Agree 100%. According to the book, it wasn't handball. How can they get away with ignoring the meaning of the law and disallowing the goal? It's their fucking job to know the laws, and a new law at that, so it can't be an honest mistake. Nobody points it out except City fans.
Literally the entire country is being fed an incorrect version of the handball law. Because nobody bothers to read it. It’s ridiculous really. I’ve posted stuff on twitter and you just get fans of other clubs saying “any handball is a foul if a goal is scored”. I ask everyone to show me where it says that in the laws of the game and nobody comes back with it. Just because SSN says it doesn’t make it correct.
It’s the same with “clear and obvious error”. People think VAR can only intervene when there’s such an error. But that’s not true at all. Clear and obvious error only applies to subjective calls. Offside is classed as an objective, black and white call, and is not subject to “clear and obvious”. That’s a joke in itself by the way because the technology isn’t there to treat it as black and white. But my point is nobody reads the laws of the game, they just go off what idiots on Sky/bbc say, when they too have not read the laws.
Correct that it happened before VAR yet now with it we still don’t get the penalty
I doubt it would have been chalked off if he looked as it wasn't obvious,no-one saw it,no-one claimed for it,llores couldn't believe it,he would have given the goal i think,instead of repeating ourselves all night lets say the rules are terrible,it's not supposed to be forensic,it's supposed to be clear and obvious not 2 mins of trying to find an excuse not to give it
What the players saw is irrelevant as is what fans see.....its what the ref sees
I’ve read the handball rule dozens of times since the game and I’m not convinced there was an offence. Ex refs in the media can come out saying “any handball that results in a goal is a foul”, but the laws don’t actually say that, and surely that’s what matters? The laws read as if Laporte would have had to gain possession/control of the ball AFTER it hitting his arm. Not in the moment it hit his arm, but after it. It’s clear that he did not gain control of the ball afterwards. The other parts of the rule are to do with if it’s deliberate (which it wasn’t), or if it goes in the net directly off the arm/hand (which it didn’t). I’m not even convinced it’s a foul, even under the new law.
But Oliver didn't see it either ..