Var debate 2019/20

This is a good one.

Last season in the Bundesliga, a referee denied a penalty claim just before half time. He then blew for half time and both teams went into their change rooms. VAR then intervened and the referee had to call both teams back out on the field. 6 minutes and 15 seconds after half time was blown, the penalty and taken and scored.

Imagine that happening to City.
 
For me the greater issue isn't whether they're getting it right or wrong, it's what it is doing to the game. The last minute "goal", as well as the penalty decision, would have been one of those things and more or less accepted by either side pre-VAR, as we all kind of accept that the ref can't always get it right. That's how it's always been.

But now we're looking at somebody sat in a bunker changing the ref's decisions effectively while we have no idea what he has seen (e.g. handball), or not seen (penalty) or why he is making the decision. You might as well let the pundits analyse the entire game after the event then make a case for it to be replayed if a wrong or missed decision costs you the match and maybe more. I don't see a lot of difference, especially if the match ref is making or changing his decision based on nothing more than what somebody sees on a small TV screen.

I don't understand the mentality of that. I would rather lose and feel hard done by, by a ref that missed a penalty rather than somebody sat in an office somewhere watching something on TV that nobody else saw or had a problem with. Thinking back the the FIFA VAR room at the world cup the monitors didn't appear to be that big, and the big screen on the wall wasn't a particularly high resolution. It looked like a projected image rather than, say a large 4K TV.

I also thought the rules were supposed to be the same for everybody at every level, apparently that's now not the case.
 
coolcity said:
Yes that's the infuriating thing, if you're going to use it for the handball why wasn't it used for the penalty? I'm not even convinced it hit Laporte's arm anyway, from the TV replay which I must have seen 20 times now it could have been the defender's arm. It certainly doesn't look 100% clear cut.

But the real issue is it's ruining the game. You don't know whether to celebrate a goal or not and it's solving nothing if they don't use it for every decision. It's a complete mockery if you can have a goal chalked off but not be given a penalty, so whichever way you look at it we were robbed.
Click to expand...
Seen that myself it’s not clear cut,which means that the goal should have stood as the VAR officials can’t be 100% sure who’s arm it has grazed,they have guessed and ruled it out ..
 
coolcity said:
Is that the new rule or the old one? I'm no expert but on Sky they're saying if it's handball, deliberate or accidental, and it leads to, or ends in, a goal then the goal should not stand.

Where do you draw the line? If it hits Laporte's arm, ref (and nobody else) spots it, then the ball is touched by half a dozen players in a goalmouth scramble before ending up in the back of the net does the same rule apply?
Click to expand...
If an attackers arm touches the ball then the goal is rulled out. If it touches a defenders arm then it needs to be a touch outside of the natural silhouette of the defender to be considered a penalty. If any attacker touches a ball with their arm it's a free kick.
 
Didn't Mike Riley state last month that VAR wasn't going to rereferee games and that they wouldn't be taking a hard line on hand ball decisions in games.

Seriously think City should ask him what he meant by that remark based on yesterday's VAR decision.
 
karen7 said:
Not the basic VAR review as i know that,it's the VAR review that is looking for mm's to disallow the goal,they seem to be looking mighty hard at our goals with a view to disallowing it and not ruling on a stonewall pen
Click to expand...

There’s been nothing contentious in others goals so far though.
 
Marvin said:
Rather than look at someone else's interpretation of the handball law - look at what it says:

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
So VAR had to interpret the accidental handball by Laporte and determine if he gains possession/control and then creates a goal-scoring opportunity.

In my opinion it is meant to apply to a player who deliberately gets control of the ball accidentally and goes on to provide an assist not an inadvertent deflection..

This interpretation of the laws.
Click to expand...
Completely agree, and it's clear to me that even if the ball did brush Laporte's arm at no point did he have control of the ball so the goal should have stood.
 
jollylescott said:
This is a good one.

Last season in the Bundesliga, a referee denied a penalty claim just before half time. He then blew for half time and both teams went into their change rooms. VAR then intervened and the referee had to call both teams back out on the field. 6 minutes and 15 seconds after half time was blown, the penalty and taken and scored.

Imagine that happening to City.
Click to expand...

Give it time.
 
It’s plain for all to see what’s happening they will be fucking certain teams over and assisting others,second game in and VAR has took the reffing out of the main referee’s hands,why did the VAR ref not advise Oliver of an incident in the box that needed reviewing on the monitor..which was a huge decision at a critical stage of the game as well, injury time ..
 
GeorgeR said:
Vertonghen did the same in the first leg last season but VAR didn't intervene. I think Lloris was off his line as well.
VAR should give consistency but that's not happening just yet.
Click to expand...


What proof of that is there though ?

Unless every goal is replayed on the big screen , there is no proof ....

It’s open to manipulation

Because pigmol said every goal is reviewed

If they told me it was Sunday I’d check my calendar !
 
I’ve had a proper read of the new handball rules this morning and have changed my view from what I posted on here yesterday.

It hits Laporte’s arm.

However, the ‘control / possession’ part of the new rule isn’t made out.

Therefore, the goal should’ve stood.

VAR should have been able to sort that easily enough.

Conclusion - bent decision.
 
Stoned Rose said:
I’ve had a proper read of the new handball rules this morning and have changed my view from what I posted on here yesterday.

It hits Laporte’s arm.

However, the ‘control / possession’ part of the new rule isn’t made out.

Therefore, the goal should’ve stood.

VAR should have been able to sort that easily enough.

Conclusion - bent decision.
Click to expand...

I’ve seen a few freeze frames and it also looks like it hits Eriksen’s arm and Eriksen pulls Laporte in the first place.

How anyone can say any of it is clear and obvious I don’t know.

We’ve certainly been cheated here, when you consider the 2 penalty shouts too.
 
meltonblue said:
There’s been nothing contentious in others goals so far though.
Click to expand...
We are the focus at the moment,i can't believe we are doing something that the dippers aren't doing,the law of averages would say there is something to look at in at least one of them,they had double figure offside goals last season.I believe they are trying stuff out on us,it's not clear it hit erics hand,it could just have easily been the defender and they tried out the offside on raz and found a couple of mm's,i was for VAR but i feel like we are the gunea pigs for this so far,it's out of order and i believe the pattern has been set from game 1
 
Stoned Rose said:
I’ve had a proper read of the new handball rules this morning and have changed my view from what I posted on here yesterday.

It hits Laporte’s arm.

However, the ‘control / possession’ part of the new rule isn’t made out.

Therefore, the goal should’ve stood.

VAR should have been able to sort that easily enough.

Conclusion - bent decision.
Click to expand...
Does the possession part refer to the team gaining possession as opposed to the player himself?
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
“Even if it’s accidental”. The handball accidentally created the chance.

I think the new law is a bad one that shouldn’t have come in. But by that law the goal should definitely have been ruled out.

The right decision was made.

Whether that would have gone the same way for United or Liverpool is total guesswork.
Click to expand...

I don’t think the handball created the chance at all. The ball barely deviated from its path. The chance was created and finished by Jesus, not as a result of the ball striking Laporte’s arm.

Simply don’t see how you can say that chance was created by the handball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top