Yeah if he didn't air swing at the ball, which neither he nor the defender were getting to, the goal would have stood. That's farcical imo.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion | May 15: Premier League clubs to vote on proposal to scrap VAR from next season
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
I haven't seen the incident but if his back was to the play then presumably it would be deemed accidental handball.
Accidental handball by an attacking player is only a handball offence if that attacking player scores directly from that incident, so that wouldn't be handball under the current rules.
It’s just about as farcial as not being allowed to pick up the ball with your hands for a quick throw in before it rolls over the line evne though it’s obviously going to go out for a throw in if you don’t pick it up.
It’s easy: An offside placed Maguire was actively competing with the Fulham player for the ball, and by doing so he effected the Fulham players chances of clearing it. Would it have made much of a difference if Maguire was a few more cm behind and onside? Probably not, but that’s besides the point.
What is farcial, however, is the difference in VAR outcome for Newcastles goal against Arsenal. Does the ball cross over the line? VAR has no angle to prove that the on pitch decision (flag stays down) is wrong so they don’t intervene, but it’s pretty much an exact replica of Rashfords pass to Højlund where the VAR, with no proper angles, decides the ball has rolled over the line. That is farcial.
Not to mention that Joelintons push on Gabriel should be a freekick 10 out of 10 times. Joelinton mistimes the header and is on his way down, with both arms stretched out into Gabriels back, when the ball comes in and hits him in his chest. It’s madness that it’s allowed
It’s not farcical. Maguire was involved in active play hence the offsides. Had he not been involved in active play (I.e. remained stationary due to being in an offside position), the defender would have covered Garnacho and may have prevented the cross or at least the goal.
My point is that likely isn't given if he makes the run but doesn't throw his leg at it. They said it was a subjective call. Once it's subjective they shouldn't rule goals out imo.
I'm not sure what Arsenal are expecting. People have been moaning about the referees for decades.
The “subjective” meant it wasn’t a matter of drawing lines. It was whether or not Maguire became involved in active play. The referee decided he was.
But he didn't. If Maguire's not there the ball still goes to Garnacho...
According to the new laws of the game, your hands have to be in a natural position to be deemed accidental. A natural position means by your side. His arms were out. That is deemed an intentional hand ball according to the new laws of the game
[/QUOTE]
One, the ball was out. 2 there was a foul. 3 it may have even been offside. I haven't seen the right angle of that though, but there is clearly only 1 defender when Joelinten "wins" the ball to Gordon. The keeper was ahead of the them making it a possible (unconfirmed) offside
This innocuous part of shoving someone with 2 hands on his lower neck.
The more you look at it the more laughable it gets
I've watched it back and he's jumped for the ball and then his arms come back up after he's landed to steady himself. Then VVD heads it into his hand from behind him at close range. You can't seriously be advocating for incidents like that to be given as handball. Objectively speaking it would harsh as feck. Would you want that given against us?
Well if he does that then you can't complain about Klopp or Arteta then, that would take away half the CAF's moaning and leave it all on our players and manager!
This angle is deceptive. They've also conveniently cut the clip to make it look as dodgy as possible. The wide angle gives a much better picture of what actually happened.This innocuous part of shoving someone with 2 hands on his lower neck.
The more you look at it the more laughable it gets
Well the exaggerated dive doesn't help, it makes you think how much force was in the push becaue a proper shove in the back wouldn't look like thatThis innocuous part of shoving someone with 2 hands on his lower neck.
The more you look at it the more laughable it gets
If Maguire wasn't there then the defender would probably be marking Garnacho, so by that definition he's interfering with play!
His first intention is to clear the ball with a sort of "diving header" (going lower and pushing up), he's about to jump and gets shoved at the same time. In my opinion, the fact that his arms don't move tells me he's neither managed to execute it because of the shove nor faking it and diving. We've all seen how every player exagerate a contact by throwing their arm to the sides or up when pushed.
The subjective part is whether they deemed he was interfering with the play or not, it's not about whether he was in an offside position, pre-VAR that quite possibly would have been ruled out by the linesman or whatever the feck they call them these days but of course they have been told not to flag these days even for blindingly obvious ones
I'm not advocating for anything. I'm simply telling you what the laws of the game are. Put it this way. It's the world cup final. Game is all tied up going into injury time. On the goal line, a guy with his back to play sticks out his arm and prevents a goal from going into the net. Do you say it's not handball because he's not looking? Watch the video below to get a full understanding of the new law and how it's supposed to be called
The vids unavailable and your hypothetical situation is quite different so I don't see the point in discussing that.
The fact that it is a natural motion due to jumping and then landing (he's not randomly sticking an arm out) and the proximity doesn't come into it for you?
I think there's a bit more nuance in the rules which, thankfully, allow referees to use a modicum of common sense with handballs like Barkley's.
This is all there is in the rules about 'natural position':
- touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
You can certainly make a case for a handball under the more prescriptive version of the rules that have been in place in recent years, but I don't think it's cut-and-dried and it's sufficiently open to interpretation to allow a sensible decision to be made.
Where else is Maguire going to be though? At the next free kick from a similar position a different player gets called across to mark garnacho.
Maguire is always going to be there offside or onside and the defender is always going to engage with him whatever,
There is no advantage gained because Maguire being marginally ahead of play doesn't make any difference to what actually happens. If he was onside neither him or the defender are getting the ball either.
The only way Maguire or United gain an advantage from Maguire being offside is if he actually plays the ball.
Like I said I understand why they came to the decision they did, it didn't surprise me. But I'm not sure I agree with it.
That looks fine to me? Although I am a little sleepy from my return flight to Saudi Arabia where I was put up in a luxury hotel for a few nights before refereeing one of their countries matches for an inflated fee.This innocuous part of shoving someone with 2 hands on his lower neck.
The more you look at it the more laughable it gets
But that would be true for any player marking an offisde player in that scenario - even if they were on the other side of the box (the knock on effect would be everyone is marking someone else).
But and it’s quite an important part, he was there !
It wasn’t just the air swing it was his movement toward the ball which distracted / occupied the defender
Here's the thing:
At any given free kick you should now have all your defenders rush forward under that logic because that means that under VAR scrutiny you can say that any one of the opposition players is "interfering with play". Like - of course they are, because they've got a free kick and they are attacking. But if the ball doesn't end up near them and there's millimetres in it, why are you rewarding the defenders for pushing up so heavily? It's against the spirit of the law to punish attackers that DON'T touch the ball, just because the defenders got lucky by a few millimetres and can argue a player that didn't touch the ball was "interfering" with any part of the play.
It's entirely subjective and we got fecked by it. Watch every single free kick and tell me you can't make a case for offside every single time. That said if a player is in front of the goalkeeper I get it - that's abusing the rules a bit. But that's a different scenario entirely.
Anyway - it's a nonsense call and yet another "subjective" decision with millimeters in it that we have been screwed by.
Sort of glad we didn't go Arteta's route but maybe we should. That's something like 8 "subjective" decisions in a row now that have wrecked our season.
Why would the angle matter? That's a clear foul.
AHH yes super slo mo. When it still looks quite innocuous in super slo mo you know clutching at straws. Now watch it full speed including the second or two before where Gabriel is already stooping but remarkably joelintons hands are not on his back, Gabriel gets himself in a horrible position and tries to buy the free kick. If he doesn't throw himself on the floor he might actually get to the ball before Gordon. Oh the irony.This innocuous part of shoving someone with 2 hands on his lower neck.
The more you look at it the more laughable it gets
The two big things for me from that Newcastle/Arse VAR decision are
1. Nevermind the push (it is a push) - how the feck could they not draw the lines for offside? What kind of shite technology is that? It looked like it was off to me too, Gordon seemed to be just ahead of the keeper as it hits Joe Linton.... but the fact that they couldn't draw lines is an absoulte farce and a bigger deal should be made of that. Why isn't there a camera from the other side?Surely that should be a pre-requisite for scenarios like this... speaking of cameras.
2. Why do we have a touchline camera but other teams don't? Again surely this should be a pre-requisite? Seems absolutely nonsensical.
1. Nevermind the push (it is a push) - how the feck could they not draw the lines for offside? What kind of shite technology is that? It looked like it was off to me too, Gordon seemed to be just ahead of the keeper as it hits Joe Linton.... but the fact that they couldn't draw lines is an absoulte farce and a bigger deal should be made of that. Why isn't there a camera from the other side?Surely that should be a pre-requisite for scenarios like this... speaking of cameras.
2. Why do we have a touchline camera but other teams don't? Again surely this should be a pre-requisite? Seems absolutely nonsensical.
99% of times a player is in an offside position they aren’t said to have become active. Most times players aren’t close to be considered to be interfering with play, blocking the keepers line of sight or making a movement toward the ball
The point very much is the word subjective bar the odd thing like the ball being out of play then most calls in football are just that subjective the problem is that more often than not those that are making those subjective calls know the laws and IFAB directives how they should be interpreted most , not all, those that comment on those subjective calls base their condemnation of officials based on the laws as they were interpreted maybe 10 or more years ago. I was an official and believe me I try to keep up with the law changes and it’s quite a chore to grasp some of them
As soon as that goal was scored I said to my wife that’s offside and that was right the Arsenal one I can actually see why it was allowed it wasn’t so much that the calls could all quite easily have gone the other way, because they could, it’s because VAR has to be 100% sure the infield calls were clearly and obviously wrong and that I am far from sure they were
That's it isn't it, if VAR applied the letter of the law like they did on saturday to every free kick/cross into the box there would be a lot more goals disallowed because someone somewhere will be marginally offside and despite not actually affecting play they potentially tied up a defender who could have been somewhere else. I said on Saturday and I stick by it, we'll not see that type of decision given again this season.
It was a ridiculous decision and I'd think that no matter which team it affected, it didn't even cost us points on Saturday. Maguires massive head being slightly offside when a free kick is lofted over him is giving the attacking team zero advantage. To me it just seems VAR is finding infractions where it really doesn't need to. The offside rule was never introduced for incidents like this, it's not in the spirit of the rule or the game to rule out perfectly good goals for minor technicalities that can only be sorted out after 5 minutes of fecking about. Unless there is a clear and obvious offside error then advantage should just be given to the attacking team and the goal stands.
VAR this is why it's broken, you still have the subjective calls? Newcastle v Gunners,, at least 2 red cards if it was another game or team.. Havertez off , Bruno off as well.. and the ball was out same as us in Brighton game ? There was also 2 hands on defender push..
All these make you feel its deliberately done. I don't like it at all VAR in the prem is useless imo it's a tool for corruption.
All these make you feel its deliberately done. I don't like it at all VAR in the prem is useless imo it's a tool for corruption.
The defender who was marking Harry Maguire and trying to prevent Harry Maguire from getting to the ball. Maguire being in an offside position didn’t prevent him from doing what he set out to achieve.
That's the thing for me, Maguire isn't all over the defender - the defender chooses to be all over Maguire (and actually ends up fouling him).
If we're saying that's then offside, in theory defenders could just pick the offside player, run into him and claim that he interefered with them - regardless of where they are in the area/on the pitch.
I hate that lego hair prick and them gooners but seriously, how can anyone view the Joelinton foul on Gabriel as not a foul or is "subjective"? The fellow had both hands on the back of the defender ffs. Any where on the field that happens, it is a clear foul.
I think you have to use common sense. If an offside player actively prevents a defender from playing the ball then fair enough. I don’t see that happening here though. The defender didn’t seem to have any interest in playing the ball. All they were doing was trying to stop Maguire getting to it.
I'll probably never understand why Arsenal have made such a big deal about that decision.
There was no conclusive evidence to call the ball out of play or call it offside. The fact that there is a proper debate between pundits on whether there was a foul or not, makes it not a clear and obvious error. It was a marginal call that sometimes goes in your favour and sometimes against.
Arsenal had a point to feel aggrieved, but that was on how Bruno G managed to stay on for the entirety of the game, and that is something Arteta should have stressed on. And definitely, there was no decision that was so outrageous that it required a club putting out a statement.
There was no conclusive evidence to call the ball out of play or call it offside. The fact that there is a proper debate between pundits on whether there was a foul or not, makes it not a clear and obvious error. It was a marginal call that sometimes goes in your favour and sometimes against.
Arsenal had a point to feel aggrieved, but that was on how Bruno G managed to stay on for the entirety of the game, and that is something Arteta should have stressed on. And definitely, there was no decision that was so outrageous that it required a club putting out a statement.
Not even sure they could do that. Probably a breach of contract somewhere along the line.