Var debate 2019/20

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

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.

It's almost like they've purposely created confusion to hide something.

 

[HypnoticBlue]

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.

I get what your saying but their response would be that “Spurs didn’t get control” so in other words we retained possession after it brushed Laportes finger.
Either way the game has gone and we dropped points, so until we start compiling vids, statements, comments, and pics of xxxx with hookers (not rugby playing type) and our very costly legal team get their dark side on and hit them with a smokin gun, we’re not gettin em back.
We’re all sharing that pain :-(

 

[Dribble]

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.

I understand exactly what you mean, however I understand what IFAB meant (I think), albeit their grasp of the English language leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[penguins4kompany]

The only team that has profitted from var this weekend is spurs. Again! Bear that in mind.

 

[paulchapo]

We all thought var would make the game fairer and hinder the dippers in particular due to all their dodgy decisions last season. How wrong could we be!

Forget the handball goal, I can see with hindsight why it was disallowed even if the wording of their own rule is subject to conjecture. What has proved it beyond doubt is the Rodri non penalty and the comments from the officials afterwards. If they can rule that is not a penalty and worse still try to say Rodri somehow maneuvered himself into being grabbed around the neck, then fell over to gain an advantage, when all the evidence is there for the world to see he didn't, then nothing has changed. Decisions are going to be manipulated to suit whatever agenda they have.

 

[HypnoticBlue]

Spot on!
Ridiculous decision.

Yeh but then it doesn’t fit the agenda, and it’s “my ball, my rules”.
It’s taken me 3 days to calm down and speak to the Mrs even though it was our wedding anniversary yesterday.

F4ck em.

 

[Paladin]

City agreed that ANY hand/arm contact by an attacking players in the box which results in a goal, whether accidentally or not will be ruled out.

The ball accidentally hit Laporte's arm & deviated to Jesus. That is fact. The issue I have is phases. Considering how much work & how many players Jesus had to pass to score, was this in the same phase as the handball or not? That's the issue I have, along with why a ball accidentally hitting a defender isn't penalised too?

Also, a ball hits Llorente in the CL, it's not a handball. The ball hits Otamendi in the CL, it's handball?? Same rule, same competition, different interpretations.

VAR is fucked until all this is sorted.

It is irrelevant whether City agreed it or not. Under the actual law, as written by FIFA, it was not handball.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

We all thought var would make the game fairer and hinder the dippers in particular due to all their dodgy decisions last season. How wrong could we be!

Forget the handball goal, I can see with hindsight why it was disallowed even if the wording of their own rule is subject to conjecture. What has proved it beyond doubt is the Rodri non penalty and the comments from the officials afterwards. If they can rule that is not a penalty and worse still try to say Rodri somehow maneuvered himself into being grabbed around the neck, then fell over to gain an advantage, when all the evidence is there for the world to see he didn't, then nothing has changed. Decisions are going to be manipulated to suit whatever agenda they have.

Said this when they decided to bring in VAR. I'm surprised they didn't say the video feed was down for the Rodri penalty claim. I'm sure they'll keep that excuse in the bag for when they need it.

 

[deano ou812]

So basically it’s gonna be one set of rules for certain teams and another set for other teams,or simply put they pick and choose what THEY deem as a pen and which aren’t...

 

[HypnoticBlue]

It is irrelevant whether City agreed it or not. Under the actual law, as written by FIFA, it was not handball.

Don’t suppose you have that to hand do you ;-)