Refs & VAR 2020/2021 Discussion

FootballHQ said:
Did they change the handball rule again? I know all the joke ones right at the start of the season when players weren't even looking and balls were being smashed at their hands and they were being given so that was rightfully amended but yesterday we head it back into penalty area and Greenwood's hand is by his head so really he knows what he's doing....don't understand why ref didn't go and look at it on his monitor.

Before you all pile in it was a clear penalty on Pogba so no idea why Dean Smith was highlighting that post match and Ollie went down far too easily.

We got this called v us just 3 months back:



0_Manchester-City-v-Aston-Villa-Premier-League.jpg
Click to expand...

The handball rule was clarified a few months ago to specify its only handball if the arm makes the body unnaturally bigger, and the arm is not in a position that is a consequence of their body movement. Greenwood was jumping and was also knocked which spun his arm out further.
 
11101 said:
The handball rule was clarified a few months ago to specify its only handball if the arm makes the body unnaturally bigger, and the arm is not in a position that is a consequence of their body movement. Greenwood was jumping and was also knocked which spun his arm out further.
Click to expand...

Different intepretation in europe though, look at that one Man. City got against Dortmund!
 
FootballHQ said:
Different intepretation in europe though, look at that one Man. City got against Dortmund!
Click to expand...

It doesn't account for what the ref decides to do on the day. I think the league did say players leave themselves at risk of it being a handball if they do it.
 
Greenwood's one was not a penalty because if you watch the replay the ball skims off his chest before hitting his arm - which we know when it hits a legal part of the body first before hitting the arm/hand they do not give a penalty for.

Watkins was already going over before any contact with Henderson, you can see he starts to fall before there is any possible contact. This is why, IMO and probably also in the view of the referee that it was simulation. He does that Salah style back arching, albeit less dramatically
 
Globule said:
I asked the question during the matchday thread, but I think it's a valid question-

If the Greenwood handball or Henderson tackle had been given by the ref, would they have been reversed after VAR?

Obviously it's a hypothetical, but I don't think they'd have been reversed, and that's where the flaws of VAR and its implementation are highlighted for me.
Click to expand...
the Watkins/Henderson incident would only be reviewed for a penalty/no penalty, not the second yellow for Watkins, and I don't know how "clear and obvious" that it was that there was/was not any contact

I agree, I don't think either would be overturned if they were the calls on the pitch.

My biggest issue from a Villa fan point of view is that there's no doubt in my mind that if either of those incidents occurred at the other end they get given as pens and that inconsistent officiating gets old real fast.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
Who knows to be honest... I think it changed to allow more leeway to arms "being in natural position" but then there was also something about "arms being above shoulders is unnatural" ... and then there's also distance to the ball (which is sometimes taken into consideration, and sometimes isn't).

Honestly I was a bit surprised it wasn't a penalty, or looked at by the ref... not that I want that sort of thing to be a penalty, but seen plenty of those given. (then again others haven't been given, like the one Hudson Odoi did against us at Stamford Bridge).
Click to expand...
Just saw Dale Johnson's thread about it and was saying that before the Premier League relaxed the handball rules it would've been given 100% and still would be in most leagues. Not surprised it wasn't given though
 
Pogue Mahone said:
Can anyone give any rational reason why the ref didn’t even get asked to have a look at Sterling planting his studs, full force, above Werner’s ankle?!
Click to expand...



I thought it was a red but given how subjective determining the force of a tackle is, I'm not surprised they didn't intervene once he was given a yellow for it. I'm sure we'll see almost identical situations result in red though. He was very lucky.
 
sullydnl said:


I thought it was a red but given how subjective determining the force of a tackle is, I'm not surprised they didn't intervene once he was given a yellow for it. I'm sure we'll see almost identical situations result in red though. He was very lucky.
Click to expand...


Is that Dale Johnson fella being paid a retainer by whoever is behind VAR? He’s constantly bending over backward to justify mystifying decisions. That’s a ludicrous defence for an absolutely blatant red card.

Even if you ignore his weird logic that Sterling not getting booked for “clumsy “ challenges in the past is somehow relevant here those photos are non-comparable situations as it was only the Werner tackle when he went off his feet. Which always makes a tackle more reckless/out of control.

And my main issue here isn’t even about the tackle itself. It’s the inconsistency whereby the ref wasn’t even asked to have a look at it on the screen.
 
Last edited:
I didn't think it was a red at the time, looking again I would say it is though. If Werner has foot planted that is going to be nasty.

It's not been given because it's in the 12th minute of a big TV game, that is the reality. If happens in 80th minute he'll walk. The other big controversy with this game is that we weren't able to get a replacement on for Christensen as he came off and then gave away a penalty with 10 men. Lucky Aguero obviously saw the injustice...:lol:
 
Watching Burnley and Fulham.

Fulham keeper handles the ball outside the box. Nothing doing, ref linesman or VAR.

Taylor goes through the back of the Fulham player and gets a toe on the ball, to me it looks like a tackle from behind. Not really sure why it's not a penalty. The commentators started talking about different thresholds or some shite.

I don't particularly like VAR or the constant references to it and nearly every goal being checked. But, the idiots in charge of it really need to be upgraded.
 
RK said:
Watkins decision infuriates me.

1) Gets the ball first
2) Henderson clips him on the leg/knee
3) He's potentially getting clattered at full pace

I agree that Watkins was looking for the penalty in advance, because he's about to be unfairly impeded. He has possession of the ball and if he doesn't go down he risks injury and/or doesn't get the deserved penalty.
Either way, the ref should be 100% sure that the player is trying to cheat before booking them. But there's some irrational hatred of 'divers'.

If you're in doubt about the contact watch (slowly) how the direction of Henderson's foot changes in the replay at 11 seconds
Click to expand...

He was halfway down by the time Henderson got to him, it was a clear dive.
 
I think it's scandalous that Sterling wasn't sent off for his challenge. If VAR isn't looking at that, then what the hell is it there for?
 
NinjaZombie said:
I think it's scandalous that Sterling wasn't sent off for his challenge. If VAR isn't looking at that, then what the hell is it there for?
Click to expand...

It was looked at by VAR and they decided to let the the yellow card stand. A view supported by the ref who does sky's ref watch column.


Dermot says: "I think not. It's not a good tackle but he's one-footed, he's low, he doesn't travel too far.
"It's a high-tariff yellow card but I wouldn't expect him to be sent off for that."
 
And if he’d been sent off Dermot would have said “He goes over the top of the ball and connects with force on the players leg. Clear red card”. He always agrees with the decisions.
 
Doracle said:
And if he’d been sent off Dermot would have said “He goes over the top of the ball and connects with force on the players leg. Clear red card”. He always agrees with the decisions.
Click to expand...
Maybe you're right, but I do see him disagree with the decisions from time to time. He did for example say that Sterling should've had a penalty in that same game.
 
I was looking forward to seeing that Sterling incident in the review programs I watch on DAZN in a feed from EPL. The incident wasn't even shown never mind discussed. Obviously some of you have heard comments from Dermot Gallagher - I didn't and the other program had Chris Foy who wasn't even asked about it.
There was a thread on here a while back accusing City of being the dirtiest team in terms of their aggressive efforts to win back the ball and how they seemed to get away with it so easily.
I know it is the mindset of the Caf to be paranoid about the decisions given against us and those ignored when our opposition misbehaves. I guess it doesn't only happen to us!
 
visiting villain said:
My biggest issue from a Villa fan point of view is that there's no doubt in my mind that if either of those incidents occurred at the other end they get given as pens and that inconsistent officiating gets old real fast.
Click to expand...

this kind of Bollocks has got to stop.

It’s old, boring nonsense.

Just stop with the ‘oh, I’m most upset because if it was United, they would have got the decision.’

It is, and always has been absolute bollocks
 
Neville desperate for it to be given seemingly.
 
I'm amazed the commentators at Sky are talking about it like it's some controversial decision. Bailly got the ball.
 
NinjaZombie said:
I'm amazed the commentators at Sky are talking about it like it's some controversial decision. Bailly got the ball.
Click to expand...

Exactly, not even like it was contentious, just blatantly not a penalty. Most Liverpool fans on twitter I've seen don't even think it was a pen.
 
Santos J said:
Exactly, not even like it was contentious, just blatantly not a penalty. Most Liverpool fans on twitter I've seen don't even think it was a pen.
Click to expand...

they are complaining about slowing down the replay!

seriously.

isint it the point that you slow it down to see what happens.

they are saying you should only show the replay in real time.

idiots.
 
NinjaZombie said:
I'm amazed the commentators at Sky are talking about it like it's some controversial decision. Bailly got the ball.
Click to expand...

I am more amazed about the fact that you think it’s still about getting the ball and then you could do whatever you want afterwards. Naturally, Bailly is fine here and studs are not out, but obiously they are looking at what happens when he tackles the Liverpool-player on the follow-through, not if he got the ball or not.
 
NinjaZombie said:
I'm amazed the commentators at Sky are talking about it like it's some controversial decision. Bailly got the ball.
Click to expand...

I can’t get my head around it, Neville reckons it’s a “foul all over the pitch”.

Not only does he get the ball, his “follow through” is his studs down into the grass, it’s as safe a tackle as one can make. If studs were up I’d get it, but instead I’m absolutely miffed as to how many see football so differently.

bizarre.
 
James Peril said:
I am more amazed about the fact that you think it’s still about getting the ball and then you could do whatever you want afterwards. Naturally, Bailly is fine here and studs are not out, but obiously they are looking at what happens when he tackles the Liverpool-player on the follow-through, not if he got the ball or not.
Click to expand...

What follow through? Like the Balbuena red card vs Chelsea, that was a natural thing to happen. It's not like Bailly went over the top and made contact on the opponent's knee.
 
Switched channels and Hoddle and Townsend are waxing lyrical about how good VAR has been here.
 
There literally is no follow through. They dont know what a follow through is
 
James Peril said:
I am more amazed about the fact that you think it’s still about getting the ball and then you could do whatever you want afterwards. Naturally, Bailly is fine here and studs are not out, but obiously they are looking at what happens when he tackles the Liverpool-player on the follow-through, not if he got the ball or not.
Click to expand...


It should be all about getting the ball, getting the man too is a bonus.
 
SuperiorXI said:
Load of nonsense, it was the right call one hundred percent. What is the argument that that is a foul? Is the game non-contact now? Didn't get the memo.
Click to expand...
Literally this, Bailly got to the ball and then they collided, full stop.
 
Berbasbullet said:
Switched channels and Hoddle and Townsend are waxing lyrical about how good VAR has been here.
Click to expand...

Have the ESPN feed and Lee Dixon, Man City fan who also spent his prime playing for United's biggest rivals of the day also says it's never a penalty in a million years :lol:

I knew Sky would have a narrative around it though as their director replayed it about 27 times.
 
Funny, but still want the offsides changed before it screws us over.
 
People pretending they like it because it screws over a team they don’t like will be the reason they stick with it until it screws over a team they support
 
You must log in or register to reply here.