Var debate 2019/20

Paladin said:
It shouldn't have been handball under any interpretation, because the criteria for it to be handball were not met. Different phases of play are irrelevant and just serve to confuse the situation. The one simple fact of the matter is that Laporte did not gain possession or control of the ball, therefore it wasn't handball. I don't understand why this needs elaboration or further explanation.
Click to expand...
But the ball hit Laporte's hand & deviated into the path of Jesus??????? This is a fact.

How the rule was interpreted afterwards, is this issue everyone is arguing about, & seeking clarification for.
 
asahartford1 said:
Listen to the Wolves defender,

"I thought I would get the ball, but it bounced over my leg and I caught him yes it was a penalty "

Difficult to argue against that.
Click to expand...
I think he's just embarrassed with his challenge. Leaden-footed and a sitting-duck for Pogba.
 
flook said:
sorry bud you can't criticise someone elses' grasp of English then write that :)
Click to expand...

That was my point. As if !!!

Of course I would say that now wouldn’t I - just like PGML and of course 2 commas would have helped.

I’m just commenting on a fans chat forum unlike IFAB who are writing the Laws of the Game for a multi billion dollar/pound/euro industry. One might expect better

Cheers
 
Last edited:
portisheadblue said:
That was my point. As if !!!

Of course I would say that now wouldn’t I - just like PGML and of course 2 comas would have helped.

I’m just commenting on a fans chat forum unlike IFAB who are writing the Laws of the Game for a multi billion dollar/pound/euro industry. One might expect better

Cheers
Click to expand...
2 comas? You planning a very long sleep?
 
FootballSense said:
Given the crucial importance of the new Law 12, why have the media and others not scrutinised the way it has been applied ?

The argument, since Saturday, is that the decision to rule out the winning City `goal` was correct by the letter of the new law, setting aside views about the actual law itself. However a growing number do not agree with this initial consensus.

The new Rule 12 states:

"It is an offence if a player: gains possession / control of the ball after it has touched their hand / arm and then scores in the opponents’ goal or creates a goal-scoring opportunity".

The question is -after the ball had touched Laporte`s arm, did he gain possession / control of the ball and then create a goal scoring opportunity?

The answer rests on the meaning of the words possession / control and create. After it touched Laporte`s arm and instantaneously moved onwards, at no stage was he in possession of, nor did he control, the ball. Therefore he could not then create.

It was Jesus (not Laporte) who gained possession / control. It was not then a simple tap in but he still had a lot of creating to do before the goal was scored.

The `goal` should have stood based on the letter of the new Law 12.
Click to expand...

Spot on. The trouble is if the law is now changed, we are the only team to have suffered. Maybe PIGMOL should invite all of the pundits/experts to Stockley again and go through the incidentsagain-televised of course!!!
 
LWashington said:
Yes I'm surprised nobody has asked the refs to make a public statement answering the question, "What could Jesus have done when he received the ball to allow City to score a valid goal ? ". If the answer is "Nothing, the team gained possession from a handball ". Then what would be the point of playing on?
Click to expand...
There isn’t, unless it enters a new “phase of play” I guess! So basically keep the ball for another minute and then hopefully create another chance! Although I’m sure they’d just go back and chalk it off anyway
 
portisheadblue said:
That was my point. As if !!!

Of course I would say that now wouldn’t I - just like PGML and of course 2 comas would have helped.

I’m just commenting on a fans chat forum unlike IFAB who are writing the Laws of the Game for a multi billion dollar/pound/euro industry. One might expect better

Cheers
Click to expand...

One for Gary Nutter and t'other for Gozzy Carragher!
 
LWashington said:
Yes I'm surprised nobody has asked the refs to make a public statement answering the question, "What could Jesus have done when he received the ball to allow City to score a valid goal ? ". If the answer is "Nothing, the team gained possession from a handball ". Then what would be the point of playing on?
Click to expand...

This is a good point.
 
Florida Blue said:
The word OR should not be in there, my bad, it isn't in the IFAB guidelines which is this...


ECbzjtyXsAU9Bs9
Click to expand...
it was on the page/link that was attached to the original post
 
Dribble said:
Sorry, but I've seen the version with 'OR' posted on here several times over the last few days.

This is why there needs to be official clarification & synergy between what IFAB states & the FA states.

Like I said there was one irrefutable fact in all of this.... The ball hit Laporte & deviated into his path. We can continue splitting hairs over and/or, but doing so detracts from the major points of phases, clarification & synergy of the rules from all the governing bodies.
Click to expand...


The word OR is NOT in there anywhere, see for yourself below from the IFAB website...... so the point stands, there are 2 different guidelines for the 2 completely different situations.



ECbzjtyXsAU9Bs9
 
The Premier League replied back to me, they didn't answer the question of course........

Hi Paul


Our officials follow the Laws of the Game when refereeing our matches.




Kind regards


Tommy




Sent: 20 August 2019 17:44
To: General Info <info@premierleague.com>
Subject: On The Pitch FAQ




You link the IFAB guidelines for handball from your site. It says on there "it's an offence if a player gains/possession/control first, then creates a goal scoring chance". It does not say the word accidental.


Are the Premier league laws and new guidelines different to the IFAB ones you link to for handball?

Thanks


Paul
 
asahartford1 said:
Listen to the Wolves defender,

"I thought I would get the ball, but it bounced over my leg and I caught him yes it was a penalty "

Difficult to argue against that.
Click to expand...
I’m not disputing he caught him but Pogba clearly throws himself at the player, Coady a a dipper, I wouldn’t believe anything those fuckers say.
 
LWashington said:
Yes I'm surprised nobody has asked the refs to make a public statement answering the question, "What could Jesus have done when he received the ball to allow City to score a valid goal ? ". If the answer is "Nothing, the team gained possession from a handball ". Then what would be the point of playing on?
Click to expand...

There was no reason to NOT play on,
as not a single soul in the whole ground has seen the minimal touch of Laportes arm (which didn't even have an influence on the game).
Oliver didn't see it, the lino didn't, no player, no fan, no coach.
Only VAR.

Was it a breach of the new idiotic handball rule? Yeah. That's all.

Could Laporte have done anything better? No. He was perfectly in line with human anatomy and physiology.
The handball rule doesn't care about human movement patterns, it's made by idiots who have never played football.
 
Florida Blue said:
The Premier League replied back to me, they didn't answer the question of course........

Hi Paul

Our officials follow the Laws of the Game when refereeing our matches.

Kind regards

Tommy


Sent: 20 August 2019 17:44
To: General Info <info@premierleague.com>
Subject: On The Pitch FAQ

You link the IFAB guidelines for handball from your site. It says on there "it's an offence if a player gains/possession/control first, then creates a goal scoring chance". It does not say the word accidental.

Are the Premier league laws and new guidelines different to the IFAB ones you link to for handball?

Thanks

Paul
Click to expand...

Paul, aka Florida Blue - Can I make a suggestion? Perhaps you would like to respond to Tommy at the Premier League and ask him to let you have a copy of or link to the Laws of the Game that he has mentioned and which their officials follow when refereeing our matches. We should all know. The Rules must be publicly available. It is the letter of the Law 12 which must be applied.

You are acting perfectly reasonably and correctly in pursuing this.
 
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