Referees’ Performances 2018/19

[Rolee]

Do you think that handball/foul in the box is called exactly as the rules state?

It doesn't matter what I think, the rules are there to be adhered to.

 

[CityInWashingtonState]

It doesn't matter what I think, the rules are there to be adhered to.

And yet - the handball rule -for example - is not at all enforced per the book.

It is, however, somewhat consistent - I think that most refs would have awarded a handball foul, yellow card, and penalty kick for the Otters incident.

President now trumps the rule book - what needs to happen is:
1) Any rule that leave refs trying to mind-read intent - has to go;
2) Given 1 above - and given that sometimes the ball will be blasted into a player's hand in the box with no possibility of avoiding the contact - the handball rule needs to be addressed with very, very careful wording.

 

[Rolee]

And yet - the handball rule -for example - is not at all enforced per the book.

It is, however, somewhat consistent - I think that most refs would have awarded a handball foul, yellow card, and penalty kick for the Otters incident.

President now trumps the rule book - what needs to happen is:
1) Any rule that leave refs trying to mind-read intent - has to go;
2) Given 1 above - and given that sometimes the ball will be blasted into a player's hand in the box with no possibility of avoiding the contact - the handball rule needs to be addressed with very, very careful wording.

"somewhat consistent" lol.

The rule states deliberate, Otter tried to put his hand behind his back.

 

[bobbyowenquiff]

True. His comments about us not ready yet to go too far in the tournament for me was a dig at the officiating we receive

Agreed. The interviewer didn't get it. Pep was certainly unhappy on the touchline during the VAR farce. I suspect his yellow ribbon didn't go down well with the Spanish officials. It does seem suspicious that the TV apparently broke down at the key moment. I wonder if we will get the same officials in second leg. Another reason for Pep to play it cool. I wonder who actually called the penalty.

 

[CityInWashingtonState]

"somewhat consistent" lol.

The rule states deliberate, Otter tried to put his hand behind his back.

Absolutely agree.

But that's not how the game is actually called.

If I were refereeing the game, and I had access to the video replay - I'd have 100% called that foul.
===
Argue against me if you wil.
===
But answer me this - let's say that we're playing Liverpool - Aguero takes a shot, and VVD ends up contacting the ball with his hand - exactly in the same way that Otters did?

Penalty - you'd absolutely say so.

Me - I'd agree reluctantly with the penalty award - stating once again that the rules as stated in writing need to change to reflect how they're actually inforced - and that furthermore - any rule requiring refs to judge a player's mind - such as "intent" - needs to be eliminated.

 

[squirtyflower]

VAR 1 - Otamendi

The thing is, I can see why after numerous slow and slower motion videos, it was eventually decided to give the penalty.
The shot may actually have gone in too.

What I can't get is how it came about.

The ref's immediate initial decision was a corner, which to us all, it looked like.

But he then allowed Caligiuri, who had already been in his face a couple of times earlier without sanction, to again intimidate and bully himself, thus him asking to have another look at it with VAR.

I'm presuming he's then told, you can't have a look, monitor's broke. (Do they do pre-match checks?)

So, he then hands the decision over to two other refs who have all the slow slow mo's up in the box.

But surely first question to them is, Did the ref make a clear and obvious error?
That has to be debatable.

Second question, Did Otamendi try to get his arm away from the ball?
It looked like it on video but again let's say debatable.

However, with the way the ref then acts with clear impunity, it is quite obvious, that he's been told, absolutely deliberate handball, award the penalty and issue a Yellow card.

Walton View - This guy didn't have a view. He just backed the VAR ref, and with an arrogance that you could see infuriate Humphries and the panel.
Hargreaves talked about 0.7 of a second, it was probably half that.

Walton with his slow mo, then spots something and says, "look, he's had time to make a fist, to make his arm stronger to deflect the ball.
And he's making it look like he's turning away. No, definite handball".

All in less than half a second?

The incredulity on the faces of the panel, knowing they were fighting a losing battle against this muppet.

Walton is a proven cheat, making shit up about making a fist to deflect from the corruption

 

[Mr.Feeny]

"somewhat consistent" lol.

The rule states deliberate, Otter tried to put his hand behind his back.

I think that the rules are somewhat vague. That's why there's content in there about arms being in "unnatural" positions. If referees had to determine without a shadow or a doubt that every offender intentionally handled the ball, then we'd barely have any penalties.

But I can understand where you're coming from as well. Otamendi was moving his arms away from the ball so it would seem harsh to give that as a spot kick. I do think, however, that it was the right decision because his handling the ball defintely resulted in an advantage to his team as he blocked a goal bound shot.

 

[Mr.Feeny]

Absolutely agree.

But that's not how the game is actually called.

If I were refereeing the game, and I had access to the video replay - I'd have 100% called that foul.
===
Argue against me if you wil.
===
But answer me this - let's say that we're playing Liverpool - Aguero takes a shot, and VVD ends up contacting the ball with his hand - exactly in the same way that Otters did?

Penalty - you'd absolutely say so.

Me - I'd agree reluctantly with the penalty award - stating once again that the rules as stated in writing need to change to reflect how they're actually inforced - and that furthermore - any rule requiring refs to judge a player's mind - such as "intent" - needs to be eliminated.

Said it better than I could have. I was trying to say the exact same thing.

 

[quiet_riot]

Walton View - This guy didn't have a view. He just backed the VAR ref, and with an arrogance that you could see infuriate Humphries and the panel.
Hargreaves talked about 0.7 of a second, it was probably half that.

Walton with his slow mo, then spots something and says, "look, he's had time to make a fist, to make his arm stronger to deflect the ball.
And he's making it look like he's turning away. No, definite handball".

All in less than half a second?

The incredulity on the faces of the panel, knowing they were fighting a losing battle against this muppet.

Walton was an embarrassment last night. He clearly only watched it in slow mo, again and again, and clung onto the 'fist making' as prove of intent. He sounded like someone who had never ever played sports, let alone football. He'd know that imminent impact would make your whole body tense (therefore your arm/hand, wherever they are placed).

 

[Rolee]

Lads you're making this more complicated than it needs to be, with the benefit of VAR it is easy to see that Otamendi tries to move his hand away from the ball, no penalty as per the rules, as they stand.

FWIW the rules are due to change next season to state that any goalbound shot that strikes a hand in the penalty area will be deemed a penalty regardless of intent.