bobbyowenquiff
Well-Known Member
As confirmed by Martin Samuel's column today.Laporte did not gain possession or control of the ball after it hit his hand. So it was not hand ball.
As confirmed by Martin Samuel's column today.Laporte did not gain possession or control of the ball after it hit his hand. So it was not hand ball.
Where can I find that mate?As confirmed by Martin Samuel's column today.
As confirmed by Martin Samuel's column today.
It's been posted on the main Var thread but if you google Martin Samuel's column today it should come up.Where can I find that mate?
I never said he did but the referees at the game say they correctly ruled it out, do we know why? And as far as I can see there is no rule saying any accidental handball is a definite free kick against the attacker but not the defender. In my scenario, and this is the point a few are missing, I am extending the interpretation of the rules as applied to Laporte and what would happen and it is that the game should go back to any infringement in the build up to the goal. Whether VAR would go back to the point of the defender handling the ball is another matter.Laporte did not gain possession or control of the ball after it hit his hand. So it was not hand ball.
Who clearly understands the interpretation of the rules far better than the Head of VAR , or PiGMOL's clandestine society rep Micheal Oliver.
The governing body for VAR has made very clearly in it's rules, that the prem should be following,that it was not handball and it should of stood,the prem have decided to go it's own way on handball and changed it to favour the defenders,the defender has to have their arm away from the body but the attacker any slight touch is handball,that's why they say it was correct,they were saying clear and obvious but that disapeared game 1,real time replays,that went as swarbrick said they watched the pen appeal in slo mo multiple times,they are making it up as they go along anally applying the rules down to the mm when it was supposed to be clear and obvious errors,they don't want the refs to use the monitors so the refs can't review anything,the handball rules they brought in were stated to be because of boly's goal v us last year,they have over complicated the rules and have veered away from the governing body,trouble is they will not accept they have made a mistake,instead they would rather label our player a cheatI never said he did but the referees at the game say they correctly ruled it out, do we know why? And as far as I can see there is no rule saying any accidental handball is a definite free kick against the attacker but not the defender. In my scenario, and this is the point a few are missing, I am extending the interpretation of the rules as applied to Laporte and what would happen and it is that the game should go back to any infringement in the build up to the goal. Whether VAR would go back to the point of the defender handling the ball is another matter.
Every last man jack and FOC in CBL3 understands handball better than anyone at PiGMOL, and while I'm on 'ere, is the "NEW' handball law the same one as we had last weekend or have they got another one for this weekend?