Var debate 2019/20

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

by the laws of the game it's irrelevant whether the ball hit Laportes arm

HANDLING THE BALL

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

He never had possession, hence irrelevant, goal should have stood

It's this deliberately murky bit that can be hidden behind. Creating a goal-scoring opportunity for whom? I would always read that it is a gso for the person whose arm the ball inadvertently brushed against, but now it's been given that Laporte gave Jesus an opportunity it can be dragged back to God knows what incident. I think they have looked for anything iffy whilst the ball was bobbling around and found Laporte loitering with intent. I would bet the cheating bastards would redefine that bit when it comes to a Rag or Dipper arm.

 

[Marvin]

Strong words from Garth Crooks tucked at the end of his team of the week analysis

Tottenham's Erik Lamela practically assaulted Manchester City's Rodri in the box and VAR said nothing. Why? If Referee Michael Oliver did not see it then it was a clear and obvious error and VAR should have brought it to the referee's attention. So no help there.

Did this technological 'know it all' not see what everyone else saw or did this scientific genius go for a comfort break? Of course not. VAR is a spoiler. It seeks and searches for error. He's a show off! VAR comes into its own when it can combine the evidence with the facts. "Don't blame me!" it shouts. "I'm just giving you the facts and attaching them to the evidence and the laws of the game."

Meanwhile, the game has developed a virus but football doesn't know it yet and it's in danger of affecting the whole game. VAR's decision to disallow Gabriel Jesus' injury-time goal based on the new law, introduced this season, regarding handball, was nothing short of laughable. The law is an ass but more worryingly the game is in danger of becoming a joke.

Also Danny Murphy, and Tim Cahill spoke well on MOTD2 last night.

Only a matter of time before you are going to get fans protesting. Banners, tennis balls, people walking onto the pitch.

If it happens again, I'd be in favour of going on the pitch and getting the game abandoned. Fans have been ignored in VAR and my head has been wrecked twice now by celebrating last minute winners only to see it ruled out. The football authorities did not consider fans at all.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

It's this deliberately murky bit that can be hidden behind. Creating a goal-scoring opportunity for whom? I would always read that it is a gso for the person whose arm the ball inadvertently brushed against, but now it's been given that Laporte gave Jesus an opportunity it can be dragged back to God knows what incident. I think they have looked for anything iffy whilst the ball was bobbling around and found Laporte loitering with intent. I would bet the cheating bastards would redefine that bit when it comes to a Rag or Dipper arm.

But it says after it hits a players arm and “gains possession of the ball and then creates a goal scoring opportunity”

Laporte did not gain possession of the ball and then create a gso, the ball hit his arm and went straight to Jesus. At no point did Laporte gain possession of the ball.

 

[55yr old teenager]

We are being used to test VAR,they keep saying they look at everything in real time which is a lie,it would be done much quicker if they did

If they looked at that incident in real time no way is that goal disallowed

 

[blue b4 the moon]

Strong words from Garth Crooks tucked at the end of his team of the week analysis

Tottenham's Erik Lamela practically assaulted Manchester City's Rodri in the box and VAR said nothing. Why? If Referee Michael Oliver did not see it then it was a clear and obvious error and VAR should have brought it to the referee's attention. So no help there.

Did this technological 'know it all' not see what everyone else saw or did this scientific genius go for a comfort break? Of course not. VAR is a spoiler. It seeks and searches for error. He's a show off! VAR comes into its own when it can combine the evidence with the facts. "Don't blame me!" it shouts. "I'm just giving you the facts and attaching them to the evidence and the laws of the game."

Meanwhile, the game has developed a virus but football doesn't know it yet and it's in danger of affecting the whole game. VAR's decision to disallow Gabriel Jesus' injury-time goal based on the new law, introduced this season, regarding handball, was nothing short of laughable. The law is an ass but more worryingly the game is in danger of becoming a joke.

Wow,ex Spurs & ex rag Crooks on (I was going to post 'our side') the money. All these other teams fans taking the piss ....well if it's consistent they're in for some big downers, if it's not then I'm done at the end of the season

 

[Deleted member 77198]

If they looked at that incident in real time no way is that goal disallowed

If the VAR understood the law about “gaining possession of the ball” there’s no way the goal is disallowed. This VAR has not understood the new law properly!

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

But it says after it hits a players arm and “gains possession of the ball and then creates a goal scoring opportunity”

Laporte did not gain possession of the ball and then create a gso, the ball hit his arm and went straight to Jesus. At no point did Laporte gain possession of the ball.

But it's left distinctly vague. Were it to say "Creates a goal scoring opportunity FOR HIMSELF' then chalking off the goal would be blatant cheating, but as it stands it is unclear as to whom the gso has been created. I think the drafting of that bit has been left on the foggy side of things quite deliberately so that the VAR shed wallahs and PiGMOL can pick and choose, as they have - they chose us. i expect, now the game has concluded and we have been awarded one point and Jesus one goal less in his quest for the Golden Boot, for PiGMOL to come out and clarify, just in time for a Rag or Dipper to benefit with a winning goal scored in identical circumstances to ours on Saturday. Remember the game of Ottamendi's pen? Uefa said after the game ended and there was more than just consternation at the contrived decision to award the penalty that they would review the handball law within the week. They sorted it but waited until PSG had conceded a penalty in similar circumstances. Now who was that against?

 

[hammocity]

Some posters still can`t get their head around this sam.

I’ve posted this before, Swarbrick and Taylor were demonstrating the VAR application on Sky before the season started. They stated they wouldn’t re referee decisions unless it was a “clear and obvious mistake” they would also not have replays in slow motion so the VAR ref could empathise with the on field ref. Oliver was three yards away from the incident on Saturday, he didn’t see anything, the Spurs players didn’t appeal and there was no inkling at all from anyone that the ball had “brushed” Eric’s shoulder. The VAR refs have gone against everything they said they weren’t going to do, bent fuckers in my opinion and if that was at Candlefield or Old Toilet no way was a goal getting chalked off.

 

[hammocity]

VAR spotted the handball that was missed by the officials and players

But it was not clear and obvious so the review should not have happened.

 

[hammocity]

Hahaha that's a good one lol

It happened the Nations league in the summer.

 

[babyape]

Footage of Stockley Park after they rewound the tape after the Jesus goal....

 

[Mike D]

There has to be some changes after this like Michael Oliver being relegated to Championship for next couple of games. It was a clear and obvious error that he should have been made to review. The handball situation is a farce it will lead to cheating if it is allowed to stay in its current form.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

If the VAR understood the law about “gaining possession of the ball” there’s no way the goal is disallowed. This VAR has not understood the new law properly!

VAR exudes not the slightest milligram of emotion. It simply states what has happened which the optically challenged Oliver and his compatriots are incapable of seeing. It is then left to another optically challenged Whistling Wanker to whisper in No I Whistling Wanker's ear that he's seen nothing about a penalty and the ball in its travels has brushed the hairs on a sky blue arm. Institutionalised cheating. If Whistling Wankers ever did 'shame' Oliver and Scott's heads would be dragging on the floor this week. Their combined performances could not be described as appalling - it was worse than that. Unfortunately, within the corridors of PiGMOL it would go down as a 'strong performance'! Paraphrasing the unctuous Alan Green: "Oliver? The best referee in the country? Don't make me laugh!"

 

[Deleted member 77198]

But it's left distinctly vague. Were it to say "Creates a goal scoring opportunity FOR HIMSELF' then chalking off the goal would be blatant cheating, but as it stands it is unclear as to whom the gso has been created. I think the drafting of that bit has been left on the foggy side of things quite deliberately so that the VAR shed wallahs and PiGMOL can pick and choose, as they have - they chose us. i expect, now the game has concluded and we have been awarded one point and Jesus one goal less in his quest for the Golden Boot, for PiGMOL to come out and clarify, just in time for a Rag or Dipper to benefit with a winning goal scored in identical circumstances to ours on Saturday. Remember the game of Ottamendi's pen? Uefa said after the game ended and there was more than just consternation at the contrived decision to award the penalty that they would review the handball law within the week. They sorted it but waited until PSG had conceded a penalty in similar circumstances. Now who was that against?

I think it’s quite clear.

1. Handball (even if accidental)
2. Gains possession/control of the ball and then
2i. Scores in the opponents net
2ii. Creates a goal scoring opportunity (can be for himself or a team mate, why does that matter? a gso is a gso and 2ii doesn’t matter anyway if he doesn’t gain possession/control of the ball)
3. Or scores directly in the opponents net with his arm (even if accidental)

So to break that down into two examples:

Llorente CL goal
1. It was accidental handball by Llorente
2. He did not gain possession/control of the ball
2i. Void as he didn’t gain possession of the ball
2ii. Void as he didn’t gain possession of the ball
3. The ball hit his arm then hit his hip and went in, it didn’t go directly into the goal off his arm
= GOAL

Jesus Prem goal
1. It was accidental handball by Laporte
2. He did not gain possession/control of the ball
2i. Void
2ii. Void
3. Void as the ball went to a teammate (Jesus) after he accidentally handballed it, not straight into the net
= GOAL

 

[Blue Mist]

I'd go to a qualified optician.

I did and he suggested the one that should be visiting him was the man who controlled the VAR, when he got back from a coffee that is.

 

[alexmcity]

VAR will be good for City ultimately. Dippers and rags won't score from off-side positions at least and won't get so many favourable decisions. Rags got 12 pens last season, 3 times what we got. Won't happen with VAR, I'm perfectly sure about that. We'll benefit in some important games from VAR as well and people will find it more acceptable.

 

[Blue Mist]

VAR will be good for City ultimately. Dippers and rags won't score from off-side positions at least and won't get so many favourable decisions. Rags got 12 pens last season, 3 times what we got. Won't happen with VAR, I'm perfectly sure about that. We'll benefit in some important games from VAR as well and people will find it more acceptable.

Do you honestly believe that the VAR man will over rule the ref and say it wasn't a penalty for the Rags, seriously ?

 

[Deleted member 77198]

It wasn’t a perfectly good goal tho. Not because of VAR but because of the new stupid handball rule

It was because Laporte did not gain possession of the ball and then create a goal scoring opportunity after accidentally hand balling it. He created a goal scoring opportunity after accidentally hand balling it.

At no point did he gain possession of the ball.

Therefore it should have been a goal.

 

[TheRemainsOfTheDave]

VAR will be good for City ultimately. Dippers and rags won't score from off-side positions at least and won't get so many favourable decisions. Rags got 12 pens last season, 3 times what we got. Won't happen with VAR, I'm perfectly sure about that. We'll benefit in some important games from VAR as well and people will find it more acceptable.

You'll catch a few with that one.

Remember when they instructed refs to take action in the box against players who block the attacker when defending a corner? When Sterling conceded a penalty? Don't think it happened again all season or since - same thing will happen here, there'll be dozens of accidental handballs left unpunished.

 

[alexmcity]

Do you honestly believe that the VAR man will over rule the ref and say it wasn't a penalty for the Rags, seriously ?

Referees will be more wary to give pens in the first place. I'm sure they ain't getting 12 pens with VAR in use.