Var debate 2019/20

[dronefromsector7G]

The way it reads to me is more like the player gains possession and then does something with the ball, either scores or passes to a teammate.

It’s worded ambiguously but if you’re correct then we’ve been blatantly cheated

 

[west didsblue]

Three main problems:

First is the offside margin of error. If this was sorted out and the advantage is given to the attacking side in millimetre decisions then VAR will be useful.

Second problem is this handball rule change which presumably was brought in mainly to stop goals being counted when there is an accidental handball deflection of the ball en-route to goal sending the keeper the wrong way. That would be fair enough but applying this rule to any arm contact in the box is just ridiculous. It’s that rule that needs changing, and in this case it’s not VAR’s fault.

Thirdly its use for penalty decisions needs to be consistent and should mainly be for a VAR ref to see an angle that the ref can’t in real time, not for forensic examination of everything after the event, unless it’s to prove simulation.

 

[flook]

Three main problems:

First is the offside margin of error. If this was sorted out and the advantage is given to the attacking side in millimetre decisions then VAR will be useful.

Second problem is this handball rule change which presumably was brought in mainly to stop goals being counted when there is an accidental handball deflection of the ball en-route to goal sending the keeper the wrong way. That would be fair enough but applying this rule to any arm contact in the box is just ridiculous. It’s that rule that needs changing, and in this case it’s not VAR’s fault.

Thirdly its use for penalty decisions needs to be consistent and should mainly be for a VAR ref to see an angle that the ref can’t in real time, not for forensic examination of everything after the event, unless it’s to prove simulation.

excellent post

 

[dronefromsector7G]

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.

Laporte was right in front of the penalty spot when it hit him. Jesus picked up the ball just outside the six yard box. Hardly ‘barely deviated’.

 

[kaz7]

Three main problems:

First is the offside margin of error. If this was sorted out and the advantage is given to the attacking side in millimetre decisions then VAR will be useful.

Second problem is this handball rule change which presumably was brought in mainly to stop goals being counted when there is an accidental handball deflection of the ball en-route to goal sending the keeper the wrong way. That would be fair enough but applying this rule to any arm contact in the box is just ridiculous. It’s that rule that needs changing, and in this case it’s not VAR’s fault.

Thirdly its use for penalty decisions needs to be consistent and should mainly be for a VAR ref to see an angle that the ref can’t in real time, not for forensic examination of everything after the event, unless it’s to prove simulation.

I hope they don't change the rules now after shafting us with them,they have to go the whole season now as they won't want to look inept and getting it so wrong from the beginning,surely football men looked at the handball issue before hand and said that's unworkable

 

[mosssideblue]

She died 40 years ago.... thanks for asking.
Your posts are tiresome, repetitive and none reflective. Neither do they respond to points being made. Hence the FFS.

Lol

 

[ctid1894]

More proof that VAR for offside is flawed as discussed on Bluemoon last week

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/f...-2-4cm-offside-allowed-13cm-margin-error.html


Cameras used by VAR run at 50 frames per second. One picture taken every 0.02 seconds. To the human eye, it looks like a moving image.

For offsides, VAR has to choose the frame which shows the ball has categorically been touched. If Frame A shows the boot an inch away from the ball, then VAR has to take the next one in which the ball has definitely been played.

In reality, though, the first point of contact will be somewhere between. And as The Mail on Sunday has calculated, for decisions as tight as Sterling’s, a player can move quickly enough to move from onside to offside. And that’s crucial. It means there is a margin of error. And that margin varies depending how fast attackers and defenders are running.

They’ve clearly been stealing my maths equations from last week.

 

[mosssideblue]

He baits,ignore it

Oh dear, Aguero having a mare has made you grumpy :)

 

[Marvin]

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.

The commentators and journalists have not read the rule.

The rule says

It is an offence if a player:

• 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

AND THEN

Laporte does not and then anything. It inadvertently flicks off his arm which leads to controlled possession by another player.

This is about interpretation. It's not black and white at all. I think the rule was set up to stop a situation where the ball directly goes in off a players arm, or when it srikes an arm, and a player makes a conscious assist.

The VAR decision was harsh or wrong application of the handball rule.

 

[danielwood5]

It’s worded ambiguously but if you’re correct then we’ve been blatantly cheated

I think it's more that it's easier for the officials to use the dumbed down rule of any kind of contact is disallowed as that's the one most easily understood by the tabloids so marginally less hassle. I don't even think it's that ambiguous really, the way the rule is written is the way most people would want the game to be played instead of the reading of it we have now.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

Even Duncan Castles thinks they were wrong to interpret the new handball rule in the way that they did.

 

[west didsblue]

The commentators and journalists have not read the rule.

The rule says

It is an offence if a player:

• 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

AND THEN

Laporte does not and then anything. It inadvertently flicks off his arm which leads to controlled possession by another player.

This is about interpretation. It's not black and white at all. I think the rule was set up to stop a situation where the ball directly goes in off a players arm, or when it srikes an arm, and a player makes a conscious assist.

The VAR decision was harsh or wrong application of the handball rule.

Yep. I assume it’s to cover a deflection leading to a simple tap in. Jesus had to make the space himself to create the goal. Clarification is certainly needed, but as Karen says, it can’t now happen until the end of the season unless they bring it in at Christmas after everyone’s played each other once.

 

[Mancityus]

The commentators and journalists have not read the rule.

The rule says

It is an offence if a player:

• 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

AND THEN

Laporte does not and then anything. It inadvertently flicks off his arm which leads to controlled possession by another player.

This is about interpretation. It's not black and white at all. I think the rule was set up to stop a situation where the ball directly goes in off a players arm, or when it srikes an arm, and a player makes a conscious assist.

The VAR decision was harsh or wrong application of the handball rule.

So Oliver did not know about the rule and was passing judgement on the field.

Not surprised at the incompetence, that is what happens when corruption seeps deep into the whole system.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Even Duncan Castles thinks they were wrong to interpret the new handball rule in the way that they did.

F*ck me - Someone check on Dunc. I think he's delirious.

 

[Thaksinssoldier]

Every goal in every game this season has had a VAR review.

No it certainly hasn't, regardless of the claims.

The rags had a goal last week that was extremely close to offside. It may have been.

Not a single side on replay on broadcast, not a mention of a VAR review which absolutely should have happened.

But the rags and dippers deliberately don't have VAR screens in their shithole stadia and you have to ask why not?

To me it looks like the refs will not use it there now because the crowd have no access to what is being used in every other ground.

it's a bloody shambles.

 

[ctid1894]

I cannot recall an incorrect VAR decision that has gone against us.

Do you have a dog and a white stick?

 

[BlueCityfan]

People are going to have to deal with the fact that we are going to have a lot of VAR controversies this season.

We dominate, create and play on the edge all the time. We bombard the opposition with crosses and runs, like no other side does. We don't make moves and runs that you see coming a mile away.

Naturally, this means that we will have more VAR reviews and tight calls than any other side. It's not going to get better unless they change the system.

 

[cibaman]

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.

Yes they need to tweak the law so that there has to be a significant advantage following an accidental hand ball in the build up to a goal. A noticeable deviation of the path of the ball.

 

[Newman Noggs]

I know everything there is to know about VAR but what I can't, for the life of me, understand is why the Premier League didn't just negotiate a points deduction with the club at the start of the season.

Why have they initiated this charade and tried to hide behind technology when every neutral and their dog can see what's going on.

 

[Blue Mooner]

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

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
  • the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
  • the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

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)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

Could they make the handball rules any more complicated if they tried?

There are several things in the handball rules above that make me think Laportes handball, could and should not have been given.

I mean what type of rule is it that says it is 'usually' an offence, it either is or it isn't an offence surely!?

The only mention of 'accidental' hand ball is in the event of a player scoring directly with his hand?

The killer statement is the following

'Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm

if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger'

I cant find one element of the handball rules above that applies to Laporte. I am even more annoyed than I was yesterday.