Ref Watch

When the deflection rule was introduced, didn't it say that it doesn't apply if the deflection doesn't make a difference? If that's changed then obviously the following is unimportant.

Looking at the replays, it appears to me that it could well have hit Laporte's arm even without the deflection, as he was spinning round, and ended up with his arm high and pretty much in line with the trajectory of the ball.

You could argue that's tricky to be sure of, but can the VAR definitely say it wouldn't have? If the ref has given it, and that's the rule, then I can't see them saying it's clear enough to overturn.

Difficult to tell as I've not seen a wide angle shot to see, but there was a Real player at the back who it may have been heading towards, at which point the strike on the arm has deflected it away. I think the law as @Vic quotes makes it ref's call.

I think @richardtheref was specifically referring to UEFA advice to referees, and not to the law as written. It's fairly common that there is suggestion as to how to ref things for competitions.
 
Difficult to tell as I've not seen a wide angle shot to see, but there was a Real player at the back who it may have been heading towards, at which point the strike on the arm has deflected it away. I think the law as @Vic quotes makes it ref's call.

I think @richardtheref was specifically referring to UEFA advice to referees, and not to the law as written. It's fairly common that there is suggestion as to how to ref things for competitions.
I think the deflection not making a difference bit refers to Laporte's head, not his arm. So, if it would have hit his arm even if it hadn't bounced off his head, not whether it makes a difference after it hits his hand.

Although it looks like there's potentially updated guidance someone posted after richard.

Ultimately, while unlucky, his arm was flapping about way too high, and there were so many players around that it's probably fair to be given.

As an aside, it's a random event that could have gone anywhere and may have led to Madrid having a chance to score. I'd prefer it to be much harder to get penalties, and for the offside rule to be a lot more relaxed. Penalties mostly seem to be given in situations where it's maybe a 10% or less chance of a goal, whereas those "inches" offside goals being ruled out are unduly harsh punishment.
 
Stuart Attwell's family have jumped to his defence after allegations he favoured Liverpool by not giving Everton a stonewall penalty in Sunday's Merseyside Derby, sons Keegan 19 and Molby 16 who were walking the Family Dog "Collymore" in the grounds of their Nuneaton residence "Dalglish House" said .... "dad is not a cheat".
 
He looked pretty chuffed when we scored if you watch. As though his decision was correct. Agree about him getting in the way all the time.
There was one occasion when Mahrez was looking to pass to Foden (I think) and he just kept closing the angle as both players were looking to make space.

It was either poor spacial awareness or he was purposely trying to make it difficult. I think probably the former in this instance, but there have been referees in the past who have done this for no other reason but to screw us over.
 
There was one occasion when Mahrez was looking to pass to Foden (I think) and he just kept closing the angle as both players were looking to make space.

It was either poor spacial awareness or he was purposely trying to make it difficult. I think probably the former in this instance, but there have been referees in the past who have done this for no other reason but to screw us over.
Pretty sure refs don’t purposely get in the way but it seems refs are having to stop games more and more often these days for the ball being trapped by them and then doing keepy ups.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.