Schalke post match thread

lazerblue said:
I lost count of the number of times the ref gave advantage when one of our players had been taken out and then failed to book the offender when the move broke down
Click to expand...
Three times I think, all bookable offences.
It's bizarre to think there is a conspiracy against city but after tonight (I would say at least 5 major decisions against us ) its hard not too, dodgy as fuck...
 
CityInWashingtonState said:
That's one opinion.

With regard to the first penalty decision - what should the ref do if the review panel is unanimous in its opinion and the onfield ref cannot review footage due to equipment problems. I for one absolutely think that the Otters hand ball should have been called a foul.

2nd Pen - no idea - multiple penalties were committed - which takes presididense - I've no idea.
Click to expand...

He should stick with his original decision. Thems the rules. It wasn't a clear and obvious error either.

2nd, offside takes presidente as that took place first.
 
Last edited:
10 v 13, so an absolutely superb win. I am very pleased with the players indeed.

The VAR studio people have got no authority to overrule the on-field ref. Only the on-field ref can change his mind when he sees the replay, but with no screen he can't. The first pen therefore is a corner and the spurious red card for Otter does not exist as the second yellow becomes irrelevant.

The second pen you see thirty, forty times a game and no foul is ever given. Hmm. Again, with a working screen, the ref would probably have overturned that. But strangely there is no working screen. I wonder why that is.

Monumental win in extremely adverse conditions. The lads must be absolutely buzzing. I am. I can't wait for Sunday.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
schfc6 said:
He should stick with decission. Thems the rules. It wasn't a clear and obvious error either.

2nd, offside takes presidente as that took place first.
Click to expand...

>> He should stick with decission. Thems the rules. It wasn't a clear and obvious error either.
And yet video replay wasn't available. How on earth should the onfield ref muster the audacity to completely disregard the replay booth when they had ample replays available to them.

I for one, absolutely agree that Otters hand ball is a penalty - on the basis that that's the way that the game is called - at the same time I absolutely agree that Otter's hand ball was not intentional.

The rules of the game need to be updated.
====
>> 2nd, offside takes presidente as that took place first.
Implicitly claiming that you're more knowledgeable than the professional referees on the field... well, I rather doubt that you're correct.
 
SWP's back said:
Yeah I don't understand why he was overruled (if that is what happened). In the absence of a working screen for him to use, then it would appear that he should have stuck to his original decision. Have UEFA released a statement on that yet?

As you say, I have no issue with the final decision because I said I thought it was a penalty straight away, but I am not sure I am comfortable with the process of arriving at that decision having later brushed up on the rules of VAR.
Click to expand...

It's fucking shit.
 
CityInWashingtonState said:
>> He should stick with decission. Thems the rules. It wasn't a clear and obvious error either.
And yet video replay wasn't available. How on earth should the onfield ref muster the audacity to completely disregard the replay booth when they had ample replays available to them.

I for one, absolutely agree that Otters hand ball is a penalty - on the basis that that's the way that the game is called - at the same time I absolutely agree that Otter's hand ball was not intentional.

The rules of the game need to be updated.
====
>> 2nd, offside takes presidente as that took place first.
No argument - but without actual reference to the rules of the game - implicitly claiming that you're more knowledgeable than the professional referees on the field... well, I rather doubt that you're correct.
Click to expand...


You always take the first offence. Unless you give advantage. They are the rules.

All 4 ex pros in the studio didn't think it was a handball, but that is irrelevant, the UEFA directive is that the on-field official must make the final decision. He didn't. If the screen didn't work. He keeps with original decision, which for many was right.
 
blue61 said:
You can't refer yellow cards to VAR but even if they could it wouldn't have been overturned
Click to expand...
You can refer any incident to VAR if it is considered to be match changing , and in this case a second bookable offence and therefore sending off could have been referred. It was a soft tackle compared to some of theirs and he had nothing to lose if it was referred but he didn't . VAR brings as many problems as it seeks to avoid
 
SWP's back said:
Yeah I don't understand why he was overruled (if that is what happened). In the absence of a working screen for him to use, then it would appear that he should have stuck to his original decision. Have UEFA released a statement on that yet?

As you say, I have no issue with the final decision because I said I thought it was a penalty straight away, but I am not sure I am comfortable with the process of arriving at that decision having later brushed up on the rules of VAR.
Click to expand...
Two thoughts...

1) Under UEFA rules - is it actually possible for the on-field ref to be overruled by VAR? I actually don't know. Your commentary about "absence of a screen" is wholly irrelevant if the onield has no say in the final decision;

2) For me, it's a clear-cut penalty given the way that the game is actually officiated. I do not for a second believe that Otters hand ball was intentional - but the way that the game is actually called - regardless of the rules - penalty.

The rules of the game need to change - first up - any rule requiring that a ref needs to judge intent needs to go - who knows what a player intends?

Secondly - if we're to adopt VAR - and we're in favor of a fast-paced game without undue delay - then... the VAR booth should have the final say - if it goes to VAR and they disagree with the onfield ref - then that's it.
 
Franny's toilet roll said:
You can refer any incident to VAR if it is considered to be match changing , and in this case a second bookable offence and therefore sending off could have been referred. It was a soft tackle compared to some of theirs and he had nothing to lose if it was referred but he didn't . VAR brings as many problems as it seeks to avoid
Click to expand...
This is taken from the rule book.....The VAR will only intervene if he thinks the referee has missed a direct red card offence, not a yellow or second yellow. However, there are three instances when the VAR can advise a referee to issue a caution. 1) If, on reviewing a penalty it turns out there is simulation. 2) If, on reviewing an awarded goal, it turns out a player has deliberately handled the ball to score. 3) If, in dismissing a player, it is proved they have been provoked into retaliating, the player who initiated the incident could get booked.
 
Magicpole said:
I am certainly not a fucking Rag, but I was thrown off the WC thread for taking the piss, or as I called it, being fucking truthful about England’s overall performance. I was of course right. Anyway, I like being a wee bit oppressed, I’m Scottish. I won’t lose sleep, but the threads will lose my brilliant footballing mind. :)
Click to expand...

I am afraid you are going to have to expect that soon England will win tournaments, whilst Scotland will lock horns with the likes of Estonia in the International footballing equivalent of conference north.

Look its not all bad I am sure you are still better than us at Curling.
 
Amazing win, whoever spotted Ederson deserves a villa from shiekh as pay raise is old school.

VAR is something that the game needs but it feels sometimes as if it has been implemented in a rush. Last night was an embarrassment for UEFA, they should ensure proper mechanism for it and every ground should have the adequate facilities before hand.

Hopefully, when PL introduces it next season, they would address these issues. May be they should have a 3rd umpire like system like how it is in cricket where 3rd umpire has all the decision making power and refs don't have to go and look up on the screens.
 
purplenose said:
I am afraid you are going to have to expect that soon England will win tournaments, whilst Scotland will lock horns with the likes of Estonia in the International footballing equivalent of conference north.

Look its not all bad I am sure you are still better than us at Curling.
Click to expand...

I will bet you a ton you don’t win a tournament in the next ten years. We will get slightly better but never be a contender. Qualifying is beyond us ffs! And yes, we are Fucking brilliant at Curling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top