Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
22,547
Playing the ball isn't in the rules with regards to a foul, and it's a made up thing.

The definition of a foul is based on whether or not you make contact with another player. You can't kick someone full pelt in the shin and say "well it skimmed the ball?"
Not every contact is a foul either though. It can still be a foul even if you play the ball first but that does still play into how they assess the tackle. As does the force of the contact, which was fairly minimal in this case.
 

Pink Moon

Full Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
7,363
Location
Glasgow
Supports
Celtic
Playing the ball isn't in the rules with regards to a foul, and it's a made up thing.

The definition of a foul is based on whether or not you make contact with another player. You can't kick someone full pelt in the shin and say "well it skimmed the ball?"
He doesn't even play the ball anyway. It's a nonsense argument.
 

Eli Zee

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
514
I just hate the fact that he kicked his right shin, and somehow the guys left shin goes flying back and he falls forward..... stop over selling fouls. It's extremely annoying.
 

cjj

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2017
Messages
433
Supports
Spurs
I think you've made that first bit up. If any challenge that had any "contact" with another player was given as a foul we'd barely have 20secs of play with out a whistle.

The actual rule is about "excessive force".
Still no. This is the internet, so it's not too difficult to fact check your own words:

https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

Direct free kick

A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

  • charges
  • jumps at
  • kicks or attempts to kick
  • pushes
  • strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
  • tackles or challenges
  • trips or attempts to trip
 
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
7,295
Is there a single non United fan that thinks that wasn’t a pen?

I know it’s difficult when looking at your own team, and not being biased. But everything I’ve seen shows that’s a pen. We’ve got lucky tonight.
 

#07

makes new threads with tweets in the OP
Joined
Oct 25, 2010
Messages
18,496
BT sports stirring up 'controversy' over the West Brom penalty shout. Fernandes wins the ball, nutmegs the West Brom player and then after the meg their legs come together. Its not a penalty.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
27,531
Is there a single non United fan that thinks that wasn’t a pen?

I know it’s difficult when looking at your own team, and not being biased. But everything I’ve seen shows that’s a pen. We’ve got lucky tonight.
Yea, he got the ball first then kicked through.

hardly any contact but clearly touched the ball first. Football is a contact game and not every touch is a foul.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
39,471
Location
W.Yorks
I'm both don't think it was a penalty but absolutely amazed /baffled that it got overturned.
 

cjj

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2017
Messages
433
Supports
Spurs
Where's the bit about any "contact" in a challenge being a foul like you said?!

Instead you've quoted what I said to you about excessive force.
No, I've emphasised the bit about 'careless, reckless'. You said "The actual rule is about 'excessive force'", when it isn't.

Everything in the list that defines a foul is 'contact with a player'. There is absolutely no reference at all to the ball.
 

NinjaFletch

Full Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
18,775
Playing the ball isn't in the rules with regards to a foul, and it's a made up thing.

The definition of a foul is based on whether or not you make contact with another player. You can't kick someone full pelt in the shin and say "well it skimmed the ball?"
Where do people get some of these things from? :lol:

What you mean is that winning the ball doesn't always mean it is not a foul, that's a very different thing from arguing that winning the ball is irrelevant.

In this case, it's absolutely essential as there is no argument whatsoever that Bruno's tackle was dangerous enough to be a foul even if he got the ball. I am however not convinced he did get it, or that he got it obviously enough to overturn the onfield decision.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
32,749
Is there a single non United fan that thinks that wasn’t a pen?

I know it’s difficult when looking at your own team, and not being biased. But everything I’ve seen shows that’s a pen. We’ve got lucky tonight.
The ref and the VAR team? :wenger:
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
1,994
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Is there a single non United fan that thinks that wasn’t a pen?

I know it’s difficult when looking at your own team, and not being biased. But everything I’ve seen shows that’s a pen. We’ve got lucky tonight.
Not trying to WUM but I genuinely am baffled by that decision. No idea how the replays can show that it was a clear and obvious error in need of overturning.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
32,749
No, I've emphasised the bit about 'careless, reckless'. You said "The actual rule is about 'excessive force'", when it isn't.

Everything in the list that defines a foul is 'contact with a player'. There is absolutely no reference at all to the ball.
It is part of it. It's in the line you quoted above!

You've asserted that contact makes something a foul. It doesn't unless it has other caveats.

Now try and enjoy a win. They haven't been that plentiful for goodness sake!

Why aren't you on the thread arguing about why Martial didn't get a pen?
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
32,749
Where do people get some of these things from? :lol:

What you mean is that winning the ball doesn't always mean it is not a foul, that's a very different thing from arguing that winning the ball is irrelevant.

In this case, it's absolutely essential as there is no argument whatsoever that Bruno's tackle was dangerous enough to be a foul even if he got the ball. I am however not convinced he did get it, or that he got it obviously enough to overturn the onfield decision.
The guy is trying to argue with me saying that "contact" makes something a foul. :lol:
 

cjj

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2017
Messages
433
Supports
Spurs
Where do people get some of these things from? :lol:

What you mean is that winning the ball doesn't always mean it is not a foul, that's a very different thing from arguing that winning the ball is irrelevant.

In this case, it's absolutely essential as there is no argument whatsoever that Bruno's tackle was dangerous enough to be a foul even if he got the ball. I am however not convinced he did get it, or that he got it obviously enough to overturn the onfield decision.
The rules. Should I be seriously concerned about the way people's logic works on here?

Here are the rules: https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct
  • A foul is 100% in context of 'contact with the player'. No mention at all to do with the ball
  • Winning the ball is irrelevant, as it is literally not relevant. It's not even mentioned.
  • You and others are talking about 'dangerous' when that also is irrelevant. The terms are 'careless, reckless or excessive'
It's there in black and white, if one can read.
 
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
7,295
Not trying to WUM but I genuinely am baffled by that decision. No idea how the replays can show that it was a clear and obvious error in need of overturning.
I think the ref was influenced by the fact that VAR asked him to review, and so he doubted himself. At the very best, it’s subjective, in my opinion blatant, so having given it, there’s no way he should be overturning it.
 

edgecutter

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2014
Messages
1,206
I always tend to think about if the decision was for us and I would be fecking fuming if that pen was overturned for us. We got away with one today.
 

prateik

Full Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2005
Messages
37,205

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
32,749
I'm both don't think it was a penalty but absolutely amazed /baffled that it got overturned.
When you've been as crap as we have for a lot of this season just take the win mate!

But this forum is so classic isn't it.
No one's even referencing the Martial pull back that could easily have been a pen.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
1,994
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
I think the ref was influenced by the fact that VAR asked him to review, and so he doubted himself. At the very best, it’s subjective, in my opinion blatant, so having given it, there’s no way he should be overturning it.
That's my position. If he hadn't given it initially and then reviewed it, I don't think anyone would be up in arms saying he'd made a colossal error had he stuck to his guns. I just don't see the "clear and obvious" evidence to overturn it.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
32,749
Yea, he got the ball first then kicked through.

hardly any contact but clearly touched the ball first. Football is a contact game and not every touch is a foul.
Yep. I thought he'd touched it as well.

The one in the Villa game was a bit more straight forward but that was another slight touch then crunching the man.
 

1nil

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 2, 2020
Messages
24
It was not a penalty. Watch the trajectory of the ball when it drops down.
 

Jeppers7

Full Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
2,081
Was no more of a penalty than the one on Martial....in fact it was less because Bruno actually looked like he touched the ball. I wouldn’t be against both being given.
 

Bobski

Full Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2017
Messages
3,958
I think all the decisions made today(Utd game) with the aid of VAR were correct by current laws. However 6 secs before the WBA pen Maguire pulls a man back straight through on goal, why does that not get looked at, or the possible foul before the Utd pen?

Handball was the correct decision as it is called now, but I still hate it, incidental contact with no intent at all from the defender. That might not matter in the laws but as a defender myself I think it is so incredibly harsh, the punishment of a near certain goal is too much for the offense. Pre VAR there was an understood grey area in the game where fouls in the box had to be a higher grade than outside, most people instinctively understood it.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
6,603
Location
Blitztown
VAR is excellent if used correctly. The PL just decided to completely feck it up and make a complete joke out of it.
It’s going horrifically wrong and is making the sport worse.

Anyone denying that has some serious issues.

I support the use of technology in sport. But I’m not going to endorse the implementation. Not even a little bit. To do so would be silly.

Hence the Trump comparison. It’s Brexit-esque.

Nobody would have voted for this shit. Promised one thing. Given a non functioning backwards step of a system instead.
 

OnlyTwoDaSilvas

Gullible
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
18,547
Location
The Mathews Bridge
All big decisions correct for me. Their overturned penalty was simulation. Bruno nicks the ball, there's minimal contact afterwards and the lad flops. There's certainly no "full pelt" kick. It looks even worse in slowmotion as you can see the delay between the challenge and the reaction. I wouldn't have been surprised if the referee stuck with his initial decision, but I think it would've been wrong. The one on Martial was similar, he feels something and reacts rather than him actually being fouled. Also not a penalty.

Definite handball by West Brom, he moves his hand upwards towards the ball. Its handball under the older rules, nevermind the new stricter rules.

Retake was justified. He lunged a yard off his line.


Luck was on our side, but we hardly robbed them.
 

TheMagicFoolBus

Full Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2016
Messages
1,994
Location
Lisboa, Portugal
Supports
Chelsea
Looked a clear foul from Bruno. Ref got our pen scenario spot on though.
Yeah agree with this. With the new laws it's handball, and the keeper was clearly off his line. I just disagree with overturning the WBA penalty, especially as the standard is supposed to be "a clear and obvious" error. I find it befuddling that anyone could look at that situation and decide that there's clearly and obviously not a foul - obviously Bruno gets a slight touch on the ball, but he gets a far bigger touch on Gallagher's shinpad.
 

Phil

Full Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2003
Messages
10,470
I like to think I'm very subjective about incidents against our team, but I just can't see how people think this one was a foul. It could be that I'm absolutely blind but I see slight contact with the ball followed by slight contact with his shin and his other leg going flying.

The shirt pull on Martial Looked much more like a pen, but I still didn't think that one was either.
 

elnorte

Freaky fly day
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
4,160
Is there a single non United fan that thinks that wasn’t a pen?

I know it’s difficult when looking at your own team, and not being biased. But everything I’ve seen shows that’s a pen. We’ve got lucky tonight.
It's excruciating to read.

These post match posts are as dire as that performance.