For FF and stats, sure. In the real world, nope. It's about creating a clear scoring opportunity as a direct result of the handball. An 80 yards hoof is hardly the same thing as a cut-back to an open teammate in the box.
Get rid of VAR NOW! We want our game back! (...or not, some are happy)
- Thread starter RedFish
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
It is the same thing when the rules only say ‘creating a goalscoring opportunity’. The rules don’t specify whether it’s a through ball, a cross or a hoof. A hoof that beats an entire team and creates a goalscoring opportunity still creates a goalscoring opportunity, even more than a through ball that releases a player on the wing who then passes it inside for a tap-in.
Imagine Evans’s hoof goes straight into the goal, what then? Does the goal not count as a goal? If it does, how has he not broken the rules according to how they’re written?
Your entire argument is that you can’t create a goalscoring chance with an 80 yard hoof, which is blatantly untrue, so your whole logic falls on that argument.
Even if it were true, would you say you can create a goalscoring opportunity from 70 yards? 60? 50? Where would you draw the line for when a goalscoring opportunity could be created?
I’d say the entire pitch is possible since the ball is hoofable for pretty much the entire length of the pitch and a pass from the corner flag could in one shot or pass lead to a goal being scored depending on circumstances.
I suggest you try to interpret the question according to how the laws of the game are written, flawed as they may be, instead of going with your feeling that “it shouldn’t be an offense!” as your only argument.
If the lawmakers don’t want that to be a penalty, they need to specify that in the laws of the game that a penalty cannot be given for such an offense but is penalised with an indirect free kick or something, but as they’re written right now it’s a definite penalty.
Last edited:
No, my argument is an 80 yard hoof would rarely generate a goalscoring opportunity. If the striker has to run 60 yards, beat a defender and the goalkeeper to the ball and then score, than the hoof hardly created the opportunity. The striker did
It's not impossible but sure it can happen. That would cause a weird situation in which the handball rule negates itself. Hence, i think it would result in a drop ball in midfield
Jesus got the ball and beat 2 or 3 men the other day but the goal was ruled out for handball from the assister.
I think you’re wrong, no matter what the striker does, how far the ball travels, whatever, who ever kicks the ball to the goal scorer is the assister.
An accurate 80 yard hoof much better fits the definition of creating an opportunity than the ball accidentally brushing off La Porte's arm en route to Jesus the other week.
How would an 80 yard hoof leave a player with 60 yards to run before scoring?
How big do you think a football pitch is? Maybe that’s where our communication is failing?
There's a good chance VAR would just ignore the handball anyway, like with the Newcastle goal which has generated a ridiculously low amount of discussion compared to the City disallowed goal.
Yeah weird how overlooked that's getting... pretty much confirms they're half making it up as they go along.
Look at how Aguero did it all by himself!
Yeah but that’s not an assist for the keeper. He’s kicked it 80 yards ffs
I know right!!! Aguero’s so amazing that the ball just fecking pops up at his feet right outside the box!
An accurate 80 yard pass and a hoof are different things though
And Laporte's handball was a textbook case of what the new rule was introduced for
Ok. Here’s another scenario. Ball touches laporte’s arm but falls to winks, who miscues it and it goes to Jesus, who scores.
Will that count?
I don’t know, ha. It probably wouldn’t count though as Laporte is now an attacker and he’s handballed it no matter Who it falls to.Ok. Here’s another scenario. Ball touches laporte’s arm but falls to winks, who miscues it and it goes to Jesus, who scores.
Will that count?
No wonder var is such a mess. No one even knows the rules anymore
Yes. The moment winks makes a deliberate play possession changes and the handball is wiped out. A more pertinent question would be if the ball hits laporte's arm than bounces off winks, than falls to jesus who scoresOk. Here’s another scenario. Ball touches laporte’s arm but falls to winks, who miscues it and it goes to Jesus, who scores.
Will that count?
In that scenario, i've honestly no idea. Would probably come off i guess
VAR: Four decisions fail to be overturned in Premier League this season
Absolute joke. Not a mention of the martial pen or rodri foul. Just giving themselves a pat on the back!!!
Absolute joke. Not a mention of the martial pen or rodri foul. Just giving themselves a pat on the back!!!
Christ if you tried bullshitting that much in the real world you would be taken to task and fired, I remember at least 4 in one weekend that was scandalous. He’s a smug twat Riley as well.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Handy guide for reference.
The arrogance of the Refs association is truly staggering. Only four? feck off.VAR: Four decisions fail to be overturned in Premier League this season
Absolute joke. Not a mention of the martial pen or rodri foul. Just giving themselves a pat on the back!!!
Pure clownfiesta, not surprising thoo, they protecting their own interests and arses, they would be fecked if you would introduce setup of unknown people to them in front of monitors. Only four mistakes...sure thing, great work incompetent pricks.
Maybe the ref was looking the other way for a photo and that's why the Martial incident was missed?
There is nothing wrong with VAR other than the misuse of it by the FA. It works fine in both Rugby codes, Cricket and Tennis. Why wouldn’t you want decisions to be correct?
In Rugby they have the linesmen or assistant Refs running the whole line which may be impractical for Soccer but they spot stuff and also the TV match official is watching various camera angles and highlighting to the Ref if an infringement has taken place. Those that say it slows the game down are talking bollocks. How long is wasted by players surrounding officials and arguing? Throw in take an age. Free kicks take over a minute or more pacing out ten metres and lining up the wall and the opposite will have a player two feet from the ball. Stop that to speed up the game. Done correctly, VAR works. Done the way the PL do it and it is causing too many issues.
In Rugby they have the linesmen or assistant Refs running the whole line which may be impractical for Soccer but they spot stuff and also the TV match official is watching various camera angles and highlighting to the Ref if an infringement has taken place. Those that say it slows the game down are talking bollocks. How long is wasted by players surrounding officials and arguing? Throw in take an age. Free kicks take over a minute or more pacing out ten metres and lining up the wall and the opposite will have a player two feet from the ball. Stop that to speed up the game. Done correctly, VAR works. Done the way the PL do it and it is causing too many issues.
As outrageous as this statement is, at least it's a start, admitting some sort of mistakes gives us hope they will try to improve the way it's being used.
Yep, just doesn't work in Englandia.
Why that handball of Stones not given ?
Scandalous
Scandalous
Would have been surprised if it was given.
There was an incident in the Liverpool game where the defender had his arms around Matips' neck at a corner, pulled him to ground and VAR did not give it. Would have made Smalling blush.
I agree with this:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Stupid that they don't overturn things like this but not surprising given the PL's set up.
Is the Premier League setting a higher bar than UEFA and FIFA in terms of overturning decisions? Or globally has the use of VAR been tempered back to really only allow absolute shockers to be overturned on the field? If it's the former, I imagine English clubs will struggle in Europe to adapt to different enforcement rules. i.e. you can get away with wrestling in the Premier League from a corner, but in Europe you will be punished. Same would then apply to international competition. I'm not clear if these guidelines are enforced everywhere now or not.
Perfect use of VAR in the Bayern Leipzeg match yesterday.
Penalty given to Bayern but VAR consulted the referee to relook at his decision and he decided it was too harsh and the challenge wasn't worth a penalty.
Overall it took 1 extra minute for the ref to make his decision after viewing it again. Perfectly reasonable and accurate use of the available technology.
Penalty given to Bayern but VAR consulted the referee to relook at his decision and he decided it was too harsh and the challenge wasn't worth a penalty.
Overall it took 1 extra minute for the ref to make his decision after viewing it again. Perfectly reasonable and accurate use of the available technology.
Yeah, I think I'm on the side that hates it. Like 10 mins of this Celta match has been the ref watching the screen to review potential red cards, which were both ultimately given.
The stops just annoy me. Really ruins the flow of the game.
The stops just annoy me. Really ruins the flow of the game.
Apologies as I have no links at the moment but I heard on a french football debate show that each time a referee goes to consult the VAR, he loses a point on his grade regarding the game in question. Also once he changes his initial decision after consulting the VAR (because it implies he fecked up in the first place), he loses additional points.
If he loses too many points, the ref is retrograded to lower leagues where his salary could be divide by as much as 2 times.
Make of that what you will but the whole thing is fecking crazy, no wonder referees don't wanna expose themselves, the whole thing is a direct hit to their pockets.
If he loses too many points, the ref is retrograded to lower leagues where his salary could be divide by as much as 2 times.
Make of that what you will but the whole thing is fecking crazy, no wonder referees don't wanna expose themselves, the whole thing is a direct hit to their pockets.
That's a fecked up practice. They should give points for making correct decisions.
dearie me, that's fabulous arse-covering & bullshit from the Officials Union or whatever they are
top work with the propaganda & re-writing history in particular
the not seeing stuff at all was to be expected I suppose
top work with the propaganda & re-writing history in particular
the not seeing stuff at all was to be expected I suppose
We need a Football Leak of the Referees Association, there would be insane stuff in it.
I'll throw this in. I'm not saying it's a great argument or anything.
The Liverpool penalty isn't a penalty (imo). But there is a camera angle where it looks like it is. The referee has given it wrong let's say but from where he is, it may look like one too.
Clear & obvious error because one angle says so or one angle says it might be a penalty or do you go with trusting multiple camera angles more than your match official on the pitch (problematic in a lot of ways I would have thought)
The Liverpool penalty isn't a penalty (imo). But there is a camera angle where it looks like it is. The referee has given it wrong let's say but from where he is, it may look like one too.
Clear & obvious error because one angle says so or one angle says it might be a penalty or do you go with trusting multiple camera angles more than your match official on the pitch (problematic in a lot of ways I would have thought)
Yet another disgusting decision.
Now it's just being used to back up incorrect calls by referees. They have no intention of turning those over, so why even look?
That's the question isn't it ? How much do they wanna extend the notion of "clear and obvious" ? This is all a joke. Better return to the normal if it's implemented like this.
Now it's just being used to back up incorrect calls by referees. They have no intention of turning those over, so why even look?
Yeah, priority is to protect the ref it seems like.