Spurs (H) Post Match Thread

i dont get the outrage....the handball rule, AS SHIT AS IT IS, was laid down before this match kicked off, so why are people surprised?
 
i dont get the outrage....the handball rule, AS SHIT AS IT IS, was laid down before this match kicked off, so why are people surprised?
Because of the forensic nature of the manner in which VAR was used to chalk off a last minute game winning goal which nobody saw anything wrong with.
 
Because of the forensic nature of the manner in which VAR was used to chalk off a last minute game winning goal which nobody saw anything wrong with.
When VAR is used in this way to chalk off a last minute dipper winner at Anfield I will take it seriously - never gonna happen though.
 
i dont get the outrage....the handball rule, AS SHIT AS IT IS, was laid down before this match kicked off, so why are people surprised?
I’ve read the handball rule dozens of times since the game and I’m not convinced there was an offence. Ex refs in the media can come out saying “any handball that results in a goal is a foul”, but the laws don’t actually say that, and surely that’s what matters? The laws read as if Laporte would have had to gain possession/control of the ball AFTER it hitting his arm. Not in the moment it hit his arm, but after it. It’s clear that he did not gain control of the ball afterwards. The other parts of the rule are to do with if it’s deliberate (which it wasn’t), or if it goes in the net directly off the arm/hand (which it didn’t). I’m not even convinced it’s a foul, even under the new law.
 
I’ve read the handball rule dozens of times since the game and I’m not convinced there was an offence. Ex refs in the media can come out saying “any handball that results in a goal is a foul”, but the laws don’t actually say that, and surely that’s what matters? The laws read as if Laporte would have had to gain possession/control of the ball AFTER it hitting his arm. Not in the moment it hit his arm, but after it. It’s clear that he did not gain control of the ball afterwards. The other parts of the rule are to do with if it’s deliberate (which it wasn’t), or if it goes in the net directly off the arm/hand (which it didn’t). I’m not even convinced it’s a foul, even under the new law.

Agree 100%. According to the book, it wasn't handball. How can they get away with ignoring the meaning of the law and disallowing the goal? It's their fucking job to know the laws, and a new law at that, so it can't be an honest mistake. Nobody points it out except City fans.
 
Agree 100%. According to the book, it wasn't handball. How can they get away with ignoring the meaning of the law and disallowing the goal? It's their fucking job to know the laws, and a new law at that, so it can't be an honest mistake. Nobody points it out except City fans.
Literally the entire country is being fed an incorrect version of the handball law. Because nobody bothers to read it. It’s ridiculous really. I’ve posted stuff on twitter and you just get fans of other clubs saying “any handball is a foul if a goal is scored”. I ask everyone to show me where it says that in the laws of the game and nobody comes back with it. Just because SSN says it doesn’t make it correct.

It’s the same with “clear and obvious error”. People think VAR can only intervene when there’s such an error. But that’s not true at all. Clear and obvious error only applies to subjective calls. Offside is classed as an objective, black and white call, and is not subject to “clear and obvious”. That’s a joke in itself by the way because the technology isn’t there to treat it as black and white. But my point is nobody reads the laws of the game, they just go off what idiots on Sky/bbc say, when they too have not read the laws.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.