This is terrible news for Liverpool fans.
Hopefully they keep the number of Man Utd matches Michael Oliver is allowed to officiate to a minimum since he is a Newcastle fan and we are competing with Newcastle for top 3 or 4.
VAR and Refs | General Discussion | Forest go into meltdown
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Hopefully they keep the number of Man Utd matches Michael Oliver is allowed to officiate to a minimum since he is a Newcastle fan and we are competing with Newcastle for top 3 or 4.
This would be cool in the Premier League, if only for the goal replays.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tactical fouls are still allowed if you're wearing light blue.
How did Akanji not concede a pen and get sent off? 
Same old, same old.
So it begins. Took 8 minutes to deny penalty and red card.
Looking forward to being gaslighted by an ex-referee as to why it was correct.How did Akanji not concede a pen and get sent off?
I wonder if the 115 charges includes paying referees?
And if anyone has the gall to moan at their incompetence, they'll just go "new directives, no dissent allowed so I'll send you off for making a relevant point about my shit decision"
Don't think there was much in that pen appeal
Cos oil, innitHow did Akanji not concede a pen and get sent off?
feck this I’m already done with the season. Just get rid of it and go back to at least thinking it’s ref errors.
The player runs past him and he pulls him by the shoulder/arm without any chance of challenging for the ball. The contact wasn't huge but it made the attacker lose balance and slip and denied him a 1v1 with Ederson.
I'd like to know what part of the laws of the game that specifies that it's a legal move to simply grab an opponent who has run past you, while having no chance of challenging for the ball.
There is too much pressure on giving a penalty. If more pens were dished out, it wouldn't be such a big thing and mental obstacle for the officials. That's impeding the attacker and a pen.
Thought kicking the ball away was a yellow according to the 23/24 New Directives™️
It looked like he just threw himself the ground when the ball got away from him a bit. Would be fuming if it was given against us
Looked to me like he slipped but if the pull causes him to lose his balance and slip then it's an infringement.
If it was given against us I bet you a lot of people would call the offender an idiot for grabbing the guy's shirt when he's gone right past him.
Oh so they do actually have VAR tonight.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Soccer Bantz
Last edited:
Have I dreamed this, but I thought there was a change to offside this year and the attacking player had to have his entire body offside to be offside?
That was just Wenger's proposal. Doubt it's implemented anytime soon. The only change this season is:
Offside Rule
One of the most significant changes this season is the clarification of the offside rule. The updated Laws of the game state that "a player who is clearly offside should not become onside on every occasion when an opponent moves and touches the ball."
Although this change was made last summer, it has now been officially incorporated into the Laws. The aim is to provide clarity regarding whether a defender deliberately played the ball or if it deflected off them. However, the wording of the rule remains open to interpretation by different match officials.
Glad you asked this because I remember reading that thread and thinking 'no fecking way? That would be a horrendous implementation'.
feck the dippers but how is that not a pen 
maybe a new interpretation of the rule. in my opinion a good decision as it wasnt intentional but would have been a pen 100% the last seasons. are there some new rules this year. i would be interestedfeck the dippers but how is that not a pen
100% penalty. I don’t understand what they are thinking.feck the dippers but how is that not a pen
The only good thing about that decision was that it went against Liverpool. Intentional or not that is a stonewall penalty.
Disasi said it hit his chest, clearly the refs feel he is an honest boy.feck the dippers but how is that not a pen
you just know next week an identical situation will happen and it will be given.
Can already tell its just going to be different Interpretation every match.
Not a penalty for me to be honest. His hands aren't above head height, not very wide from the body and do not move towards the ball which is deflected at him from three yards away, giving him minimal time to react to the deflection.
Must be. Similar one not given in the Brentford game. If so, thank feck. So many ludicrous pens given for handball last season.
His hands being up in front of him rather than to the side saved it from being a pen
Surely the simple solution is to say that if the ball strikes the arm/hand then it’s a penalty if the ball would otherwise have continued its trajectory, and not a penalty if the ball would have struck a legal part of the body otherwise. That way you’re judging the incident on whether the arm has impacted the outcome of the situation or not.
With that being the rule we'll get five penalties per game where players aim loose chips at opponents' arms.
Big fan of the new rule around being booked if you demand a booking. No tolerance.
There’s nothing wrong with the current interpretation of the handball rule, it would be bizarre on every single level introducing extremely harsh rules for penalties for handball.
It’ll be gone by the end of the month
Not a fan. Just ignore it, no reason it should have an effect on the referee and it’s hardly unsportmanship. Gallagher should’ve had an yellow card for the foul, somehow Alexis is the only one getting booked as he waved an imaginary card, bizarre
found this for all that are interested
https://www.thefa.com/football-rule.../football-11-11/2023-24-law-changes-explained
Handling the ball
For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence. It is an offence if a player:
• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• 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
• scores in the opponents’ goal:
• directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
• immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental
so for me correct decision. the rule seems to be not new though. just hope that it will be seen like today more consistently