VAR Discussion Thread | 2024/25

TheBeautifulGame said:
Right, that's my point. The only way that they could have given a FK was to send the keeper off in that scenario, which is why they didn't give the FK. They did not conclude that it was deserving of a red card, clearly. Whether you agree with it or not.
Click to expand...
So you clearly think the keeper did not deny a goalscoring opportunity? Yes or no?
 
halfcenturyup said:
Commentators can hear the VAR discussions, is that right?

So they can attempt to look smart by relaying the discussions as their own opinion. Shearer, for example, could have heard Gillett discussing direction of travel and relayed that.

Doesn't mean communication happens the other way, although it makes it appear that way?
Click to expand...

The commentators clearly have some sort of insight into what the VAR is saying. Whether it’s an open mic. so they can listen to everything that’s been said in there, or some kind of limited info, sent when a decision is pending, I’m not sure.

I’m inclined to think they can’t hear everything, or we wouldn’t get incidents like in the City, Tottenham game. When both commentators were totally oblivious to the fact that the goal had been disallowed on field. In fact they seemed totally confused as to everything that was going on until well after Tottenham had taken the free kick for handball.
 
richardtheref said:
So you clearly think the keeper did not deny a goalscoring opportunity? Yes or no?
Click to expand...
He did, but due to the fact that he was at the edge of the box, his action was not (imho) worthy of a red card. The GK is allowed to hand the ball within the box. It is reasonable for a keeper to attempt to punch the ball out within the box which he appeared to be attempting to do. If he misjudged his position within the boundary of the box in the attempt at punching it out, that is certainly worthy of a foul but not of a card. My view is that he should not have been carded, but handball should have been called and a free kick given. Unfortunately VAR prevents such a scenario from being correctable.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
He did, but due to the fact that he was at the edge of the box, his action was not (imho) worthy of a red card. The GK is allowed to hand the ball within the box. It is reasonable for a keeper to attempt to punch the ball out within the box which he appeared to be attempting to do. If he misjudged his position within the boundary of the box in the attempt at punching it out, that is certainly worthy of a foul but not of a card. My view is that he should not have been carded, but handball should have been called and a free kick given. Unfortunately VAR prevents such a scenario from being correctable.
Click to expand...
What an utter load of bollocks
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
He did, but due to the fact that he was at the edge of the box, his action was not (imho) worthy of a red card. The GK is allowed to hand the ball within the box. It is reasonable for a keeper to attempt to punch the ball out within the box which he appeared to be attempting to do. If he misjudged his position within the boundary of the box in the attempt at punching it out, that is certainly worthy of a foul but not of a card. My view is that he should not have been carded, but handball should have been called and a free kick given. Unfortunately VAR prevents such a scenario from being correctable.
Click to expand...
I thought I would use my 1000th post wisely and call you a know nowt idiot . He was clearly outside the area and it is a 100% sending off if it was against any other club than City .
 
CPPSC said:
I thought I would use my 1000th post wisely and call you a know nowt idiot . He was clearly outside the area and it is a 100% sending off if it was against any other club than City .
Click to expand...
Congrats on your 1000th post but that's not very wise my friend. His entire body was within the area sans the arm that was swatting at the ball. He was outside the box and was moving back towards the box and trying to time it perfectly to be back inside the box when he handed it. He misjudged it only slightly. His toe was on the line, the rest of his foot, the other leg and the rest of his body was inside the penalty box. He was clearly attempting to get himself back inside the box so he could hand the ball legally.
 

Attachments

  • handball.jpg
    handball.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 14
TheBeautifulGame said:
My friend, VAR is limited by their own constraints. There's a reason why that couldn't be corrected. Because it wasn't in the box. Simple as that. The only time a handball outside the box can be seen and corrected is if actually leads to a goal or a penalty. That didn't happen here, so they couldn't correct that error. I know, it's stupid. VAR is stupid. I get that you and many others are saying that it prevented a goal scoring opportunity so it should have been corrected, but unfortunately that is not what VAR allows. Whether or not it prevented a goal scoring opportunity is subjective and impossible for them to factually know for sure. Since the handball occurred outside the box, it was not considered in their minds a goal scoring opportunity. I know, it's stupid, but they have created these stupid guidelines which limits what they can do in situations like this.

Should they have simply given the free kick following a VAR review? Of course, that would be factual, simply and logical. But their own criteria and self-confusion about what they're allowed to do prevented them from doing that. Don't you get it? VAR is bent, it can't get out of its own way.

Had they given a red card, then it would have been a free kick outside the box. That's the only way that could have resulted in a free kick, at least according to their own criteria!

In my view, the reason why so many people are claiming it should have been a red card, is due primarily to that being the only way for them to have given a free kick following a VAR review, which is bent beyond belief! But that's VAR for you. On the other hand, I get that you also genuinely believe that it was deserving of a red card, because it stopped a goal. but that is hugely open to interpretation and I disagree with that. IMHO it should have been a free kick, not a red card or a yellow in my view due to it being on the edge of the box. But they couldn't give it without giving a red card, which is bent.
Click to expand...
If you think it was not even a yellow, you have no idea. If an outfield player knocked the ball away in the sam manner it should have been a red. An outfield player would easily have got a yellow. It makes no difference that it was a goalkeeper. The offence is the same for both.
 
creditunionhero said:
If you think it was not even a yellow, you have no idea. If an outfield player knocked the ball away in the sam manner it should have been a red. An outfield player would easily have got a yellow. It makes no difference that it was a goalkeeper. The offence is the same for both.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. Of course if an outfield player did that it should be a clear red. But it wasn't an outfield player. The keeper can legally hand the ball inside the edge of the box. He was attempting to get back into the box and hand the ball legally. He slightly misjudged it.
 
Nellies left peg said:
What an utter load of bollocks
Click to expand...
He's fucking mental!

"I tried to make a fair tackle and I attempted to play the ball, but I misjudged my timing and went straight through the back of the opposition player raking my studs across both of his calves. I'm allowed to attempt to play the ball and it is reasonable for a player to attempt to make a tackle which is what I appeared to be attempting to do, so I don't think it's worthy of a red card. My view is that I should not have been red carded, but a foul should have been called and a free kick given."

Fucking bonkers
 
It also needs to be said that the penalty that was given to City on the slide tackle shouldn't have been a penalty at all. Another VAR blunder, and a massive one at that. I know ya'll don't want to hear it but we need to be objective here.

I could understand the penalty being given on the pitch in real-time, but the VAR replays made it very clear that the slide tackle was a good tackle. He clearly got his foot to the ball before bringing his man down. Just nicked the ball, but he definitely got to it first, clear as day seen from the replays.

And this highlights just how fraudulent VAR is. Apparently the VAR team watched those replays that we can all see clear as day he got to the ball first, avoided contact prior to getting to the ball, but yet the blind VAR team concluded that there was no touch on the ball. And the commentators had the gall to conclude that he "clearly" wasn't playing the ball, whilst it is clearly visible from the replays that he was not only playing the ball but got to the ball first before bringing him down.

I'm sorry but for that to go to review only for VAR to confirm a penalty is bollocks. It could be seen clear as day from the replay that he played the ball, got to the ball first, before any contact. It was a brilliant slide tackle, and never should have been a penalty. Fortunately for Palace the PK was saved.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Irrelevant. Of course if an outfield player did that it should be a clear red. But it wasn't an outfield player. The keeper can legally hand the ball inside the edge of the box. He was attempting to get back into the box and hand the ball legally. He slightly misjudged it.
Click to expand...
In other news, Russia havent invaded Ukraine. They've just slightly misjudged the border.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
Congrats on your 1000th post but that's not very wise my friend. His entire body was within the area sans the arm that was swatting at the ball. He was outside the box and was moving back towards the box and trying to time it perfectly to be back inside the box when he handed it. He misjudged it only slightly. His toe was on the line, the rest of his foot, the other leg and the rest of his body was inside the penalty box. He was clearly attempting to get himself back inside the box so he could hand the ball legally.
Click to expand...
He didn’t time it perfectly as he clearly to any one who isn’t blind hit it with his hand outside the box. Are you arguing for any close decision to decided on what the player was thinking? It doesn’t matter where his foot , knob or leg is it matters where his hand is as that is what determines HANDball
 
RiversideBlue said:
In other news, Russia havent invaded Ukraine. They've just slightly misjudged the border.
Click to expand...
We're not talking about whether or not it was a foul lol. We're talking about whether or not it was deserving of a red card! His intent was to get back into the box and hand the ball legally. To suggest otherwise is being disingenuous. I'm a City fan but we got to be objective when discussing decisions.
 
CPPSC said:
He didn’t time it perfectly as he clearly to any one who isn’t blind hit it with his hand outside the box. Are you arguing for any close decision to decided on what the player was thinking? It doesn’t matter where his foot , knob or foot is it matters where his hand is as that is what determines HANDball
Click to expand...
lol I'm not arguing that it wasn't a handball. It clearly was. I'm pointing out that his action was not deserving of a red card!!!!! He was clearly trying to get back into legal position to hand the ball. He miscalculated it as can be expected given the fact that his eyes were on the ball and the attacker not the boundary of the box.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
lol I'm not arguing that it wasn't a handball. It clearly was. I'm pointing out that his action was not deserving of a red card!!!!! He was clearly trying to get back into legal position to hand the ball. He miscalculated it as can be expected given the fact that his eyes were on the ball and the attacker not the boundary of the box.
Click to expand...
No he was clearly stopping a goal scoring opportunity red card all day long Anyway you are obviously a wum and on ignore you go.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
We're not talking about whether or not it was a foul lol. We're talking about whether or not it was deserving of a red card! His intent was to get back into the box and hand the ball legally. To suggest otherwise is being disingenuous. I'm a City fan but we got to be objective when discussing decisions.
Click to expand...
You sort of wonder why they bother painting these lines on the pitch.
 
CPPSC said:
No he was clearly stopping a goal scoring opportunity red card all day long Anyway you are obviously a wum and on ignore you go.
Click to expand...
As if trying to stop a goal scoring opportunity is inherently a foul. The goal of defending is to stop goal scoring opportunities you muppet lol.
 
TheBeautifulGame said:
We're not talking about whether or not it was a foul lol. We're talking about whether or not it was deserving of a red card! His intent was to get back into the box and hand the ball legally. To suggest otherwise is being disingenuous. I'm a City fan but we got to be objective when discussing decisions.
Click to expand...
Which City are you a fan of?
 
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