Var debate 2019/20

[SWP's back]

No.

Wrong according to this:

http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/continuation-fouls/

It’s a penalty if it continues into the box.

Also: https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf

The Law states 'If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick.'

 

[ctid1894]

Wrong according to this:

http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/continuation-fouls/

It’s a penalty if it continues into the box.

Also: https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf

The Law states 'If a defender starts holding an attacker outside the penalty area and continues holding him inside the penalty area, the referee must award a penalty kick.'

If that’s correct I apologise, not my understanding of the rule and that’s not how it’s ever really been applied but I stand corrected.

 

[SWP's back]

If that’s correct I apologise, not my understanding of the rule and that’s not how it’s ever really been applied but I stand corrected.

No drama but that’s the second united penalty not given anyway.

It’s also how I’ve always understood the rule and remember it being applied (for balance).

 

[franksinatra]

I agree - the rule is absolutely wrong on a number of levels....i was gutted by the disallowed goal as it winning was nothing short or what we deserved...

the fact that utd had a couple of calls go against them today alos makes a mocker of some on here who have been saying all week that VAR would rule in their favour

I agree - the rule is absolutely wrong on a number of levels....i was gutted by the disallowed goal as it winning was nothing short or what we deserved...

the fact that utd had a couple of calls go against them today alos makes a mocker of some on here who have been saying all week that VAR would rule in their favour

The weekend is not over yet and people will always find reasons to support their entrenched position. VAR is anti-football for me not anti-City.

 

[SWP's back]

The weekend is not over yet and people will always find reasons to support their entrenched position. VAR is anti-football for me not anti-City.

Agreed.

Also, as we scored more goals, we’ll see it in use more. If it rules out 10% of goals across the board (for easy maths) and we score 100 per season, we’ll see ten not given. A team like Burnley may only see 4 taken off with similar percentages.

 

[franksinatra]

Agreed.

Also, as we scored more goals, we’ll see it in use more. If it rules out 10% of goals across the board (for easy maths) and we score 100 per season, we’ll see ten not given. A team like Burnley may only see 4 taken off with similar percentages.

I was talking to a Leeds fan about this very subject today and the myth the top clubs get all the decisions. In relation to VAR and Pens it is as you say going to impact on sides who attack more, score more goals and create more possible penalty situations. The Leeds fan (and a sensible fan) was bemoaning how they should have had an additional 4 pens already this year (obv not in relation to Var).

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Guendouzi blatantly fouled by Van Dijk there to allow Matip to score.

VAR?

Not a fucking whiff.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Guendouzi blatantly fouled by Van Dijk there to allow Matip to score.

VAR?

Not a fucking whiff.

Yep.

 

[SWP's back]

Guendouzi blatantly fouled by Van Dijk there to allow Matip to score.

VAR?

Not a fucking whiff.

I think we have to come to terms with the Fact it’s not going to over rule anything a ref misses on the pitch unless it’s an offside or an attacking handball.

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

I think we have to come to terms with the Fact it’s not going to over rule anything a ref misses on the pitch unless it’s an offside or an attacking handball.

They didn’t even call to review.

I am convinced it’s not actually in place at that kip. That red card check was all for show as there was clearly nothing to check!