Var debate 2019/20

[SebastianBlue]

I'd say not because Mane deliberately hits it at his arm.

I agree with you on that but I unsure how it relates to my point about VAR implementation.

 

[bert38]

Two years ago Refs allowed opposition players to kick sh*t out of our players without punishment, this season Liverpool had decisions go their way in countless games-neither worked. Next season VAR will become a subjective tool to try to hamper us-just as it was the champions lg this.

 

[Gabriel]

Thought I’d copy the new rule in full out:

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)

So, last nights decision a correct implementation of the new law. Llorente’s against us would also have been disallowed

Assuming that applies to a defender, it would seem that the referee called that wrongly and VAR should have referred it to him last night.

 

[mosssideblue]

VAR will be nothing more than an additional tool used to ensure that whatever pre-determined outcome is required can be justified.

Sad, but true. There is no excuse for not being transparent in its operation, but they choose not to

 

[Abattoir Blue]

I agree with you on that but I unsure how it relates to my point about VAR implementation.

Think I might have misinterpreted the third bullet point in 2nd section. Though does that mean as he played it off chest first it wouldn't be handball?

 

[SebastianBlue]

Think I mightbhave misinterpreted the third bullet point in 2nd section. Though does that mean as he played it off chest first it wouldn't be handball?

Oh, I was commenting about the Llorente handball.

I think last night’s decision was very harsh, as it did hit Sissoko’s chest first, but I could see it given in general (although Sissoko was seemingly just gesturing for one of his teammates to get back to cover, he is just asking for a professional footballer to intentionally hit it up to try to get the penalty, which is exactly what happened).

That said, I think it was so quickly given, even though the ref did not have a great view of the incident, because there was likely an influence (however small) on the officials to try to aid Liverpool in winning yesterday. And the VAR “review” was always very unlikely to change the referees call on the pitch for that reason.

I am of the opinion the powers that be desperately wanted Liverpool to win yesterday, and I am also fairly confident that VAR is going to be used to manipulate outcomes in the same way referees have for decades, not least because UEFA continue to refuse to alter the current implementation to allow for basic transparency in decision making and consistency in application.

 

[tonea2003]

Except the bold bit which you ignored.

except i didn't if you re read the post

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

The original hand ball rule , was if an opponent moved his arm towards the ball , hence the saying "ball to hand" which was considered accidental , it now appears any contact with the arm or hand is now 95% nailed on penalty , which is ridiculous , players naturally put their arms out for balance etc., The rule needs to be reconsidered only deliberate hand ball i.e. a movement towards the ball to gain an advantage should be penalised.

 

[blueparrot]

The original hand ball rule , was if an opponent moved his arm towards the ball , hence the saying "ball to hand" which was considered accidental , it now appears any contact with the arm or hand is now 95% nailed on penalty , which is ridiculous , players naturally put their arms out for balance etc., The rule needs to be reconsidered only deliberate hand ball i.e. a movement towards the ball to gain an advantage should be penalised.

The old rule is far better than the new ones and next year will cause mayhem, it should be hand to ball not ball to hand.
However my argument is once he had his arm up and it hit his chest he should have kept his arm up , the ball didn’t bounce up from his chest it was bouncing away. Only when he brought his arm down did it hit his arm and drop at his feet . In my opinion it was arm to ball and he did gain an advantage as it pulled the ball back to drop at his feet.

 

[Gabriel]

Most worrying thing about this is that ‘expert’ referees and players are so eager to back the officials and the system that they ignore the rules. Ignorance of the rules is disgraceful but so, too, is the reluctance of those in the booth to question the referee. The ball hit his chest and then his arm so not a penalty. The referee presumably thought the ball had struck his arm first and that is a clear and obvious error. The decision should have been reviewed and overturned.

If they can make such mistakes in the biggest game in European football, Heaven help us in August.

 

[pardoeofftomexico]

Most worrying thing about this is that ‘expert’ referees and players are so eager to back the officials and the system that they ignore the rules. Ignorance of the rules is disgraceful but so, too, is the reluctance of those in the booth to question the referee. The ball hit his chest and then his arm so not a penalty. The referee presumably thought the ball had struck his arm first and that is a clear and obvious error. The decision should have been reviewed and overturned.

If they can make such mistakes in the biggest game in European football, Heaven help us in August.

The defender may consider himself very unlucky but it meets the conditions for a penalty set out by UEFA for this competition earlier in the season. In fact, I think it would have always been a penalty. His arm was in an unnatural position and he even brought it down to connect with the ball. All I can say is that if anyone can't see that was a penalty then after the first week of next season this thread will be a thousand pages long particularly if it involves a City player!

 

[Neville Kneville]

Haven't seen the game, & never will, but from reading about the incident, it appears to fall in with what many of us predicted would happen, when it was announced.

The teams who get the most 'breaks' from refs, will get the most 'breaks' from v.a.r. & whenever a tight one goes against any of them, there will be such a public outcry that they don't lose a similar one for a long time.

Most 'close' v.a.r. decisions will go in favour of Utd & Liverpool next season.

 

[thelongbowman]

I thought VAR would help the game. It hasn't. It should only be used for objective decisions such a off side and ball positions similar to goal line technology. As soon as a matter has an element of subjectivity the decision has to be with the referee. This stopping the game thing and some unknown dick in a separate country advising the ref is a nonsense.

To prevent travesties of justice I would allow each team an appeal per half which would stop incidents of gross unfairness in their tracks.

VAR as it stands is not fit for purpose.

 

[Marvin]

If we had VAR this season, would we have been champions.

Does it add or remove bias / error? Open to question

 

[Gabriel]

The defender may consider himself very unlucky but it meets the conditions for a penalty set out by UEFA for this competition earlier in the season. In fact, I think it would have always been a penalty. His arm was in an unnatural position and he even brought it down to connect with the ball. All I can say is that if anyone can't see that was a penalty then after the first week of next season this thread will be a thousand pages long particularly if it involves a City player!

Assuming the rule quoted above and elsewhere online remains the pertinent one, “it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)” then it all depends whether the ball strikes another part of the defender’s body before striking his arm. Had the ball struck his arm directly, then a penalty no doubt, but the fact that it hit his body and then arm should have seen it deemed no penalty. The problem with this wording is the insertion of the word ‘usually’, as that leaves it entirely at the discretion and interpretation of the officials and, thus, subjective.

 

[pardoeofftomexico]

Assuming the rule quoted above and elsewhere online remains the pertinent one, “it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)” then it all depends whether the ball strikes another part of the defender’s body before striking his arm. Had the ball struck his arm directly, then a penalty no doubt, but the fact that it hit his body and then arm should have seen it deemed no penalty. The problem with this wording is the insertion of the word ‘usually’, as that leaves it entirely at the discretion and interpretation of the officials and, thus, subjective.

I think the rule you are quoting is the one for next year although I think that a penalty would still be given. I think what the logical answer should be is that if his arm had been beside him then no penalty but to have your arm above your head and then bring it down making contact with the ball should logically be a penalty.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

If we had VAR this season, would we have been champions.

Does it add or remove bias / error? Open to question

Alternatively , would the dippers have got so many penalties and off-side goals and been much further behind us ?

Edit that , because I expect certain clubs to still get the dubious decisions.

 

[Newman Noggs]

If we had VAR this season, would we have been champions.

Does it add or remove bias / error? Open to question

We'll be able to judge at the season's end. My prediction is;

1. We'll have more goals disallowed following the use of VAR than any other top 6 side
2. We'll have more penalties awarded against us following the use of VAR than any other top 6 side

If that happens, we'll know.

 

[ballinio]

Haven't seen the game, & never will, but from reading about the incident, it appears to fall in with what many of us predicted would happen, when it was announced.

The teams who get the most 'breaks' from refs, will get the most 'breaks' from v.a.r. & whenever a tight one goes against any of them, there will be such a public outcry that they don't lose a similar one for a long time.

Most 'close' v.a.r. decisions will go in favour of Utd & Liverpool next season.

Of course they will, i’m Not looking forward to next season .

 

[Gabriel]

I think the rule you are quoting is the one for next year although I think that a penalty would still be given. I think what the logical answer should be is that if his arm had been beside him then no penalty but to have your arm above your head and then bring it down making contact with the ball should logically be a penalty.

Not sure. I think the rule was in operation last night and have seen it quoted as such in a number of publications today. It makes sense, as it would give some leeway for shots that deflect (e.g. Micah Richards at Anfield) but not balls that hit an arm directly. By their rule that was not a penalty unless they are using ‘usually’ to qualify their decisions, but that opens up the question of what constitutes ‘usual’ and contrariwise what constitutes ‘unusual’.

The whole notion of what ‘unnatural’ means in terms of arm position in sport is ridiculous, but their rule, if applied properly, should be comprehensible and consistent. I fear it will, however, lead to a spate of penalties at the start of the season when attacking players deliberately target hitting arms in the box.