If that was the case, every player would go in late and over the top, and every headed challenge would involve a flailing arm, because, well, it was just an inevitable coming together of my studs and his shin or my elbow and his eye socket. Too bad, so sad!However, if the on field ref says that it’s an inevitable coming together, then how can VAR intervene?
Hyperbole, but yes, if extrapolated to the extreme, then it could include that.If that was the case, every player would go in late and over the top, and every headed challenge would involve a flailing arm, because, well, it was just an inevitable coming together of my studs and his shin or my elbow and his eye socket. Too bad, so sad!
Then studs up, both feet off the ground, full stretch is always a red, sometimes even if there’s no contact.It doesn’t matter that he made contact, it’s whether that contact was deemed reckless or not. I thought it should have been, others don’t. Yes it is absolutely subjective.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the panel overwhelmingly says they got it wrong.
I don’t like the way he reffed the game as a whole and his general refereeing was the worst thing about it, thought the Foden one should have been a penalty, less fussed about the handball or the offside.
It’s simpler than that in reality.
VAR looks at each decision and determines whether the call that has been made is justifiable in any way within the laws of the game.
The human element of VAR means that two identical decisions could be viewed differently by the on field ref initially and then the VAR official trying to see whether thr original call on field is justifiable.
Now, I guess the Foden call was that he got his shot off and the contact was inevitable because the defender is desperately lunging to block the shot.
I think it was a penalty, because he took Foden out after he played the ball.
However, if the on field ref says that it’s an inevitable coming together, then how can VAR intervene?
The system is a mess. I think that all major marginal calls should be looked at by the on field ref.
I agree that incident was outrageous, too!Hyperbole, but yes, if extrapolated to the extreme, then it could include that.
Just like Pickford maimed Van Dijk.
It was, and immediately cleared! Boggles the mind how THREE players in an offside position, all between the shooter and the keeper, can be considered of zero consequence?!Scratching my head on why Arsenal's first goal wasn't even reviewed for offside/blocking the keepers view.
While i agree with your overall point, surely every slide tackle where the player doesnt get the ball would then be classed as an inevitable coming together then and no longer be a foul?It’s simpler than that in reality.
VAR looks at each decision and determines whether the call that has been made is justifiable in any way within the laws of the game.
The human element of VAR means that two identical decisions could be viewed differently by the on field ref initially and then the VAR official trying to see whether thr original call on field is justifiable.
Now, I guess the Foden call was that he got his shot off and the contact was inevitable because the defender is desperately lunging to block the shot.
I think it was a penalty, because he took Foden out after he played the ball.
However, if the on field ref says that it’s an inevitable coming together, then how can VAR intervene?
The system is a mess. I think that all major marginal calls should be looked at by the on field ref.
Correct.I agree that incident was outrageous, too!
We have to draw a line somewhere, and while I have no issue with football being a full bloodied contact sport, and have had the scars and broken teeth to prove it, we have to draw a line somewhere. I think inflicting unnecessary, dangerous and reckless challenges on players has to be on the other side of that line…and all the pics I posted, including the one on Foden, are over it.
Common Natural sense.And replace the Stockley Park crew with two extra on-field linesmen. Sure, they may make mistakes with some calls but fans in the ground wouldn't have to wait 2 - 3 minutes for a decision.
A late tackle is a foul. They happen in every game and it's allways a free kick. No ref ever says that the ball has already been passed by the player so it doesn't count. Ref and var made the mistake on Saturday of treating as though it was a 'denying a player a chance of a goal'.I suppose the question is, is it not a foul if you’ve passed the ball or had a shot? If it’s not, he made many errors after the Foden foul and a dangerous precedent has been set.
It's bent when they want it to be, people can argue semantics about the Rashford offside goal, and the one on Saturday but, then think about the Cup Final.... there's nothing you can say about that other than bent.Not sure about refs being bent I still think incompetence rules.
'Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence'
VAR is the biggest problem now. Absolutely changes how refs manage the game and not in a good way. As I've said before, I wanted it and thought it would be good, but it's been an unmitigated fucking disaster and it's not getting any better. Has absolutely ruined the game.
And yet we were all told that semi auto offside would improve the flow of the game and be more accurateIt was, and immediately cleared! Boggles the mind how THREE players in an offside position, all between the shooter and the keeper, can be considered of zero consequence?!
Is it time for keepers to stop making an effort to save the ball and just hold their hands up?!
It’s amazing how TWO RULES, offside and handball, have created more angst in the last few years of “improving it!”
Thanks for the reply. If you believe there is institutional bias then those imposing the bias are bent.Maybe not bent. But there is no doubt Pep's views on Catalonia have upset a lot of people in the Spanish establishment, including people like Tebas. There is a lot of politics in Spanish sport and I believe there is an institutional bias against Pep because of it. Peer group pressure is a very powerful thing in organisations. The same happens in England where the establishment clubs like LFC and MUFC wield a lot of power behind the scenes and in the media. Refs know that if they upset these clubs it can damage their career and so do those in the media so they avoid upsetting them.
Nothing subjective about it..he fouled Phil..
The ref either saw it and ignored it..and if he ignored it then Why... Or he missed it so Car should be looking at it and advising him to have a look at the monitor.
If Var looked at it they could see it was obviously a foul..then why hasn't it been given.
No subjectivity about the contact..he made contact so it's a foul..inside the area so a penalty..
I'm still fucking fuming about the shite offside and the non handball and the amount of fucking fouls he let them get away with..
Off to bed and hopefully I won't think about it again
In a broad sense you are right but not for the Foden foul. The defender had both feet of the ground and his studs went straight into Fodens ankle. That is not subjective. That is a foul on any pitch in any football league.No it isn’t, the laws have never worked like that. That’s why you get some agreeing with the handball and not the Foden one and others thinking the complete opposite way round. It always has a subjective element to it.
First image shown was clearly offside, even gooner Smith said " Newcastle fans are gonna be disappointed' ,then there was a long delay, just knew they were manipulating something.It's bent when they want it to be, people can argue semantics about the Rashford offside goal, and the one on Saturday but, then think about the Cup Final.... there's nothing you can say about that other than bent.
That's not even thinking about different standards in different games being applied or even VAR not getting the correct frames to view.