Hate handball decisions like that first one. Arm not far away from body, and he's in the process of pulling his arm behind his back when hit by the ball. Pen and yellow for this were a huge influence on the game (no send-off without that first card), and way too harsh.
VAR to be used in CL knockout stage
- Thread starter peridigm
- Start date
The Morata goal called off was just a terrible call for me. Very weak contact, if stuff like that is called we will have defenders diving during every cross just to make sure. See the goal that counted and Bonucci.
I don't understand how officials can look at that replay and determine it was a foul, I really don't. It seemed evident it was a dive, Chiellini clearly launched himself.
UEFA's statement after the game says this on the second decision in the Schalke match:
The second decision was also correctly made on the basis of the Laws of the Game (Law 11 – Offside) which stipulates: “if a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence”.
Who else believes this rule seems unfair? If a player is offside once the ball is played and starts to move towards the ball then he should be offside. It basically means you can gain an advantage by being offside as you can get yourself in a dangerous position and then hope you're fouled before the ball gets near to you and win a penalty, which is exactly what happened last night.
The second decision was also correctly made on the basis of the Laws of the Game (Law 11 – Offside) which stipulates: “if a player in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball and is fouled before playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the foul is penalised as it has occurred before the offside offence”.
Who else believes this rule seems unfair? If a player is offside once the ball is played and starts to move towards the ball then he should be offside. It basically means you can gain an advantage by being offside as you can get yourself in a dangerous position and then hope you're fouled before the ball gets near to you and win a penalty, which is exactly what happened last night.
The part you've quoted is a bit of a mindfeck.
"[P]layer in an offside position is moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball" can be fouled because he hasn't played or attempted to play the ball. Isn't "moving towards the ball with the intention of playing it" an offside then? That suggests that there is a line or a difference between "moving towards the ball with the intention of playing the ball" and "attempting to play the ball" that defines the actual offside offence. Where does that line go? In my mind, but apparently not in FIFAs, moving towards the ball with the intention of playing it, would make the player "actively participating" and therefore offside already, thus not being able to receive a foul because his offence occurs when he runs towards the ball.
So if you're standing ten yards offside and you're running towards the ball, then all opponents will stop, right? Can you then just shepherd the ball while indicating that you're not attempting to play it, while a teammate runs in from deep? In that situation the guy shepherding the ball for his teammate would only become offside if an opponent got close to him because then he'd be "challenging an opponent for the ball" of "interfering with an opponent"?
But you're killing the phases after if you do that. You can run towards the ball without interfering with play. The rules are pretty clear on that and is widely accepted.
How many times has a player been offside but not interfering then a deflection / poor pass etc leaves him with a chance from an onside position?
Fans who argue against the decisions last night are looking for things to argue about.
But if you're running towards the ball in an attempt to play it in such close proximity to the defender that he has to foul you or accidentally does so, then surely you've "challenged an opponent" for the ball or interfered with his decision making, ie making you offside? If the offside player's not there then obviously the defender doesn't need to lunge/tackle/pull a shirt because there's nobody there to challenge him for the ball.
* I haven't seen last night's situation so can't comment on that particular one, I'm just talking in general.
He's nowhere near the ball when he's fouled though. Not in keepers eye line etc so he's not offside when the defender drags him down so they're both in a legal position in that phase of play.
If anything it's the defender that's challenging the attacker thus the foul.
I don't think the rules are clear on it at all though. Plenty of people last night were asking if the second Schalke penalty should have been offside, so the rules aren't well-known when it comes to incidents like that. It seems bizarre to me that you could end up in a situation where a player is a yard offside, has a through ball played ahead of him, a defender turns to chase it and clips the attacker's heels. That would result in a foul under the current rules, apparently. Do you not think that is wrong? It's giving an advantage to a player who is offside.
Well he's offside if he's running onto a through ball? This is more like a striker getting ahead of the play while the winger has the ball and is pulled back. Thats a foul.
What the City defender did was last night was to stop the player getting into position for the second phase.
Remember Kanes goal v Liverpool last year when he was stood offside and Lovren mis cued his clearance that trickled through to Harry, thus having him in an onside position? Imagine VVD pulled him back before that. How would that not be a foul?
Phases of play isn't a new thing.
Seen last night's situation now. Yeah, that's like any off the ball incident for me. Penalty all day.
Absolutely. Proper dive.
I can see how the ref disallowed the goal though. I’m pretty sure when the ref studied the footage, it was all in very slow-motion. In the slo-mo it looks like a foul but at real speed it’s a clear dive. Should the refs have a replay of real speed and slo-mo?
That's one of my major issues with VAR. Contact always looks so much worse in slo-mo.
Slow-mo is great seeing contact but it takes away realism of the situation. It looks like refs use the VAR based on slow-mo alone
Replays in VAR should be done at full speed, just like what they do in American Football.
totally agree and that's how VAR is supposed to work, certainly for penalties as any handball in slow mo will look blatant
I knew VAR would solve problems, clear up controversy & make football a better sport to watch. And definitely wouldn’t lead to long long delays as that was scaremongering.
Yep exactly- everything looks worse in slow mo.
I thought they used both for Instant Replay? Normal speed for things like late hits but slo-mo for decisions like "did the receiver touch both feet down after the catch before getting knocked off the field?"
In the Superbowl, I'm sure they used slo-mo to check whether Edelman's finger had touched that punt? For the exact reason that at real speed, it looked like he did (the onfield decision).
I agree that for handballs (and some other checks), it needs to be at full speed. There's got to be a mix though. For example, in the France Scotland match on now (rugby), France scored a try... looked a try in real time, looked a try on real time replays (from most angles) BUT when they slo-mo the ball just before the final pass you see a knock-on. Two minutes, right decision, game moves on.
Last edited:
Was discussing this guy earlier for the Ajax - Real Madrid game where people was saying he was simply favouring Real. Turns out he just loves to apply the rules as strictly and literally as possible.
GIVE THE MAN A STATUE
Last edited:
Yeah, Skomina is a top ref. Together with Kjuipers, Mazic and yes cnut Cakir, best ref in Europe. People go to much into conspiracy theories *Was discussing this guy earlier for the Ajax - Real Madrid game where people was saying he was simply favouring Real. Turns out he just loves to apply the rules as strictly and literally as possible.
GIVE THE MAN A STATUE
* The only true conspiracy is that Ovrebo was a Barcelona fan.