Var debate 2019/20

[mikemcfc]

Going back to the Rodrigo incident:

Neil Swarbrick - the ex referee and now chief of VAR said:

“The arm was around the top of the body, yet Rodri fell forward. He didn’t fall backwards like he was pulled, he fell forward, so he felt contact, can he win the header? No he can’t, so he’s gone down looking for a penalty."

He's basically accused Rodrigo of cheating. Shouldn't he be forced to resign? How can he fall backwards without defying the laws of gravity?

stupid, even though his hand is over the shoulder there was never any momentum from the defender going backwards, his forearm is clearly pushing rodri forward as well as his left knee in back of rodri's leg.

 

[Marvin]

You have to take into account the distortion introduced on a 2D image when the camera is not in line with play. I don't think anyone can just look at that and say whether it is onside or not.

You need some kind of algorithm to adjust for the angle of view. I am sure that this is possible to do, but there's no indication that they are doing this. You can't just guess.

It's ridiculous that we are now into October and the science of the offside measurement is still unknown.

And even if they can measure it with a very small uncertainty budget, it's still a problem unless it's real time.

 

[caseball]

Oliver/Laporte - no, I don't think so.

Handball by an attacking player, offside and line calls are considered factual not subjective, and are all judged the same. They do no need to be 'clear and obvious'.

I think handball is defined as subjective in the text you quoted from the PL. The words are For subjective decisions such as a foul or a handball, VAR can be used to overturn if a “clear and obvious error” has been identified.

It doesn't mention different types of handball.

 

[caseball]

It seems fairly obvious that if someone as strong as professional footballer is pulling you backwards, you're pushing forward to get away from then, and then they release their grip the motion will carry you forward and not backwards. What sort or nonsense is this?

It's known as Salah's Second Law of Resistance. It's to do with the electrostatic force of repulsion that exists between shirts of different colours. Since both teams were wearing shades of blue, Swarbrick knows that the repulsive force from Lamela's shirt was not sufficient to knock over an adult male. If the light blue shirt had been red, then the force would have greater by two orders of magnitude and a penalty would have been the only possible outcome. Physical laws of Nature and what have you.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I think handball is defined as subjective in the text you quoted from the PL. The words are For subjective decisions such as a foul or a handball, VAR can be used to overturn if a “clear and obvious error” has been identified.

It doesn't mention different types of handball.

I think this is overruled by the laws now, rather than the VAR protocol which is what I copied from. I had seen that bit, and agree that it does look strange - I assume it may be talking defensive handballs.

The laws now say that any goal where the ball strikes a hand of an attacking player will be disallowed. There is no need for opinion as to whether it would count as 'handball', just that it hit a hand is enough.

 

[Paladin]

The laws now say that any goal where the ball strikes a hand of an attacking player will be disallowed. There is no need for opinion as to whether it would count as 'handball', just that it hit a hand is enough.

The law doesn't say this. IFAB has said that football does not want goals scored after the ball has touched the hands or arm of an attacking player. This is out of step with the law, and I expect them to change the law at its next iteration.

 

[Vic]

My mistake, it was Sokratis who was pulled.

I think his "PL guidance" is nonsense. I hope.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

The law doesn't say this. IFAB has said that football does not want goals scored after the ball has touched the hands or arm of an attacking player. This is out of step with the law, and I expect them to change the law at its next iteration.

I was paraphrasing obviously, or I'd have quoted it. Hackett of IFAB disagrees with you, and his explanation is how the laws are being reffed.

The current explanatory notes on this include this, which is wider than the law wording, and what is being reffed:
• football expects a player to be penalised for handball if they gain possession/control of the ball from their hand/arm and gain a major advantage e.g. score or create a goal-scoring opportunity

I think the significant part is the interpretation of the 'gains possession' line. Any strike on an attacker's hand/arm counts; it also makes sense to me that it encompasses the ball falling to any player on the attacking team once it's hit them, and not just the player struck. It was how the Wolves disallowed goal was reffed, and for Laporte (arguably a wide interpretation of creating a GSO). The Newcastle goal that was allowed was declared an error by Riley.

 

[aguero93:20]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...arent-friends-with-english-referees-2wqlg3nnt

 

[Rolee]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...arent-friends-with-english-referees-2wqlg3nnt

Has Alyson written about VAR this season prior to this article?