Var debate 2019/20

[GeorgeR]

Add to the fact not only did he encroach but he cleared the rebound before Aguero could get to it

Vertonghen did the same in the first leg last season but VAR didn't intervene. I think Lloris was off his line as well.
VAR should give consistency but that's not happening just yet.

 

[kaz7]

Every goal in every game this season has had a VAR review.

Not the basic VAR review as i know that,it's the VAR review that is looking for mm's to disallow the goal,they seem to be looking mighty hard at our goals with a view to disallowing it and not ruling on a stonewall pen

 

[jollylescott]

This is a good one.

Last season in the Bundesliga, a referee denied a penalty claim just before half time. He then blew for half time and both teams went into their change rooms. VAR then intervened and the referee had to call both teams back out on the field. 6 minutes and 15 seconds after half time was blown, the penalty and taken and scored.

Imagine that happening to City.

 

[coolcity]

For me the greater issue isn't whether they're getting it right or wrong, it's what it is doing to the game. The last minute "goal", as well as the penalty decision, would have been one of those things and more or less accepted by either side pre-VAR, as we all kind of accept that the ref can't always get it right. That's how it's always been.

But now we're looking at somebody sat in a bunker changing the ref's decisions effectively while we have no idea what he has seen (e.g. handball), or not seen (penalty) or why he is making the decision. You might as well let the pundits analyse the entire game after the event then make a case for it to be replayed if a wrong or missed decision costs you the match and maybe more. I don't see a lot of difference, especially if the match ref is making or changing his decision based on nothing more than what somebody sees on a small TV screen.

I don't understand the mentality of that. I would rather lose and feel hard done by, by a ref that missed a penalty rather than somebody sat in an office somewhere watching something on TV that nobody else saw or had a problem with. Thinking back the the FIFA VAR room at the world cup the monitors didn't appear to be that big, and the big screen on the wall wasn't a particularly high resolution. It looked like a projected image rather than, say a large 4K TV.

I also thought the rules were supposed to be the same for everybody at every level, apparently that's now not the case.

 

[deano ou812]

Yes that's the infuriating thing, if you're going to use it for the handball why wasn't it used for the penalty? I'm not even convinced it hit Laporte's arm anyway, from the TV replay which I must have seen 20 times now it could have been the defender's arm. It certainly doesn't look 100% clear cut.

But the real issue is it's ruining the game. You don't know whether to celebrate a goal or not and it's solving nothing if they don't use it for every decision. It's a complete mockery if you can have a goal chalked off but not be given a penalty, so whichever way you look at it we were robbed.

Seen that myself it’s not clear cut,which means that the goal should have stood as the VAR officials can’t be 100% sure who’s arm it has grazed,they have guessed and ruled it out ..

 

[BlueAnorak]

Is that the new rule or the old one? I'm no expert but on Sky they're saying if it's handball, deliberate or accidental, and it leads to, or ends in, a goal then the goal should not stand.

Where do you draw the line? If it hits Laporte's arm, ref (and nobody else) spots it, then the ball is touched by half a dozen players in a goalmouth scramble before ending up in the back of the net does the same rule apply?

If an attackers arm touches the ball then the goal is rulled out. If it touches a defenders arm then it needs to be a touch outside of the natural silhouette of the defender to be considered a penalty. If any attacker touches a ball with their arm it's a free kick.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Didn't Mike Riley state last month that VAR wasn't going to rereferee games and that they wouldn't be taking a hard line on hand ball decisions in games.

Seriously think City should ask him what he meant by that remark based on yesterday's VAR decision.

 

[meltonblue]

Not the basic VAR review as i know that,it's the VAR review that is looking for mm's to disallow the goal,they seem to be looking mighty hard at our goals with a view to disallowing it and not ruling on a stonewall pen

There’s been nothing contentious in others goals so far though.

 

[Cheer Up Peter Reid]

Rather than look at someone else's interpretation of the handball law - look at what it says:

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

So VAR had to interpret the accidental handball by Laporte and determine if he gains possession/control and then creates a goal-scoring opportunity.

In my opinion it is meant to apply to a player who deliberately gets control of the ball accidentally and goes on to provide an assist not an inadvertent deflection..

This interpretation of the laws.

Completely agree, and it's clear to me that even if the ball did brush Laporte's arm at no point did he have control of the ball so the goal should have stood.

 

[Stoned Rose]

This is a good one.

Last season in the Bundesliga, a referee denied a penalty claim just before half time. He then blew for half time and both teams went into their change rooms. VAR then intervened and the referee had to call both teams back out on the field. 6 minutes and 15 seconds after half time was blown, the penalty and taken and scored.

Imagine that happening to City.

Give it time.