HypnoticBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2014
- Messages
- 952
That excuse is stuck to the Batphone.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Var debate 2019/20
- Thread starter Chi-town blues
- Start date
That excuse is stuck to the Batphone.
Colin Bell (genuine name)
Well-Known Member
I've sent this to info@sportsjournslists.co.uk. Don't know if I'll get a response but I'd like to think one of them would be willing to take it up
I apologise in advance but I would like to seek assistance from the sports journalists in highlighting the incorrect implementation of the revised laws of rule 12 regarding handball in relation to goal scoring.
There appears to be a general acceptance in both the printed and television media since the introduction of VAR that the decisions made by VAR officials is correct in relation to the law regarding handball leading to a goal, when in fact the decisions that have been made so far are a mis-interpretation by those implementing the decisions.
The laws were introduced as a direct consequence of 3 incidents last season by Willy Boly, Sergio Aguero and Nathan Redmond whereby all three players scored goals directly from hand or arm ball.
The laws were written thus, please read them and please note that the law relates to the player committing the offence and not the team
HANDLING THE BALL
It is an offence if a player:
It is usually an offence if a player:
Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction.
There has been two goals ruled out this season as an infringement of the above rules and yet there has been NO infringement.
The wolves goal should have been allowed as the ball struck Boly's upper arm from a header by Dendonker , part three section 2 (directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close)
The Man City goal was another phase of play, Gabriel Jesus had to collect the ball by quickly reacting to the deflection, moving the ball into an area to shoot from, and shooting past 4 defenders, a team mate and an opposition goalkeeper.
Why are these decisions to rule out perfectly good goals being accepted as lawful fact by the press. Do you not read the rules, is that not your job, to educate yourself and question?
Why is nobody in the press challenging the interpretation of these rules by VAR and the referees?.Why is nobody in the media challenging these decisions in relation to the rules? Why are referees not being challenged regarding their interpretation of the rules? Why is their opinion and it is an opinion being accepted unquestionably?
The rules specifically are related to the player and not the team. Why are the decisions going factually unchallenged by the press?
Another point is everybody believes that the introduction of VAR was to make the game fair, open and accountable for mistakes.
I don't know anybody or seen or heard any opinion other than, Michael Oliver or Neil Swarisbrick that the Rodri, Lamela penalty was anything other than a penalty, even Dermot Gallagher was struggling to deny it was a penalty. What is the point of VAR if the whole world can see what has happened and yet those that make the decisions decide otherwise?
Furthermore has anyone in the press highlighted why after keeping the ball from 3 Spurs players for the best part of 30 seconds in an exceptional piece of individual brilliance that Bernardo Silva having been elbowed to the neck by Danny Rose whilst attempting to head the ball was deemed to be the offender and have a free kick awarded against him. (you'll find this in first half injury time)
So why are the game officials being allowed to dictate goals allowed or disallowed according to their misinterpretation of the rules without challenge by the press?
Why is their misinterpretation being accepted as fact?
Why are you not challenging them?
Why does nobody in the press read the rules of the game and be in a position to ensure that everything is above board, which is the reason for VAR after all?
Don't expect a reply but hope to be shocked.
I apologise in advance but I would like to seek assistance from the sports journalists in highlighting the incorrect implementation of the revised laws of rule 12 regarding handball in relation to goal scoring.
There appears to be a general acceptance in both the printed and television media since the introduction of VAR that the decisions made by VAR officials is correct in relation to the law regarding handball leading to a goal, when in fact the decisions that have been made so far are a mis-interpretation by those implementing the decisions.
The laws were introduced as a direct consequence of 3 incidents last season by Willy Boly, Sergio Aguero and Nathan Redmond whereby all three players scored goals directly from hand or arm ball.
The laws were written thus, please read them and please note that the law relates to the player committing the offence and not the team
HANDLING THE BALL
It is an offence if a player:
- deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
- gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
- scores in the opponents’ goal
- creates a goal-scoring opportunity
- scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
It is usually an offence if a player:
- touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
- the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
- the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
- directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
- directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
- if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
- when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body
penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction.
There has been two goals ruled out this season as an infringement of the above rules and yet there has been NO infringement.
The wolves goal should have been allowed as the ball struck Boly's upper arm from a header by Dendonker , part three section 2 (directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close)
The Man City goal was another phase of play, Gabriel Jesus had to collect the ball by quickly reacting to the deflection, moving the ball into an area to shoot from, and shooting past 4 defenders, a team mate and an opposition goalkeeper.
Why are these decisions to rule out perfectly good goals being accepted as lawful fact by the press. Do you not read the rules, is that not your job, to educate yourself and question?
Why is nobody in the press challenging the interpretation of these rules by VAR and the referees?.Why is nobody in the media challenging these decisions in relation to the rules? Why are referees not being challenged regarding their interpretation of the rules? Why is their opinion and it is an opinion being accepted unquestionably?
The rules specifically are related to the player and not the team. Why are the decisions going factually unchallenged by the press?
Another point is everybody believes that the introduction of VAR was to make the game fair, open and accountable for mistakes.
I don't know anybody or seen or heard any opinion other than, Michael Oliver or Neil Swarisbrick that the Rodri, Lamela penalty was anything other than a penalty, even Dermot Gallagher was struggling to deny it was a penalty. What is the point of VAR if the whole world can see what has happened and yet those that make the decisions decide otherwise?
Furthermore has anyone in the press highlighted why after keeping the ball from 3 Spurs players for the best part of 30 seconds in an exceptional piece of individual brilliance that Bernardo Silva having been elbowed to the neck by Danny Rose whilst attempting to head the ball was deemed to be the offender and have a free kick awarded against him. (you'll find this in first half injury time)
So why are the game officials being allowed to dictate goals allowed or disallowed according to their misinterpretation of the rules without challenge by the press?
Why is their misinterpretation being accepted as fact?
Why are you not challenging them?
Why does nobody in the press read the rules of the game and be in a position to ensure that everything is above board, which is the reason for VAR after all?
Don't expect a reply but hope to be shocked.
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.
I watched the rags game last night. While I obviously wanted Wolves goal to be allowed,the so called offside looked more offside, or at least equal to the Sterling offside at West Ham.
In my opinion it was a great goal, the same as ours at West Ham and neither should be under scrutiny for millimetres.
If they scrutinize every goal long enough I am sure an excuse could be found to disallow 99% of them if they wanted. That's another thing that worries me.
This last point may now being churlish but why did it take so long to reach the decision to disallow Saturday's goal? The var ref had seen something, he knew what he was looking for, it would be seconds to confirm and relay the information. It took so long we all thought the check, if there was one, had been completed and was fine. The cynic in me would say someone was deriving great pleasure in watching us celebrate while smugly knowing they were about to wipe that joy out. That of course may be me being churlish as I said.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
I think they do enjoy f*cking us over, but I think the VAR deliberation for that goal was them searching for a reason not to give the goal, or which interpretation of the rules could be used to disallow the goal.I watched the rags game last night. While I obviously wanted Wolves goal to be allowed,the so called offside looked more offside, or at least equal to the Sterling offside at West Ham.
In my opinion it was a great goal, the same as ours at West Ham and neither should be under scrutiny for millimetres.
If they scrutinize every goal long enough I am sure an excuse could be found to disallow 99% of them if they wanted. That's another thing that worries me.
This last point may now being churlish but why did it take so long to reach the decision to disallow Saturday's goal? The var ref had seen something, he knew what he was looking for, it would be seconds to confirm and relay the information. It took so long we all thought the check, if there was one, had been completed and was fine. The cynic in me would say someone was deriving great pleasure in watching us celebrate while smugly knowing they were about to wipe that joy out. That of course may be me being churlish as I said.
I think they do enjoy f*cking us over, but I think the VAR deliberation for that goal was them searching for a reason not to give the goal, or which interpretation of the rules could be used to disallow the goal.
In the stadium we didn't even know it was going to a review, but apparently all goals are.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
Might as well not celebrate anything until VAR has had its say. The game is gone.In the stadium we didn't even know it was going to a review, but apparently all goals are.
Might as well not celebrate anything until VAR has had its say. The game is gone.
That's it in a nutshell. The whole point of the game is to score goals, more than your opponent. While we can appreciate great play leading up to it without a goal at the end it isn't the same. Everything is about that pent up tension and utter joy being released the moment the ball hits the net. If we have to wait two minutes to celebrate it then the magic is lost. We may as well follow the game at home an teletext.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 16,743
I’ve said the City players should score, all run over to the VAR screen in the stadium, and just stand there waiting for a decision.Might as well not celebrate anything until VAR has had its say. The game is gone.
Even if it is a goal, they should just walk back to their position on the field after the decision!
A silent protest that SHOULD wake people up to the ruination of what is supposed to be the supreme joy of the game!
BosnianBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 4,003
- Team supported
- City
I watched the rags game last night. While I obviously wanted Wolves goal to be allowed,the so called offside looked more offside, or at least equal to the Sterling offside at West Ham.
In my opinion it was a great goal, the same as ours at West Ham and neither should be under scrutiny for millimetres.
If they scrutinize every goal long enough I am sure an excuse could be found to disallow 99% of them if they wanted. That's another thing that worries me.
This last point may now being churlish but why did it take so long to reach the decision to disallow Saturday's goal? The var ref had seen something, he knew what he was looking for, it would be seconds to confirm and relay the information. It took so long we all thought the check, if there was one, had been completed and was fine. The cynic in me would say someone was deriving great pleasure in watching us celebrate while smugly knowing they were about to wipe that joy out. That of course may be me being churlish as I said.
wolves goal was backpass, that can't be an offside
wolves goal was backpass, that can't be an offside
So why was it reviewed then?