VAR and Refs | General Discussion

The penalty was very much a 50/50 call. It is just not clear cut enough.

Ultimately, Cucurella doesn't move his hands to a ball that was struck with ferocity. I don't think you could say with any confidence that he meant to save it.

But yeah if you don't get that decision you will always be aggrieved because they get given.

Taylor generally had a poor game but in a cack handed way he got the biggest call right. There were too many question marks about that handball.
 
Last edited:
Would be interesting to know whether VAR decided that wasn't clear enough to send him to check the replay or if they did and so checked the offside too and it was the latter

Either way, UEFA needs to interdict english refs from ever refereeing their competitions again
 
Goldfiessli said:
https://x.com/dalejohnsonespn/status/1809291649110982704?s=46

As much as I‘d love to blame Taylor for anything, it appears as if he made the decision UEFA with respect to the handball law.
Click to expand...
I feel like that tweet is only looking at the still, where the arm was right then, and not looking at how it came to the contact: both arms stretched out far to the sides, he then pulled his right arm back to his side in time, but his left, the hand which made contact, only pulled right into the path of the ball while firmly having his eyes on it. If his arms were just dangling down there then I'd be fully onboard with the ruling, but as it happened it looked like he deliberately moved his arm into the path of the ball even with regards to the short distance and the speed of the ball.
 
Im totally on Nagelsmanns side regarding the hand rule.
We have to take into consideration what (probably) would have happened with the ball if it hadnt been stopped with the hand.

In a scene like yesterday where Musialas shot would have clearly been on goal you cant not give the penalty because the defender tried to get his arm back to his body in the last second.
He literally stopped the shot from going on/in the goal with his hand.

Even after one night of sleep and with less emotions thats one of the if not THE most ridiculous penalties not given since VAR exists.
Its ridiculous.
 
BayernFan87 said:
Im totally on Nagelsmanns side regarding the hand rule.
We have to take into consideration what (probably) would have happened with the ball if it hadnt been stopped with the hand.

In a scene like yesterday where Musialas shot would have clearly been on goal you cant not give the penalty because the defender tried to get his arm back to his body in the last second.
He literally stopped the shot from going on/in the goal with his hand.

Even after one night of sleep and with less emotions thats one of the if not THE most ridiculous penalties not given since VAR exists.
Its ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Aside from the fact the penalty would almost certainly have been overruled I agree with the boldepart.

This is what all the fiddling with rules doesn’t cover. Whether the handball is intentionally or not defenders often gain an advantage by stopping a shot or cross when their hand is in the “unnatural” position. Problem is deciding what is an unnatural position seems highly subjective at best, unless they decide on an arbitrary measure of something like your hand must be within 20cm* of your hip or something when defending the box.

*completely made up measure
 
No way VAR should be getting involved with that. One of those where you just stuck with the onfield decision
 
It’s no different to, for example, the Onana non-penalty vs Wolves last season, where the foul has been committed after the ball has been played and the player being fouled has not been impeded or affected the play by it. I’ve never agreed this kind of thing is a penalty but I’m always told it is, by the laws of the game.
 
Flying high said:
Clear foul for me. Unfortunate maybe, but you can't lead with your studs up like that.
Click to expand...
It’s that simple. If he isn’t actively lunging when he connects with Kane and holding his ground in more of a block then there is an argument but the fact is he was late with his challenge and connected with him studs up. It’s a foul anywhere else on the pitch so it’s a foul in the box.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
No way VAR should be getting involved with that. One of those where you just stuck with the onfield decision
Click to expand...
Happens almost every game. I think it's a pen but they are never given. The only other one I've seen was when ederson clattered saka or someone from arsenal.
 
arnie_ni said:
Happens almost every game. I think it's a pen but they are never given. The only other one I've seen was when ederson clattered saka or someone from arsenal.
Click to expand...
Agree with this. They should be given more. If the player was making a pass, it would be given a foul every time.
 
Dan_F said:
Agree with this. They should be given more. If the player was making a pass, it would be given a foul every time.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure they should be given more. You need to give defenders *some* latitude.
 
Annihilate Now! said:
No way VAR should be getting involved with that. One of those where you just stuck with the onfield decision
Click to expand...

Exactly. It’s a 50/50 and not a clear and obvious one which is what warrants a check, but when it’s a big nation it’s called. No ref in hell will go against a VAR recommendation in a semi or a final unless they want death threats.

Exact same thing happened last time when Sterling dived and sent England to the final.

Either a weak group of refs or a corrupt one.
 
arnie_ni said:
I'm not sure they should be given more. You need to give defenders *some* latitude.
Click to expand...
Studs up though. It’s far more a penalty than 50% of handball’s and those stupid foot taps where’s it’s a pen because there’s ‘contact’.

If you go in studs up anywhere else on the pitch and don’t get the ball, it’s a foul.
 
A very soft penalty tonight to say the least.
Switched the momentum of the game completely.
Another game that could be decided by VAR.
 
Ridiculous penalty decision.
Dan_F said:
Studs up though. It’s far more a penalty than 50% of handball’s and those stupid foot taps where’s it’s a pen because there’s ‘contact’.

If you go in studs up anywhere else on the pitch and don’t get the ball, it’s a foul.
Click to expand...

He put his foot up to block the shot and Kane kicked his foot after he got his shot away.

If that's a penalty, defenders may as well not even trying to block shots inside the box just in case they get kicked and give away a penalty.
 
I'd personally give it real time if I'd see it properly but I don't think it falls under a clear and obvious error to not give it. It's a debatable pen. VAR shouldn't be giving debatable pens.
 
Jules_T said:
It was studs up but you could argue that Kane made the contact and not the other way round.
Click to expand...

Yes, Kane made 'contact', but having actually touched the ball.

Dumfries wasn't really close enough to make the challenge because he didn't get near to the ball.
 
Striker has kicked through the ball and made the contact. See that happen every game and honestly never seen it given as a pen. I'd be absolutely fuming had that been given against my team.
 
Not a penalty for me. The way I saw it, Kane kicked the defender. Surprised VAR decided to look at it. Don’t think anyone would have been surprised had play continued.
 
LDUred said:
Made contact but having played the ball.

Dumfries wasn't really close enough to make the challenge because he didn't get near to the ball.
Click to expand...
No, he got volleyed on the sole of his boot by Kane's follow through as he tried to block desperately.If that was given against Utd, I'd be raging.
 
Penalty for me given he came in with his studs. You could certainly argue it shouldn't have been overturned though.
 
Oranges038 said:
Ridiculous penalty decision.


He put his foot up to block the shot and Kane kicked his foot after he got his shot away.

If that's a penalty, defenders may as well not even trying to block shots inside the box just in case they get kicked and give away a penalty.
Click to expand...
I’ve not seen anyone else give away a penalty for blocking a shot so far? It is possible to do it without going studs up. I also think he tried to win the ball, not block it.
 
Carl said:
Striker has kicked through the ball and made the contact. See that happen every game and honestly never seen it given as a pen. I'd be absolutely fuming had that been given against my team.
Click to expand...
Parma Dewol said:
Not a penalty for me. The way I saw it, Kane kicked the defender. Surprised VAR decided to look at it. Don’t think anyone would have been surprised had play continued.
Click to expand...

Not a good argument for me. It's similar to those when the fullback clears and the winger goes to block with studs up. Those are given as yellow card often.
 
It's technically a penalty but they're so rarely given for contact after the ball is played, it shouldn't really be given and certainly not as a clear and obvious VAR intervention.

Arsenal got one for a foul on Jesus by Ederson after he shot. Jesus didn't even appeal. That's the last one I remember.
 
Oranges038 said:
Ridiculous penalty decision.


He put his foot up to block the shot and Kane kicked his foot after he got his shot away.

If that's a penalty, defenders may as well not even trying to block shots inside the box just in case they get kicked and give away a penalty.
Click to expand...
I’ll add though mate, I hate VAR, and if it wasn’t a thing everyone would just move on. Once you slow it down and analyse it, it’s a foul. I’d rather we didn’t bother.
 
Does that get given as a foul everywhere else on the pitch? Definitely. 10 times out of 10. Therefore penalty.
 
Dan_F said:
I’ll add though mate, I hate VAR, and if it wasn’t a thing everyone would just move on. Once you slow it down and analyse it, it’s a foul. I’d rather we didn’t bother.
Click to expand...

When you slow it down it always looks worse, Kane gets his shot away and missed. It's not like he was smashed before he shot or after, Dumfries is putting a leg across to block the shot and Kane kicks him on the follow through.

I just don't see how it's a penalty.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.