deano ou812
Well-Known Member
No because it involved us being on the end of it,could you imagine the stink caused by the media if it was the rags or scousers,they’d have wanted Oliver and the VAR ref suspended with immediate effect ..
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Var debate 2019/20
- Thread starter Chi-town blues
- Start date
1961_vintage
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 21 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 14,733
VAR needs its own VAR. Happy to volunteer.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 16,641
That doesn’t apply to this rule. It’s the fact that a goal was scored that creates an instant review.But it was not clear and obvious so the review should not have happened.
Under the Duvet with Uwe
Member
- Joined
- 21 Aug 2012
- Messages
- 8
Regardless, the law as written potentially allows the defending team an opportunity to score by committing the same offence as the attacking team.
Bunchofdickovs
Active Member
- Joined
- 18 Aug 2019
- Messages
- 35
With regards to your first paragraph, how did your team have a red card overturned, (changed to a yellow) last season when VAR stepped in
you've lost me on that . i have no idea to what you're referring .
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 16,641
im trying hard to steer clear of “agenda” and to just speak about the MISAPPLICATION of the new law, due to pundits believing it says something it doesn’t, while ignoring the STATED PRETEXT.No because it involved us being on the end of it,could you imagine the stink caused by the media if it was the rags or scousers,they’d have wanted Oliver and the VAR ref suspended with immediate effect ..
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
You've misunderstood or I've not asked the question well enough. I just mean what advantage did we gain? Was the ball deflected sufficiently by the contact to create an advantage? If it had not touched Laporte, would a Spurs player have beaten Jesus to the ball?
I thought I might, sorry about that.
Without finding a clip to review and therefore having to rely on memory, it looked to me that the contact off Laporte moved it to Jesus facing the right way, rather than having to turn.
I'm not denying that the law is a problem, but I do think it was correctly applied. It's mostly a trouble of the law being clarified into black and white, and not allowing for opinion from the ref. That could play either way, but presumably was in response to a demand for clarification.
hopefully it stops stuff like this:
Why would it ? instead of just posting a clip please explain why you think it will stop it. If VAR didn't interfere on Saturday why would they interfere in this instance ?
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Because they are corrupt. The law as quoted often in this thread is quite clear that even 'if' the ball hit Laportes hand the goal should have stood
And that's your opinion, and nothing more - both on PGMOL, and on what the law means.
Has any ex-ref come out and stated that it was applied wrongly? There's plenty who quite like a pop at Riley and Oliver.
People are PARAPHRASING THE LAW, but you can’t do that, as it is very, very specific in when it is and is NOT a handball.
- THIS IS A KEY POINT!!!
In this case, the law was “created” because Llorente scored directly from the contact, which is a different section of that rule.
In short, people are NOT APPLYING THE RULE CORRECTLY....TO THE POINT OF CREATING VERBIAGE THAT ISN’T EVEN IN THE LAW!
I can’t believe no-one in the media is picking up on this?! Is it because they’re too lazy to actually read the law itself?
So it's not just a shit rule, it's a shit rule badly written .... my doesn't that surprise me anymore?