for the David Silva incident. VAR reviews it, 'No Penalty'.

 

Dermot Gallagher and Chris Foy say a penalty.

 

It was a clear penalty.

 

Whats going on?

I don't know. I think it's about letting the ref on the field referee as much as possible and not over rule him, except if there is a clear and obvious error (which I thought there was in this instance). This isn't really the VAR I thought we were going to get but it's early days and we knew it wasn't going to be perfect from the off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, mrbojangles said:

I don't know. I think it's about letting the ref on the field referee as much as possible and not over rule him, except if there is a clear and obvious error (which I thought there was in this instance). This isn't really the VAR I thought we were going to get but it's early days and we knew it wasn't going to be perfect from the off.

Interesting post this.

 

This is not about the David Silver incident specifically, but about VAR's integrity. If it's "about letting the ref on the field referee as much as possible and not over rule him, except if there is a clear and obvious error,,,....." then it should be made clear ASAP. This is a crucial point. Can only the ref and his assistants make real-time decisions? If VAR can also, then the Silva incident should have been pointed out to the ref'; also in the Anfield game the Salah's spot-kick goal. 

 

If the ref misses something on the field of play, should VAR (or the 4th official) send him a quick message to review the incident?

 

In the Liverpool - Arsenal match at the w/e, the penalty goal by Salah should NOT have stood. What is VAR actually for? To point out obvious errors or only to assist the ref' when he makes a decision.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...