Var debate 2019/20

[brummie blue]

Proof if needed of the corruption.

They contradict each other. Last I heard they weren't reviewing in slow motion. Bent

Are they serious? VAR is a complete and utter mess, making comments like that when most impartial football watching media, pundits and fans consider it a penalty and to compound it they allow the Pogba dive to stay as a penalty in last nights game, VAR is supposed to look at clear and obvious errors, and the was som error by the ref to give it .

 

[simon23]

The key words are THEN and AFTER..... a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity.

So he first has to gain control/possession ( which he never had at any point, it was a 50/50 header) then AFTER he then creates the goal scoring opportunity. Which would mean another touch to Jesus. None of that happened.

the word then is nullified by the word "or"...Laprte inadvertently created a goal scoring opportunity with his arm...you dont have to control a ball before you pass it (with any part of the body)....a first time pass you are never in conrtol of (or you could argue you are contoling the ball by passing it on......you are just changing the direction of flight/speed of the ball. Laporte inadvertently passed to Jesus with his arm.

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

read all the expanations of VAR and i have come to the conclusion that we will get f*cked over every single week , and certain other clubs will benefit from decisions , its a back handed compliment , we are light years ahead of every club even the Dipper media darlings , we are on a different level altogether. The Premier league along with PGMOL will do everything in their power to keep the title race competitive , because Klopp and his merrymen are certainly nowhere near good enough , their caveman route one football is just a slight more refined version of Wimbledon's crazy gang , in fact Vinny Jones would look a cultured ballplayer in comparison to Henderson or Milner.

 

[Florida Blue]

Yes, but isn't a deflection a form of 'control'? Much the same as a save, block or pass? It's one action which influences what the ball does next which may or may not affect the outcome???

Not imo because it says he has to control it and THEN create an opportunity, its 2 things, 2 phases.

If it hit his arm, ball goes down on ground then he passes it to Jesus, yes that is handball, but he didn't have possession/control, no 50/50 header is, you can say the Spurs defender had possession/control then in that situation.

 

[Florida Blue]

the word then is nullified by the word "or"...Laprte inadvertently created a goal scoring opportunity with his arm...you dont have to control a ball before you pass it (with any part of the body)....a first time pass you are never in conrtol of (or you could argue you are contoling the ball by passing it on......you are just changing the direction of flight/speed of the ball. Laporte inadvertently passed to Jesus with his arm.

The word OR should not be in there, my bad, it isn't in the IFAB guidelines which is this...

 

[Rolee]

Neil Swarbrick is head of VAR? They taking the piss?

 

[Florida Blue]

Not imo because it says he has to control it and THEN create an opportunity, its 2 things, 2 phases.

If it hit his arm, ball goes down on ground then he passes it to Jesus, yes that is handball, but he didn't have possession/control, no 50/50 header is, you can say the Spurs defender had possession/control then in that situation.

The word THEN makes it 2 passages of play to me. Control/possession first, THEN he passes or heads it to Jesus. That is the reason it is on 2 different lines and has it's own separate bullet point.

The IFAB ruling imo , was made to stop Laporte handling it, and THEN he passes it to Jesus. NOT the way it it transpired, being penalized for a deflection he had no clue about going to Jesus. That would make way more sense that the ruling the Prem have decided to use.

 

[paulchapo]

Head of VAR at Stockley Park, Neil Swarbrick on the Rodri penalty decision: “It was a coming-together of two players and it was looked at. The arm was around the top of the body, fractionally. If you look at that in slow motion, multiple times, it’s exaggerated..."

Neil Swarbrick: “He’s [Rodri] felt some contact. Can he win the header? No he can’t. It was ‘I’ve gone down looking for a penalty’. That’s how the referee read the incident." [via @SunSport]

I want to throttle this twat and see if he falls to the ground or not

He can't win the header as he is in a half bloody nelson the blind bastard!

 

[Florida Blue]

The whole kicker to the wording used by IFAB is they used 2 different explanations to the 1. the ball going in directly off the hand/arm and 2. creating a chance off the hand/arm.

If they wanted the Laporte incident to be handball all they had to say was the same wording as scoring " you cannot create/assist a goal with the arm/hand even if it's accidental or deflected by accident"

They didn't for a reason, , they specifically worded the rule scoring directly from the hand and creating a chance from handball differently, they specifically put in the ball must be under control /possession and THEN creates a goal scoring opportunity.

They could easily have said ' if you score or create a chance off the arm it's handball whether accidental or not" That's NOT what they did. Hence the confusion.

 

[Burtonblue]

I checked it again mate, & there was a definite deflection right to Jesus, accidental or not. My issue is, with all the work Jesus had to do, was the goal scored in the same phase as the handball?

Spot on!
Ridiculous decision.