No, Im saying when there is contact AFTER the ball was released and didn’t impact the action whatsoever.So there was contact and the player was impeded and fouled in other words?
No, Im saying when there is contact AFTER the ball was released and didn’t impact the action whatsoever.
I’m not sure why you’re willing to die on this hill when other posters pointed that these pens are often given when the player goes down, which Mainoo could have easily done if he didn’t jump to avoid the keeper
You said those are never pens, and I argue that oftentime, they are given as pens when the player goes down when the contact occurs even after he released the ball and contact has no impact on the rest of the sequenceI'm not really sure what hill you think I'm dying on but we seem to be arguing at cross purposes.
The suggestion initially was that a penalty should have been given. I disagreed with that contention.
You said those are never pens, and I argue that oftentime, they are given as pens when the player goes down when the contact occurs even after he released the ball and contact has no impact on the rest of the sequence
Have we? I'm not sure about that.
From memory when people penalties are given in those instances the ball is still there to be won and/or the player hasn't been able to pass or shoot. Either that or the attacker is absolutely smashed by the keeper.
There’s never been any requirement for the attacker to be smashed. Just takes the faintest contact (and an attacker who cynically makes the most of it) for a penalty to be awarded. This happens all the time. If Kobbie had decided to nick the ball past Kelleher and go down like a sack of shit, instead of passing the ball and trying to stay on his feet then it’s a nailed on pen. Basically the way VAR is being implemented is rewarding the same dishonesty that we always assumed would only work without video referees to expose the cheats.
I don't think the PL has sort the handball out. More likely they have turned the dial all the way to the other end. I doubt there's a golden rule to be found though since it's the most subjective of calls that involves the highest penalty for the offender. No two people involved in an incident will ever agree and the one on the receiving end will always feel aggrieved.
Fine by me - Honestly, unless someone is doing a star-jump it shouldn't be handball.
People were up in arms about the Everton/West Ham one from the other day and I was just thinking... people really want a handball for that?
Interesting angle of the overturned penalty yesterday.
Yep best angle I've seen, the ones they showed last night made it seem like there was stronger contact. You could argue it doesn't meet the clear and obvious threshold but the correct decision was got to eventually.Interesting angle of the overturned penalty yesterday.
Yeah that’s my view as well: Star jump or a failure to take the arm out of the way with sufficient time to do so should be the circumstances in which penalties are given for making the body bigger. Anything less - no penalty. If it deflects off another body part - quite clearly no penalty.Fine by me - Honestly, unless someone is doing a star-jump it shouldn't be handball.
People were up in arms about the Everton/West Ham one from the other day and I was just thinking... people really want a handball for that?
Agreed on both counts.Two things from last night (and the night before)
- The handball in Europe is a total joke. We've actually sort of got it right in this country (somehow) and you don't see ridiculous pens given for those non-handballs. UEFA need to sort it out ASAP because teams should not be winning big games of football based on ridiculous handball calls.
- the non-penalty for Arsenal goes against how VAR is meant to be used, but to me illustrates exactly how it should be used. There is minimal contact, so by that bar VAR - in theory - shouldn't intervene, however it is clearly not a penalty, and not enough contact to warrant a foul... and if VAR was used in this way, if it was just the official thinking "Yeah I don't think that's a foul" instead of trying to work within some ridiculous "clear & obvious" framework, then VAR/officiating would undoubtely be better off (especially as it would give agency to the on-pitch official during a review)
Neither of the ones this week were real penalties. Most of the handball penalties arent in general. We are left to argue what is within the (new) rules and how to interpret, but the rules and what they are based on themselves are horrid.I don't think any of the CL pens for handball were pens this week. I would compare them to the Licha hairpull red, pens on technicalities, grossly disproportionate to the actual offense.
There needs to be discussions about downgrading some of these to indirect free kicks, balls bouncing off a knee to a hand from a shot from 3 yards away should never be a pen. We don't want defenders doing the John Terry, closing shots down with hands out to the sides keeper style, but it can't be this harsh.
Espn is trash. Honestly, last night i thought we got robbed, but i think the right decision was achieved in the end.Arsenal robbed of the 2nd penalty according to ESPNs ref. Always the same, we have to put up with all the game slowing down and ruined goals and they still make mistakes as well!
https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_...enal-gotten-second-penalty-vs-atletico-madrid
Same reason as why the commentators were moaning about Simeone’s antics on the touchline as if Arteta isn’t doing the same thing week in, week out and nobody mentions it.Cannot believe the media pushback over what was an extremely obvious dive by Eze
Not sure I understand where we are on handball in the box....and I still dont know why we dont go back to having an indirect freekick option. That ball comes off White's shin before hitting his hand. I have seen a bunch of these called off on VAR....and now the reverse happened. Are the rules different in European play? It looks to me like they are, and perhaps FIFA needs to step in and confirm what the rule should be. I have never seen the handball decisions being as erratic as they are now.
Very lucky not to have been sent off.
Still worrying reading despite reaching that decision -
However, while the panel believed referee Anthony Taylor should have dismissed the Brazil international, it also felt the incident did not reach the threshold for a video assistant referee (VAR) intervention.
Most panellists disagreed with the yellow card shown by Taylor, voting 3:2 that "the extra head movement forward from Gabriel" should be seen as violent conduct.
The other two panellists argued "there is little force or initial backwards movement from Gabriel."
The panel voted 4:1 against a VAR intervention.
Incredible. Hadn't read the full article. Fully clueless. It's somewhat pathetic to continue to compare to incidents going against United, but the fact that the Martinez hair pull was deemed significant enough for VAR intervention, while this was not, is just fecking bonkers.Still worrying reading despite reaching that decision -
Still worrying reading despite reaching that decision -
This:
"However, while the panel believed referee Anthony Taylor should have dismissed the Brazil international, it also felt the incident did not reach the threshold for a video assistant referee (VAR) intervention"
Entirely sums up what is wrong with VAR.
Ran by idiots, policed by idiots.
So what if he 'slipped'. Even without the slip he's mistimed the tackle and absolutely nowhere near the ball.
Honestly, refereeing and VAR this season...
I am sorry but that's absolutely stonewall.Never a penalty, he's not even attempting a tackle.
Maybe they should have a look at the Taty tackle in the corner and ask why he wasn't sent off.
Never a penalty, he's not even attempting a tackle.
Maybe they should have a look at the Taty tackle in the corner and ask why he wasn't sent off.
