So let’s say the ball ricochets off Rashford to Bruno and he taps it in, the goal stands?
VAR and Refs | General Discussion | Forest go into meltdown
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
The most obvious handball ever, somehow missed by the ref, yet allowed by some insane technicality. Bizarre even now.
Lest we forget.
By the law, yes
It was an obvious hand ball by Rashford and the goal was rightly disallowed. The problem is as always, a complete lack of consistency in those decisions.
How stupid
It wasn’t allowed by a technicality. VAR got lost in the weeds about handball directly before a goal and forgot to check if it was just a normal handball.
The biggest issue I have with the handball rule is the inconsistency for defending v attacking. If you benefit from a handball, it should be a foul. Either way.
Standard PL extra time. It's a joke. I'd have been fuming if we were still chasing the game.
The handball rule is such BS. This crapology of it being a handball when it's an attacking player but not when it's a defending player is ridiculous. Either it's handball or it's not 
VAR got it right. The rule is garbage though.
English refs are saying feck you to the rules in the World Cup, they were giving more added time before the break.
Same, it's a joke, world cup got it much better
Weird how it was suddenly the standard there but hasn't been adopted worldwide. It wasn't just one ref doing it, it seemed to be a directive from the top.
It came from the fifa head of referees
I think it was a directive, but ironically i noticed the english refs didnt add as much time
typical.They should apply it worldwide, was so much better and will stop the shithouse anti-football teams from their BS antics.
Definitely. It would easily have been 10mins today if it was the world cup
Not if it goes off Rashford's arm, if a hand/arm is involved in a goal situation it won't stand.
Thats incorrect. If the goalscorer handles it even accidentally it doesn't stand, but an accidental handball in the buildup with a different goalscorer it stands.
See the Middlesbrough goal last season.
Stoppage time was a joke, but it all came from Wolves eating the clock and playing for 0-0 from the start. Good to see it go against the timewasters for a change.
Podence got 3 minutes of treatment for a tiny cut on his nose, whilst literally sitting on the touchline. Referee should've told them to move one yard over. Why shoud the game come to a halt just so 2 physios can put a plaster on a grown-man's face? The other lad got another 4 minutes of treatment on his knee, he hobbled to the touchline via a couple of pauses, then instantly sprinted back on. Miraculous. The Wolves magic sponge could cure cancer.
Podence got 3 minutes of treatment for a tiny cut on his nose, whilst literally sitting on the touchline. Referee should've told them to move one yard over. Why shoud the game come to a halt just so 2 physios can put a plaster on a grown-man's face? The other lad got another 4 minutes of treatment on his knee, he hobbled to the touchline via a couple of pauses, then instantly sprinted back on. Miraculous. The Wolves magic sponge could cure cancer.
If that happened while defending, the ref wouldn’t have given a penalty. I don’t understand the rule.
We all know the rule is moronic. The real question is why was this rule created? Was there some outrageous handball offense that wasn’t called a handball in real time that led to someone at UEFA deciding to take the determination of whether the handball was “deliberate” out of the analysis?
That's my bad for trusting commentators..
But that makes the rule even worse in my eyes, if United player A or United player B scores after a handball shouldn't be the factor that determines whether the goal should stand or not.
So it WAS therefore allowed by a technicality.
I guess the idea is to make handball rule simpler. If you have to judge whether it was a deliberate hand ball, or how close the ball was to the body, what angle it was etc. it will always be up to the refs how they interpret it and it will never be consistent. With the rule being "any contact with the hand is a handball", it should leave no room for interpretations and should make decisions consistent, in theory at least.
Regarding timekeeping, I reckon this can only be down to a Premier League directive for TV scheduling.
In normal circumstances you basically get an absolute maximum of 15 minutes across both half’s, usually more like 2+4.
A match is 90 minutes + half time + extra time so that rounds off to a convenient 2 hour maximum for a match.
12:30 - 14:30
30mins build up
15:00 - 17:00
30mins build up
17:30 - 19:30
30 mins build up
20:00 - 22:00
That’s the general schedule with Sunday running slightly offset.
If you change the extra time rules it makes scheduling harder as games begin to overlap with no time left for build up and the all important advert breaks.
In normal circumstances you basically get an absolute maximum of 15 minutes across both half’s, usually more like 2+4.
A match is 90 minutes + half time + extra time so that rounds off to a convenient 2 hour maximum for a match.
12:30 - 14:30
30mins build up
15:00 - 17:00
30mins build up
17:30 - 19:30
30 mins build up
20:00 - 22:00
That’s the general schedule with Sunday running slightly offset.
If you change the extra time rules it makes scheduling harder as games begin to overlap with no time left for build up and the all important advert breaks.
Added on time is even less for Champions League and Europa League games, which favours sh*t house time wasting teams such as Atletico Madrid. I've always thought that must be the myriad of European TV broadcasting deals that they have.
Probably the only one watching the Leeds/Newcastle game, but I have shocked by the ref, Simon Hooper. He is embarrassingly out of shape, walking/jogging everywhere and barely leaving midfield.
The handball rule is such BS. This crapology of it being a handball when it's an attacking player but not when it's a defending player is ridiculous. Either it's handball or it's not
Funny thing … remember Martinez’s penalty in the EL?
That is the theory, but if adopting this rule is sensible in a goal scoring situation why is it not sensible for every other situation?
One supposes the answer would be that strikers would start targeting a hand/arm to win a cheap pk when in fact the defender did nothing to gain an unfair advantage. But Rashford today did nothing to gain an unfair advantage.
The VAR referee can fairly easily discern whether Rashford did or did not deliberately use his hand to control or affect the path of the ball. If yes, no goal. If no, yes goal. There will be some tough calls, but this wasn’t a tough call.
I'm watching it, it's shocking he's reffing at this level but out of shape refs are a tradition in the PL by now.
There’s out of shape and then there is being pear shaped. His gut is hanging over and he has back boobs. That could all be forgiven if he could actually run. He’s been out of position so many times.
Newcastle losing their cool.
Someone explain to me how Haaland wasn't sent off?
Any video or gif of his foul?
@GifLord please help a brother. the foul on Mykolenko.
Thank you.
Thanks. Definitely a red card, people were arguing that he is a likeable player when he's a cnut just like his dad.