Var debate 2019/20

[gingerprince]

On the Salah penalty yesterday, I was surprised that in the first instance Atkinson didn't give Luiz a red card?

I thought the law was if a penalty is awarded for a foul, if its not a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball its a straight red and a penalty, not a yellow?

Pulling the shirt back is not a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball? And if Atkinson was incorrect and it's a red card offence, why didnt VAR overturn as would have been clear and obvious error?

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

No idea if they went to VAR but is there a difference between a grab and pull of the arm (Laporte) and a grab and tug of the shirt (salah). It is these inconsistencies that infuriate

Indeed there is! It starts with the colour of the shirt. No amount of technology, super human characteristics, nor bionic eyesight will turn football arbitration into a level field. Rodri was fouled three times by Lamela, each one should have resulted in a pen but Swarbrick classes it as a dive. It'll be the same Swarbrick that classifies every fuckin' Dipper tumble, stumble and dive as a pen!

No VAR controversy yesterday, although I am surprised the Palace winner wasn't chalked off, but there will be some today. I forecast it will be somewhere on the south coast, kick off somewhere around two o'clock.

 

[caseball]

Basically, you can't score a goal yourself after a non-deliberate handball, full stop. Either directly or after juggling the ball for half a minute.
You can't make a goal for another player if you control the ball or get to it first (gain possession) after your own non-deliberate handball.

It doesn't say anything about the ball ricocheting off you to another player. So it's not handball.

If the goalie blasts a clearance at you and you've got your arms by your side, you don't move them and the ball hits your arm/hand, it's not handball. If it bounces off you and hits the bar, it's not handball. If it bounces off you and goes in, it's handball. According to the letter of the law.

I don't know why they just didn't say that after a non-deliberate handball, the same player commits an offence by being the next player to touch the ball. So attackers and defenders know that if it accidentally hits their hand, it's no problem as long as another player touches it next.

 

[i kne albert davy]

On the Salah penalty yesterday, I was surprised that in the first instance Atkinson didn't give Luiz a red card?

I thought the law was if a penalty is awarded for a foul, if its not a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball its a straight red and a penalty, not a yellow?

Pulling the shirt back is not a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball? And if Atkinson was incorrect and it's a red card offence, why didnt VAR overturn as would have been clear and obvious error?

Double jeopardy law from last season if a penalty awarded yellow card .

 

[meltonblue]

Double jeopardy law from last season if a penalty awarded yellow card .

That only applies when there has been a legitimate attempt to play the ball though.

 

[Blueknows]

On the Salah penalty yesterday, I was surprised that in the first instance Atkinson didn't give Luiz a red card?

I thought the law was if a penalty is awarded for a foul, if its not a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball its a straight red and a penalty, not a yellow?

Pulling the shirt back is not a genuine attempt to challenge for the ball? And if Atkinson was incorrect and it's a red card offence, why didnt VAR overturn as would have been clear and obvious error?

No a new rule was brought in , double jeopardy ? a penalty will be awarded but only a booking

 

[Blueknows]

Basically, you can't score a goal yourself after a non-deliberate handball, full stop. Either directly or after juggling the ball for half a minute.
You can't make a goal for another player if you control the ball or get to it first (gain possession) after your own non-deliberate handball.

It doesn't say anything about the ball ricocheting off you to another player. So it's not handball.

If the goalie blasts a clearance at you and you've got your arms by your side, you don't move them and the ball hits your arm/hand, it's not handball. If it bounces off you and hits the bar, it's not handball. If it bounces off you and goes in, it's handball. According to the letter of the law.

I don't know why they just didn't say that after a non-deliberate handball, the same player commits an offence by being the next player to touch the ball. So attackers and defenders know that if it accidentally hits their hand, it's no problem as long as another player touches it next.

But yet we were told last season in the CL a penalty will be awarded regardless if the ball hits you on the arm

 

[Fabled mabel]

I came away from City and watched the highlights last week thinking the longer I watch football the less I understand. I read the rules, often with the Oxford English Dictionary to hand. I have not watched other teams much but have read what fellow Blues say, even those Blues whose main intention seems to to to try and prove their fellow Blues wrong. It reminds me of the Brexit debate whereby those that voted one way or the other now argue black is white to justify their original decision.

Anyway I've just watched Match of the Day and quite a few incidents and goals. All decisions were done quite quickly although I don't necessarily agree with all of them. If all goals are subject to VAR scrutiny they did that pretty quick. But why do they take so long in reviewing City's goals? It's as if they are searching all sorts of camera angle to see if they can find the slightest reason to disallow. Quite the opposite for the rugby tackle on Eric was dismissed out of hand and instantly by both match and VAR refs.

 

[Neville Kneville]

If you cannt even admit it came of Laportes arm when several players of our own have alluded to that in their comments then there is no point.

It created an opportunity accidentally (not deliverately)

https://www.mancity.com/citytv/citytv-landing
Look at the city website highlights...7:21 - 7:41 (and at about 7.40 you can clearly see it hit Laportes arm)..the corner is an outs winging corner by KDB with his right foot meaning that if noone touhes the ball it would of ended up going out of the penalty area somwhere probably to the left of where the ref is initially stood as the ball is crossed and the the right of the Number 28 spurs player....look at where the ball does end up (with GJ just near the edge of teh 6 yd aea when he takes his first touch yet Laporte is probably about a yd or two to the right and a yd in front of the penalty spot when it comes off his arm......

the ball actually changes direction completely

You are not being fair here, in your desire to win the argument. Main points in capitals, purely to stand out, no offence intended.


Your claim of 'Nobody touching the ball' is irrelevant & unfair.

Because it isn't going to happen.

Laporte has won the battle & he is getting the ball. Illegal interference from the defender, causes it to hit Laporte's arm, rather than him winning it, as he would otherwise have done. NO WAY IS HE MISSING THE BALL.

He is not shit, he is going to make contact with the ball. The defender turns it into handball.

Next, without even arguing the grammatical meaning of the rule: the ball clearly goes BEHIND Jesus, NOT TO HIM.

There is A SPURS PLAYER ABSOLUTELY LEVEL IN DISTANCE FROM THE BALL with Jesus, as it is deflected. it goes between them IT DOESN'T GO TO JESUS. HE GOES TO THE BALL & WINS THE RACE.

Stop the video & look at it. Jesus is INSIDE THE SIX YARD BOX MOVING TOWARD GOAL, as the ball comes toward Laporte with the ball eventually going BEHIND where Jesus is currently heading.

'Creates a goalscoring opportunity' remember.

Jesus, BRILLIANTLY, swivels & reacts, as a Spurs player FACING THE BALL, stands still as Jesus begins to move AWAY FROM THE GOAL.

This brilliant reaction speed, allows him to reach the LOOSE BALL, because he reacts to the LOOSE BALL, before the Spurs player & it gives him a yard of advantage HE DIDN'T HAVE, when the ball was touched.


He then RUNS AWAY FROM THE GOAL, to reach a LOOSE BALL. Then, surrounded by Spurs players, he MOVES FURTHER AWAY from the goal, with the ball & then shoots, with THREE SPURS PLAYERS charging the ball down, & ANOTHER SPURS PLAYER in front of the goal.

Look at the points in capitals & see the adjudications V.A.R. has made, all going in favour of Spurs, in order to disallow that goal.

Surely you can see that the ball does not go to Jesus, it is him who goes to the ball ?

Surely you can see, tat there is a Spurs defender who is in a better position than Jesus, to reach that ball ?

Surely, even if you can't admit that, you can at least admit that there is doubt Jesus could have reached he ball, if both ran at the same time ?

Surely you can see hat Jesus is moving away from goal, in order to get to the ball, with several Spurs defenders coming out toward him ?


This is a quite brilliant goal, by a brilliant player & no credit has gone to him, because he has been cheated out of it, by incorrect application of the rules.

If he reacts as slowly as the Spurs defender, he doesn't score. If he doesn't then pick his spot through 4 Spurs defenders, he doesn't score.

It's a brilliant, brilliant goal MADE BY JESUS & stolen from him & it's not fucking fair, at all.

 

[blue b4 the moon]

You are not being fair here, in your desire to win the argument. Main points in capitals, purely to stand out, no offence intended.


Your claim of 'Nobody touching the ball' is irrelevant & unfair.

Because it isn't going to happen.

Laporte has won the battle & he is getting the ball. Illegal interference from the defender, causes it to hit Laporte's arm, rather than him winning it, as he would otherwise have done. NO WAY IS HE MISSING THE BALL.

He is not shit, he is going to make contact with the ball. The defender turns it into handball.

Next, without even arguing the grammatical meaning of the rule: the ball clearly goes BEHIND Jesus, NOT TO HIM.

There is A SPURS PLAYER ABSOLUTELY LEVEL IN DISTANCE FROM THE BALL with Jesus, as it is deflected. it goes between them IT DOESN'T GO TO JESUS. HE GOES TO THE BALL & WINS THE RACE.

Stop the video & look at it. Jesus is INSIDE THE SIX YARD BOX MOVING TOWARD GOAL, as the ball comes toward Laporte with the ball eventually going BEHIND where Jesus is currently heading.

'Creates a goalscoring opportunity' remember.

Jesus, BRILLIANTLY, swivels & reacts, as a Spurs player FACING THE BALL, stands still as Jesus begins to move AWAY FROM THE GOAL.

This brilliant reaction speed, allows him to reach the LOOSE BALL, because he reacts to the LOOSE BALL, before the Spurs player & it gives him a yard of advantage HE DIDN'T HAVE, when the ball was touched.


He then RUNS AWAY FROM THE GOAL, to reach a LOOSE BALL. Then, surrounded by Spurs players, he MOVES FURTHER AWAY from the goal, with the ball & then shoots, with THREE SPURS PLAYERS charging the ball down, & ANOTHER SPURS PLAYER in front of the goal.

Look at the points in capitals & see the adjudications V.A.R. has made, all going in favour of Spurs, in order to disallow that goal.

Surely you can see that the ball does not go to Jesus, it is him who goes to the ball ?

Surely you can see, tat there is a Spurs defender who is in a better position than Jesus, to reach that ball ?

Surely, even if you can't admit that, you can at least admit that there is doubt Jesus could have reached he ball, if both ran at the same time ?

Surely you can see hat Jesus is moving away from goal, in order to get to the ball, with several Spurs defenders coming out toward him ?


This is a quite brilliant goal, by a brilliant player & no credit has gone to him, because he has been cheated out of it, by incorrect application of the rules.

If he reacts as slowly as the Spurs defender, he doesn't score. If he doesn't then pick his spot through 4 Spurs defenders, he doesn't score.

It's a brilliant, brilliant goal MADE BY JESUS & stolen from him & it's not fucking fair, at all.

Great post.

 

[gingerprince]

Double jeopardy law from last season if a penalty awarded yellow card .

I'm aware of double jeopardy however, I was under impression that only removed an automatic red card & obviously later suspension, to replace with a yellow card and with resultant no suspension but with the caveat introduced that no genuine attempt for the ball would still result in a red card awarded

This is current 2019/20 FA laws and sanctions

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.

So why did Atkinson only apply a yellow.

Do VAR only review if ref gives a red or ref doesnt give a yellow, but if ref awards a yellow do they not review...although obviously under the laws it's a red card incident, so should be reviewed?

 

[ctid1894]

If the Salah shirt pulling is a penalty, then so is the pulling on Laporte’s arm before the so called handball.

 

[Marvin]

I came away from City and watched the highlights last week thinking the longer I watch football the less I understand. I read the rules, often with the Oxford English Dictionary to hand. I have not watched other teams much but have read what fellow Blues say, even those Blues whose main intention seems to to to try and prove their fellow Blues wrong. It reminds me of the Brexit debate whereby those that voted one way or the other now argue black is white to justify their original decision.

Anyway I've just watched Match of the Day and quite a few incidents and goals. All decisions were done quite quickly although I don't necessarily agree with all of them. If all goals are subject to VAR scrutiny they did that pretty quick. But why do they take so long in reviewing City's goals? It's as if they are searching all sorts of camera angle to see if they can find the slightest reason to disallow. Quite the opposite for the rugby tackle on Eric was dismissed out of hand and instantly by both match and VAR refs.

There was a 90 second delay at Anfield for a red card review. Brighton had a goal ruled out.

I do agree though City fans have had the very worst of VAR.

The game does still function well with VAR but that is not an argument in its favour.

I was originally in favour, now strongly against. There are somethings which technology could I think do quickly and precisely, but I don't like the 2nd human review over everything.

Presumably football makes the best of what they have this season and then in the Summer tinkers with it. The danager is that the referees start to defend it as their baby and refuse any justified criticism.

 

[M12Blue]

You are not being fair here, in your desire to win the argument. Main points in capitals, purely to stand out, no offence intended.


Your claim of 'Nobody touching the ball' is irrelevant & unfair.

Because it isn't going to happen.

Laporte has won the battle & he is getting the ball. Illegal interference from the defender, causes it to hit Laporte's arm, rather than him winning it, as he would otherwise have done. NO WAY IS HE MISSING THE BALL.

He is not shit, he is going to make contact with the ball. The defender turns it into handball.

Next, without even arguing the grammatical meaning of the rule: the ball clearly goes BEHIND Jesus, NOT TO HIM.

There is A SPURS PLAYER ABSOLUTELY LEVEL IN DISTANCE FROM THE BALL with Jesus, as it is deflected. it goes between them IT DOESN'T GO TO JESUS. HE GOES TO THE BALL & WINS THE RACE.

Stop the video & look at it. Jesus is INSIDE THE SIX YARD BOX MOVING TOWARD GOAL, as the ball comes toward Laporte with the ball eventually going BEHIND where Jesus is currently heading.

'Creates a goalscoring opportunity' remember.

Jesus, BRILLIANTLY, swivels & reacts, as a Spurs player FACING THE BALL, stands still as Jesus begins to move AWAY FROM THE GOAL.

This brilliant reaction speed, allows him to reach the LOOSE BALL, because he reacts to the LOOSE BALL, before the Spurs player & it gives him a yard of advantage HE DIDN'T HAVE, when the ball was touched.


He then RUNS AWAY FROM THE GOAL, to reach a LOOSE BALL. Then, surrounded by Spurs players, he MOVES FURTHER AWAY from the goal, with the ball & then shoots, with THREE SPURS PLAYERS charging the ball down, & ANOTHER SPURS PLAYER in front of the goal.

Look at the points in capitals & see the adjudications V.A.R. has made, all going in favour of Spurs, in order to disallow that goal.

Surely you can see that the ball does not go to Jesus, it is him who goes to the ball ?

Surely you can see, tat there is a Spurs defender who is in a better position than Jesus, to reach that ball ?

Surely, even if you can't admit that, you can at least admit that there is doubt Jesus could have reached he ball, if both ran at the same time ?

Surely you can see hat Jesus is moving away from goal, in order to get to the ball, with several Spurs defenders coming out toward him ?


This is a quite brilliant goal, by a brilliant player & no credit has gone to him, because he has been cheated out of it, by incorrect application of the rules.

If he reacts as slowly as the Spurs defender, he doesn't score. If he doesn't then pick his spot through 4 Spurs defenders, he doesn't score.

It's a brilliant, brilliant goal MADE BY JESUS & stolen from him & it's not fucking fair, at all.

Perfectly said.
The handball didn’t leave to a goal opportunity, the player created one

 

[Gorton_Tubster]

Same here, 2nd review by other refs is rubbish and there is no need. In those circumstances the ref should be going over to the screen and reviewing things himself.... I dont want some unseen, unkown person giving judgement on games... It's worse than ever for the subjectivity angle if someone is making that call and we dont even see them.

 

[M12Blue]

There was a 90 second delay at Anfield for a red card review. Brighton had a goal ruled out.

I do agree though City fans have had the very worst of VAR.

The game does still function well with VAR but that is not an argument in its favour.

I was originally in favour, now strongly against. There are somethings which technology could I think do quickly and precisely, but I don't like the 2nd human review over everything.

Presumably football makes the best of what they have this season and then in the Summer tinkers with it. The danager is that the referees start to defend it as their baby and refuse any justified criticism.

I think transparency is all most people want, especially now whilst it’s finding it’s way.

I would also bang some kind of camera on the ref’s head so we have a general idea of the refs field of view. Could even have it played live on the big screen.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

If the Salah shirt pulling is a penalty, then so is the pulling on Laporte’s arm before the so called handball.

Look at the difference between the Salah one and the Martial one. Martial was clearly fouled and a lot more than Salah was.

Compared to the Salah one, Laporte has a similar kind of pull but on his hand.

Compared to them all Rodri was rugby tackled!

But only Salah got a penalty out of the four incidents.

 

[Bandofblues]

The OR bit means he doesnt even have to be in control or possession. It means its an offence if the ball comes off his (or any players arm) and then creates a goal scoring opportinutiy regardless of possession....

Nope, sorry. If that part of the sentence wasn't meant to be linked to the first part about gaining possesion then it would be a separate line all on its own. It's just bad punctuation. The intent of the rule is clearly that attacker can not handle the ball and score directly or create a goal scoring opportunity from handling the ball.

It's still a goal though because Laporte didn't create a goal scoring opportunity, Jesus did that bit himself.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

I think transparency is all most people want, especially now whilst it’s finding it’s way.

I would also bang some kind of camera on the ref’s head so we have a general idea of the refs field of view. Could even have it played live on the big screen.

And the VAR should be mic’d up and he comes over the tannoy at every ground when he’s called upon so we can hear what he’s reviewing.

 

[Bandofblues]

Look at the difference between the Salah one and the Martial one. Martial was clearly fouled and a lot more than Salah was.

Compared to the Salah one, Laporte has a similar kind of pull but on his hand.

Compared to them all Rodri was rugby tackled!

But only Salah got a penalty out of the four incidents.

It was a blatant pull back on the shirt by the defender, he had a fistful of the shirt.
Rodri, Martial and Salah's were all nailed on penalties.

The problem is the same as it has always been that the onfield refs are still the ones making the decisions and frequently incorrectly.
If anything the early evidence seems to be that the probelem is getting worse, it seems the refs are waiting for VAR to tell them it's a penalty whilst the VAR officials are jacking themselves off in their dark little room.

If VAR isn't going to take objective reviews of penalty incidents and instruct refs to give them then what is the point of it being there at all. The PL need to sort their shit out ASAP.