cyberman
Full Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 37,331
Surely that’s a red card for the player on the touch line just now? How do you get a warning / yellow card?
So a silly rule shouldn't be discussed?The rule is no handball if the hand is supporting the body when falling. So there isn’t really a discussion to be had. It’s no penalty.
Well that’s a totally different point. We’re talking about the incident here. Nothing to discuss. Now you’ve gone off on a tangent.So a silly rule shouldn't be discussed?
It's all linked. Are you not arguing it shouldn't be discussed because the rule clearly states its not a penalty?Well that’s a totally different point. We’re talking about the incident here. Nothing to discuss. Now you’ve gone off on a tangent.
But that was very different, because after falling over initially and having his hands there to support his fall, Cedric kept crawling forward to keep going and ended up scooping the ball away. Once you go from "supporting the body" to "crawling like a crab" then it doesn't really constitute a natural position or movement anymore.I didn't see it but this rule was applied against us vs arsenal was it? The player clearly played the ball with his hand when falling and the refs deemed this silly rule appropriate. So it should be up for discussion
Oh i agree. But the refs took the rule to be pure black and white. Basically he read the rule to be a handball can't be given by a player on the ground totally ignoring the action said player.But that was very different, because after falling over initially and having his hands there to support his fall, Cedric kept crawling forward to keep going and ended up scooping the ball away. Once you go from "supporting the body" to "crawling like a crab" then it doesn't really constitute a natural position or movement anymore.
Are you sure?It’s because he’s not a fish.
If play would go on until the half-time (or full-time) whistle is blown then the VAR can give a penalty anyway because the incident took part while the ball was in play. We got a handball penalty against Brighton that way. Final whistle went, then VAR gave pen, Bruno scored pen and game finished.I have a stupid question. Providing West Ham realize they are in problem and keep playing (idle possesion game) until end of half/ game. What happens? Var can only check things if there is a pause in game, right?
It was near the end of the first half. Chalobah falling to the floor and putting his hand down when he lands on the floor. Ball hit his hand as he’s falling to the ground and it’s crossed in. Only got a pic.
If it was against us, it would have been a penalty, red card, 3 match ban for bringing the game into disrepute and we would have been forced to bring on Maguire from the bench!Its not a pen
But you know damn well that if it was against us - the ref is giving a pen no doubt in my mind
How did var not give that Wolves penalty against Arsenal? They really are shockingly bad.
Not sure how var didn't give a pen to wolves. Shocking decision
Oh as if that makes it all ok.It was offside so the penalty review was moot.
Oh as if that makes it all ok.
1 - It wasn't offside. That was a shocking decision itself, that doesn't make it any better.
2 - it was explained at half time that var checked the offside and if wasn't offside but they didn't deem it a penalty so they cant actually step in and over rule the incorrect offside.
If they thought it was a pen they would have over ruled the offside.
So again. Shocking decision.
Your doll presenter got a explanation of them and read it out and Jamie redknapp went to town on the decision (for him).I must've missed that. Madness.
No it wasn’t. They even stated VaR said it was onside. They just decided against the penalty.It was offside so the penalty review was moot.
Basically the ruling was that the offside can only be overturned if it is followed by a game changing event such as a goal. Because it wasn’t, then they couldn’t intervene with the penalty decision as they felt the ref didn’t make a clear and obvious error. In summary, it was a complete shambles.I see the start of the first half, why would they overrule the offside? Were they through on goal?
I have a stupid question. Providing West Ham realize they are in problem and keep playing (idle possesion game) until end of half/ game. What happens? Var can only check things if there is a pause in game, right?
It’s ridiculous and ruining the game. It’s actually worse than when we didn’t have it. This clear and obvious bullshit...isn’t in itself clear and obvious. So it needs getting rid of. How about using it just for offsides, fouls leading to goals and penalties and have five impartial viewers. The decision goes with the majority. Get rid of this also ‘subjective’ nonsense. The majority of these non calls 9/10 people would give and the 1 is usually regularly contrary.Basically the ruling was that the offside can only be overturned if it is followed by a game changing event such as a goal. Because it wasn’t, then they couldn’t intervene with the penalty decision as they felt the ref didn’t make a clear and obvious error. In summary, it was a complete shambles.
I honestly don’t understand what clear and obvious error means anymore. They claimed VaR didn’t the ref made a clear and obvious error so his decision stood.It’s ridiculous and ruining the game. It’s actually worse than when we didn’t have it. This clear and obvious bullshit...isn’t in itself clear and obvious. So it needs getting rid of. How about using it just for offsides, fouls leading to goals and penalties and have five impartial viewers. The decision goes with the majority. Get rid of this also ‘subjective’ nonsense. The majority of these non calls 9/10 people would give and the 1 is usually regularly contrary.
It was offside so the penalty review was moot.
I honestly don’t know. If it should have been a penalty, anyone with eyes can see it should have been, then the ref got it wrong.I honestly don’t understand what clear and obvious error means anymore. They claimed VaR didn’t the ref made a clear and obvious error so his decision stood.
in that situation what would constitute a clear and obvious error? Defender literally didn’t get the ball and fouled the defender ffs. It couldn’t be a clearer and obvious error than that as the ref clearly thought he got the ball.
I honestly don’t understand what clear and obvious error means anymore. They claimed VaR didn’t the ref made a clear and obvious error so his decision stood.
in that situation what would constitute a clear and obvious error? Defender literally didn’t get the ball and fouled the defender ffs. It couldn’t be a clearer and obvious error than that as the ref clearly thought he got the ball.
This would also add an element of accountability. Currently referees are treated like some endangered species who can feck up with very little consequence, a few games in the EPL because the lower leagues deserve shite refereeing apparently & that’s only when they are actually held responsible for their worst mistakes.Here's where knowing what the referees are saying would be helpful in order to determine if they are incompetent or willingly ignoring the laws of the game.
If the ref says "I saw Saliba get the ball" and replays show that he didn't get the ball, then he has obviously made an error and the incident should be reviewed on the screen. If the referee communicates "I saw that Saliba got none of the ball but I don't think he tackled the player", then he has also obviously misjudged the incident. If the referee says "I saw Saliba not getting the ball but it felt like a 50/50" then replays also show that to be an error that is up for review. And lastly, if the ref had said "I saw that Saliba didn't get the ball and illegally tackled the Wolves player but I don't think it's a pen", then surely you ship him off to ref in the lower leagues due to lack of knowledge of the laws and/or integrity?
I've been a saying this so many times and that is that I really want to see changes where referees have mics on during games. Where VAR room have mics and video on when taking decisions. We need transparency and we need referees to clarify decisions. We also need referees to do interviews after games just like managers do.This would also add an element of accountability. Currently referees are treated like some endangered species who can feck up with very little consequence, a few games in the EPL because the lower leagues deserve shite refereeing apparently & that’s only when they are actually held responsible for their worst mistakes.
There should be a public report admirer each game. Don’t make them interview but as with the NBA a report should acknowledge where & when they get things wrong.
Yes! Came here to say this, 3 mins was a joke and then blowing up then. Madness.Can’t complain after the win, but it needs to
He pointed out. 3 min of stoppage time, first minute is used for Pereira head injury then sub, then the goal and celebration, and adds on 20 sec or so
Defenders legs were between Garnachos. Easy foul.It’s just a crutch for not making decisions. I’ve no idea how that tackle on Garnacho is not a foul.
Is there new offside rule again? How can they flag for a non offside when we have perfectly good position to counter attack?