Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

Utd heap

Models for Coin.
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
21,246
Pre VAR = never a pen

VAR = assumed it would be given as a pen

It was by no stretch a 'stone waller' that seems a strange take to me.

But once three geezers in a van stop the game to look at it, bizarre that its not given.

My conclusion - we are talking about VAR being subjective again. Go away please.
 

The Purley King

Full Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
4,227

Here's Greenwood making contact with CHO before the ball gets there. Both of them have their arms up to ward off the other; it can thus be argued that CHO's arm is in an entirely natural position given the impending contact with Greenwood.

Greenwood makes contact with CHO's arm which makes contact with the ball. Before VAR, this wouldn't even be looked at twice. It's completely accidental, CHO gains no advantage as Greenwood controlled anyway, and there is no chance the incident impeded Greenwood's ability to shoot or cross or do anything dangerous.

I agree that a draw was fair enough. I don't agree this was a stonewall penalty.
Do you work for the iraqi PR team?
That image is proof that Greenwood pushed odoi? Really?
Must do better.
 

dwd

Saturday Night Spies
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
16,294
Location
Under soil heating.
The way round it is to take the ‘Assistant’ aspect out of VAR. Its decision should be final it proves the referee got it wrong.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
The way round it is to take the ‘Assistant’ aspect out of VAR. Its decision should be final it proves the referee got it wrong.
The way around it is to just get rid of slow mo replays and freeze framing. People want VAR to correct the egregious decisions that are clearly visible at normal speed, not whether someone's pubic hair was offside or not.
 

The Purley King

Full Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2014
Messages
4,227
Better than stating a "fact" and not actually providing any evidence! My whole point is that it's ambiguous and stating otherwise is silly.
The demonstrable fact is that Greenwood did not push odoi into the ball.
Is my last post on the topic it’s past my bedtime!
Prove me wrong by the morning and I’ll reply :)
 

dwd

Saturday Night Spies
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
16,294
Location
Under soil heating.
The way around it is to just get rid of slow mo replays and freeze framing. People want VAR to correct the egregious decisions that are clearly visible at normal speed, not whether someone's pubic hair was offside or not.
So you’re saying only decisions should be made at normal speed then? VAR would be barely useful in that case. Haven’t you literally posted a freeze frame above?
 
Last edited:

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
The demonstrable fact is that Greenwood did not push odoi into the ball.
Is my last post on the topic it’s past my bedtime!
Prove me wrong by the morning and I’ll reply :)
Who said anything about CHO the man? We're talking about his arm mate!

Both of them have their arms up and are warding off the other. Greenwood makes contact with the underside of CHO's arm. CHO's hand makes contact with the ball. I think these are facts that no one will dispute. I don't think Greenwood pushed the entirety of CHO causing him to flail and hit the ball with his arm; I think that their arms got tangled / involved, neither was particularly looking at the ball, and it grazed CHO's hand. For me, that's simply not worthy of a penalty, especially as Greenwood subsequently controlled the ball.

Kudos to you for a sensible bedtime; hope you have a great night mate. Appreciate the discussion / banter!
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
So you’re saying only decisions should be made at normal speed then? VAR would be barely useful in that case.
Yep. That's how I'd use VAR. Offsides where someone is blatantly a yard off; penalties where from a different angle it's obvious someone's been hacked down, etc. I want VAR to fix egregious errors, not to legislate tiny measurements that probably fall within the margin of error given the camera framerate anyways.
 

dwd

Saturday Night Spies
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
16,294
Location
Under soil heating.
Yep. That's how I'd use VAR. Offsides where someone is blatantly a yard off; penalties where from a different angle it's obvious someone's been hacked down, etc. I want VAR to fix egregious errors, not to legislate tiny measurements that probably fall within the margin of error given the camera framerate anyways.
You’ve posted a freeze frame to try to prove Greenwood pushed CHO though so I’m a bit confused on where you stand to be honest. They would still have to freeze the play to work out offside so what’s the error of margin then? Half a metre? One? The problem would still exist in your usage of it.
 

The Oracle

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,105
I think it's very telling when Gary Lineker states that it was a penalty, as did ex-referee Mark Clattenberg.
 

Maagge

enjoys sex, doesn't enjoy women not into ONS
Joined
Oct 9, 2011
Messages
11,929
Location
Denmark
Just get rid of VAR. If refs are going to insist on making bad calls then we may as well make it quicker.
:lol: The refs have well and truly shown they need help this season and a sensible solution now appears to be to take away that help. What a season this is.
 

Utd heap

Models for Coin.
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
21,246
:lol: The refs have well and truly shown they need help this season and a sensible solution now appears to be to take away that help. What a season this is.
Football coped ok for 100+ years in fairness mate.

For the first time in 20 years of attending football im considering if i want to go anymore.

Some bloke in a van can disallow a goal now.
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
11,532
:lol: The refs have well and truly shown they need help this season and a sensible solution now appears to be to take away that help. What a season this is.
I don’t thinking is helping them, it’s micro analysing in slow motion every decision they make, it’s a minefield at the moment, I don’t think football is meant for this freeze frame over analysing way of officiating.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
You’ve posted a freeze frame to try to prove Greenwood pushed CHO though so I’m a bit confused on where you stand to be honest.
Haha fair play you've got me there! I just find the notion that these incredibly fine margins are treated as definitive to be immensely tedious - re: the screenshot, I was being pedantic to prove a point that this situation isn't as unambiguous as others have portrayed.

I just find the lines and the absurd scrutiny on tiny snippets of time from a match to be fundamentally ludicrous and antithetical to the ethos of the sport, which should be about free-flowing creative expression and a subconscious understanding between everyone on the pitch. And that's notwithstanding the natural issues regarding framerate - VAR cameras shoot at 50 frames per second, so assuming a speed of 7 meters per second (aka 25 km/hr, and for scale the fastest players are clocked around 35 km/hr) that means there is a margin of error of 14 centimeters for every VAR freeze frame. It's ridiculous that it's viewed as authoritative in this context.
 

Utd heap

Models for Coin.
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
21,246
Haha fair play you've got me there! I just find the notion that these incredibly fine margins are treated as definitive to be immensely tedious - re: the screenshot, I was being pedantic to prove a point that this situation isn't as unambiguous as others have portrayed.

I just find the lines and the absurd scrutiny on tiny snippets of time from a match to be fundamentally ludicrous and antithetical to the ethos of the sport, which should be about free-flowing creative expression and a subconscious understanding between everyone on the pitch. And that's notwithstanding the natural issues regarding framerate - VAR cameras shoot at 50 frames per second, so assuming a speed of 7 meters per second (aka 25 km/hr, and for scale the fastest players are clocked around 35 km/hr) that means there is a margin of error of 14 centimeters for every VAR freeze frame. It's ridiculous that it's viewed as authoritative in this context.
Right it's definetly time for bed
 

dwd

Saturday Night Spies
Joined
Jan 16, 2012
Messages
16,294
Location
Under soil heating.
Haha fair play you've got me there! I just find the notion that these incredibly fine margins are treated as definitive to be immensely tedious - re: the screenshot, I was being pedantic to prove a point that this situation isn't as unambiguous as others have portrayed.

I just find the lines and the absurd scrutiny on tiny snippets of time from a match to be fundamentally ludicrous and antithetical to the ethos of the sport, which should be about free-flowing creative expression and a subconscious understanding between everyone on the pitch. And that's notwithstanding the natural issues regarding framerate - VAR cameras shoot at 50 frames per second, so assuming a speed of 7 meters per second (aka 25 km/hr, and for scale the fastest players are clocked around 35 km/hr) that means there is a margin of error of 14 centimeters for every VAR freeze frame. It's ridiculous that it's viewed as authoritative in this context.
The way I see it if you use video replays it has to be accurate and consistent or just don’t use it at all. I actually prefer it without to be honest but it’s the inconsistency that pisses me off more than anything, that and the fact it’s ruined celebrating the main aim of the sport.
 

ManUnitedCanuck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
2,295
Yes but if that's to block a cross or a shot then that's much more valid in my opinion. This was two players moving away from goal trying to control the ball, and the player who handballed it didn't even emerge from the challenge with possession - I just can't really see how anyone can argue that there was a major advantage gained by CHO's actions, even if you think they were deliberate.

Again, I understand that this isn't the law as written but I do think this is how referees interpret it.
But that’s exactly the point it doesn’t matter at all, there is no validating. It’s a handball or not.

Just like fouls in the far corner of the box where there is no scoring opp. It’s a pen
 

Maagge

enjoys sex, doesn't enjoy women not into ONS
Joined
Oct 9, 2011
Messages
11,929
Location
Denmark
Football coped ok for 100+ years in fairness mate.

For the first time in 20 years of attending football im considering if i want to go anymore.

Some bloke in a van can disallow a goal now.
I don’t thinking is helping them, it’s micro analysing in slow motion every decision they make, it’s a minefield at the moment, I don’t think football is meant for this freeze frame over analysing way of officiating.
I get your points it's just funny to think that we've witnessed truly awful refereeing this year even with the extra help from VAR. Yet we're at a point where it might be best to just go back to the shit referees on their own. I don't know where I stand on the whole thing, it's just been a shambles.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
But that’s exactly the point it doesn’t matter at all, there is no validating. It’s a handball or not.

Just like fouls in the far corner of the box where there is no scoring opp. It’s a pen
But that's not correct - it's not a handball if the ball hits your hand and you don't have a chance to move it out of the way. The law as written is ambiguous - it has consistently been interpreted as being a handball if the defender gains an advantage. I'm not arguing that the law shouldn't be clarified and made explicit one way or another; my point is it seems very much antithetical to the spirit of the law to argue that this is a stonewall penalty when afterwards Greenwood controlled the ball anyhow.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
The way I see it if you use video replays it has to be accurate and consistent or just don’t use it at all. I actually prefer it without to be honest but it’s the inconsistency that pisses me off more than anything, that and the fact it’s ruined celebrating the main aim of the sport.
I can appreciate that perspective and I don't think we are miles apart in our preferences. This is why I would only want VAR to be used in cases where there's something egregiously wrong - I don't think every goal should ben scrutinised to the extent that it is now. Have another ref watching at normal speed - if he sees something he thinks might be off he can flag it if he watches replays at normal speed and still thinks so. Otherwise, let the game play out, allow linesmen to make calls in normal time the way they always have, and stop the tedium of lines being drawn and everything being endlessly legislated.
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,806
For the 5th time on this thread, I understand that that is the case. Did you even read the post you quoted? I didn't say that it was a requirement, I said that that's how it's been interpreted more or less since the law has been in effect. I genuinely don't understand how this is even up for debate at this point.
Of course, you made up some non-existent idea that referees only give handball if a player gets an advantage. They don’t and never have. It’s a complete nonsense. Handball is, in my view, found too frequently nowadays but today’s was a clear example of one which should be given. He’s looking straight at the ball and basically punches it.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Of course, you made up some non-existent idea that referees only give handball if a player gets an advantage. They don’t and never have. It’s a complete nonsense. Handball is, in my view, found too frequently nowadays but today’s was a clear example of one which should be given. He’s looking straight at the ball and basically punches it.
Of course it's not a non-existent idea. Where do you think the whole notion of a player making themselves bigger comes from? It's because that gives an unfair advantage. And punches it? It grazed his hand and fell to Greenwood anyway. By that standard Greenwood assaulted CHO's arm with his.

Like it or not, that's consistently been the way the law has been interpreted for decades. VAR is melting your brain; five years ago you'd be laughed out of the room for suggesting that's a handball.
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,806
It’s nothing to do with VAR. You just don’t understand the handball law. You appear to be genuinely saying that if a player punches the ball straight to an opponent then it’s not a handball because they haven’t gained an advantage. It’s a complete misunderstanding of the law and it has never been interpreted in that way. As I said above, this type of incident (if spotted) has always been a penalty. I can only presume that the referee has wrongly taken the view that Greenwood handled it first, as that’s the only plausible reason for the decision today.

edit - as mentioned above, this is much more a penalty than the Pogba one versus Liverpool from 3-4 years ago, when he got himself in a mess and ended up handling it when he was trying to head it. So far as I can recall, there was a unanimous view that was a penalty, even though it was clearly an accident. This incident today is absolutely clear cut - it’s a penalty. It’s absolute madness that anyone is even debating this one.
 
Last edited:

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
It’s nothing to do with VAR. You just don’t understand the handball law. You appear to be genuinely saying that if a player punches the ball straight to an opponent then it’s not a handball because they haven’t gained an advantage. It’s a complete misunderstanding of the law and it has never been interpreted in that way. As I said above, this type of incident (if spotted) has always been a penalty. I can only presume that the referee has wrongly taken the view that Greenwood handled it first, as that’s the only plausible reason for the decision today.

edit - as mentioned above, this is much more a penalty than the Pogba one versus Liverpool from 3-4 years ago, when he got himself in a mess and ended up handling it when he was trying to head it. So far as I can recall, there was a unanimous view that was a penalty, even though it was clearly an accident. This incident today is absolutely clear cut - it’s a penalty. It’s absolute madness that anyone is even debating this one.
So you're so far down the rabbit hole that you are assuming the referee can't see? Do you think your television broadcast had more angles than the ref saw and that you're somehow better informed? :lol:

Of course I understand the handball law. I understand that it leaves ample room for interpretation. I also understand the way that it's been interpreted historically, which seems to be escaping you at the moment.

The Pogba one is completely different - his handball takes it off the head of the Liverpool attacker. It's not a comparable situation in the slightest as again, Pogba has gained a significant advantage in denying the shooting opportunity with his hands. This is the way the law has always been interpreted - if the defender gains an advantage over the attacker due to an infringement, it's a penalty. For the umpteenth time, I know that this isn't the letter of the law but it's the spirit of it and it's always been the way it's been interpreted until VAR came along and mucked it all up.
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,806
It’s the argument your own manager seems to have gone with and, in the absence of any other plausible explanation, seems the most likely reason for the error. Tuchel hasn’t gone down the route of trying to argue that whether an advantage was gained is relevant which is, of course, because where the ball ended up is irrelevant to the question of whether or not he handballed it.

I never understand why fans try to argue against clear penalties against their team but I’ll give you credit for coming up with a completely new test for handball. Kudos!
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
It’s the argument your own manager seems to have gone with and, in the absence of any other plausible explanation, seems the most likely reason for the error. Tuchel hasn’t gone down the route of trying to argue that whether an advantage was gained is relevant which is, of course, because where the ball ended up is irrelevant to the question of whether or not he handballed it.

I never understand why fans try to argue against clear penalties against their team but I’ll give you credit for coming up with a completely new test for handball. Kudos!
The fact that you think it's new speaks volumes! And just a word to the wise going forward, post-match interviews with managers are hardly the place for objective analysis.
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,806
Please find any handball decision where the explanation given has ever relied upon whether an advantage is being obtained and come back to me. Even better, find someone other than you who is arguing that the reason it wasn’t a penalty today was because no advantage was obtained. Good luck!

Oh, and for the record, you seem to have missed the relevance of Tuchel’s comments. There’s no way he genuinely believed that Greenwood had handballed it first after the match - someone would have been bound to tell him that was wrong. He obviously didn’t want to concede it was a clear penalty and presumably couldn’t think of any other reason for the referee’s error.
 
Last edited:

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
6,502
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Please find any handball decision where the explanation given has ever relied upon whether an advantage is being obtained and come back to me. Even better, find someone other than you who is arguing that the reason it wasn’t a penalty today was because no advantage was obtained. Good luck!
Please find any refereeing decision that was actually explained adequately! You're asking me to chase a dragon that doesn't exist.
 

ManUnitedCanuck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
2,295
But that's not correct - it's not a handball if the ball hits your hand and you don't have a chance to move it out of the way. The law as written is ambiguous - it has consistently been interpreted as being a handball if the defender gains an advantage. I'm not arguing that the law shouldn't be clarified and made explicit one way or another; my point is it seems very much antithetical to the spirit of the law to argue that this is a stonewall penalty when afterwards Greenwood controlled the ball anyhow.
We will just have to disagree on this one...having an advantage has nothing to do with a handball
 

Doracle

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
2,806
Please find any refereeing decision that was actually explained adequately! You're asking me to chase a dragon that doesn't exist.
Of course I am asking you to chase a dragon that doesn’t exist. We just disagree on the reason why that is! :-)

It will be interesting to see how handball decisions go for the rest of the season. The one today involved a player punching the ball, whilst looking straight at it and with no deflection or argument that it was hit too hard for him to react. If that’s no longer to be considered a deliberate handball, we won’t see many more this season.
 

ManUnitedCanuck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
2,295
But that's not correct - it's not a handball if the ball hits your hand and you don't have a chance to move it out of the way. The law as written is ambiguous - it has consistently been interpreted as being a handball if the defender gains an advantage. I'm not arguing that the law shouldn't be clarified and made explicit one way or another; my point is it seems very much antithetical to the spirit of the law to argue that this is a stonewall penalty when afterwards Greenwood controlled the ball anyhow.
Think of when a player loses the ballbut gets fouled and gets a pen. They would have never got a shot off but still pen. Most recent I can think of is Gundogan, miscontrols ball out of plat fouls other player first, gets a pen. What advantage was taken for that interpretation?
 

Zen86

Full Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
13,871
Location
Sunny Manc
:lol: The refs have well and truly shown they need help this season and a sensible solution now appears to be to take away that help. What a season this is.
Mistakes like yesterday are a lot easier to rationalise when they’re spur of the moment decisions made in real-time. It’s a harder pill to swallow when the ref can stare at replays on a screen for 2 minutes and still arrive at an incorrect and inconsistent conclusion.
 

pratyush_utd

Can't tell DeGea and Onana apart.
Joined
Aug 30, 2017
Messages
8,421
If that isn't handball then I expect no handball penalty from VAR.
 

Gio

★★★★★★★★
Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
20,300
Location
Bonnie Scotland
Supports
Rangers
Of course, you made up some non-existent idea that referees only give handball if a player gets an advantage. They don’t and never have. It’s a complete nonsense. Handball is, in my view, found too frequently nowadays but today’s was a clear example of one which should be given. He’s looking straight at the ball and basically punches it.
The old handball law was written that all handballs must be deliberate. However, referees always interpreted it with a degree of common sense where they factored in intent and the advantage gained. Where the advantage gained was so significant from a non-deliberate handball they typically awarded a penalty. Or, to put it another way, not all handballs given as penalties were deliberate. That was how referees embraced the spirit of the law.
 

UncleBob

New Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
6,330
But that's not correct - it's not a handball if the ball hits your hand and you don't have a chance to move it out of the way. The law as written is ambiguous - it has consistently been interpreted as being a handball if the defender gains an advantage. I'm not arguing that the law shouldn't be clarified and made explicit one way or another; my point is it seems very much antithetical to the spirit of the law to argue that this is a stonewall penalty when afterwards Greenwood controlled the ball anyhow.
Depends on the position of the arm, obviously.

The rule is what the rule is.
 

Berbasbullet

Too Boring For A Funny Tagline
Joined
Nov 3, 2011
Messages
20,031
In what universe didn’t CHO have the chance to move his hand out the way? :lol: