VAR, Refs and Linesmen | General Discussion

SER19 said:
so newcastle can just score with their hands now, or in build up? add that to their ridiculous goal against arsenal last season and it seems a memo has been sent that joelinton can do anything he likes
Click to expand...
The goal was within the rules so yes it was correct to have been given.
 
Ole'sgunnarwin said:
Why punish the player who made no attempt to play the ball with his hand? The rule is correct
Click to expand...
because if it doesn’t hit his hand, the ball sails past him. there was nothing wrong with the rule that basically said “use your hands to protect your body or face, otherwise it’s handball.” it’s not like there were 20 penalties a weekend. nowadays you can basically slap the ball down to yourself if you do it in a flowing motion and it’s fine, but if you’ve got a pube offside, then we wait 5 minutes whilst var fecks about.
 
rimaldo said:
because if it doesn’t hit his hand, the ball sails past him. there was nothing wrong with the rule that basically said “use your hands to protect your body or face, otherwise it’s handball.” it’s not like there were 20 penalties a weekend. nowadays you can basically slap the ball down to yourself if you do it in a flowing motion and it’s fine, but if you’ve got a pube offside, then we wait 5 minutes whilst var fecks about.
Click to expand...

What are you even talking about?

the rule that basically said “use your hands to protect your body or face, otherwise it’s handball has never existed in history, what happened today has never been handball.
 
Chipper said:
What are you even talking about?

the rule that basically said “use your hands to protect your body or face, otherwise it’s handball has never existed in history, what happened today has never been handball.
Click to expand...
what are you even talking about?

handball used to be given if the ball hit your hand… you know… handball. the only people allowed to use their hands wore gloves to make it obvious to even the thickest of fans that they were the ones able to use their hands to interact with the ball. there was leeway if you were protecting your face from the ball. players used to get around the rule by just not touching the ball with their hands. you got the odd unfortunate penalty against you when the ball was whacked against a player 2 foot away, but by in large, players just moved their hands out of the way of the ball. now they just leave it there and hope var says they didn’t move it towards the ball, so it’s ok.

as usual, the stuffy old boys who know feck all about anything decided they need to fix something that wasn’t really broken, whilst ignoring all the other stuff that is actually broken.
 
rimaldo said:
what are you even talking about?

handball used to be given if the ball hit your hand… you know… handball. the only people allowed to use their hands wore gloves to make it obvious to even the thickest of fans that they were the ones able to use their hands to interact with the ball. there was leeway if you were protecting your face from the ball. players used to get around the rule by just not touching the ball with their hands. you got the odd unfortunate penalty against you when the ball was whacked against a player 2 foot away, but by in large, players just moved their hands out of the way of the ball. now they just leave it there and hope var says they didn’t move it towards the ball, so it’s ok.

as usual, the stuffy old boys who know feck all about anything decided they need to fix something that wasn’t really broken, whilst ignoring all the other stuff that is actually broken.
Click to expand...

No, handball has never been given for the ball just hitting your hand.

You seem to be aware of this when you talk about the ball being whacked at you from close range, and how that isn't handball which is exactly what happened.
 
Newcastle, as a club and their players, have every single official in the country bent over their knee. The stuff they get away with is unreal, im not talking about todays handball. Above all else, the ref should just give them his stopwatch and let them set how long they want the ball to be in play for
 
SER19 said:
Newcastle, as a club and their players, have every single official in the country bent over their knee. The stuff they get away with is unreal, im not talking about todays handball. Above all else, the ref should just give them his stopwatch and let them set how long they want the ball to be in play for
Click to expand...


Most games should have a lot more stoppage time than is ever given, to be fair. At the moment players are rewarded for time wasting with little consequence.

A few seasons ago they were giving a lot more added time and then they just decided they didn't like it, for no apparent reason.
 
Withnail said:
Most games should have a lot more stoppage time than is ever given, to be fair. At the moment players are rewarded for time wasting with little consequence.

A few seasons ago they were giving a lot more added time and then they just decided they didn't like it, for no apparent reason.
Click to expand...

it was one of the few positive changes. but even now when they do add more, time wasting in stoppage time almost always goes unpunished and little happens. Newcastle are by a distance the biggest cheats in the league.
 
SER19 said:
Newcastle, as a club and their players, have every single official in the country bent over their knee. The stuff they get away with is unreal, im not talking about todays handball. Above all else, the ref should just give them his stopwatch and let them set how long they want the ball to be in play for
Click to expand...
Fair play to the ref today, 10 mins added time and then he added 3 mins on top of that.
 
.
SER19 said:
Newcastle, as a club and their players, have every single official in the country bent over their knee. The stuff they get away with is unreal, im not talking about todays handball. Above all else, the ref should just give them his stopwatch and let them set how long they want the ball to be in play for
Click to expand...
They just had to defend a narrow lead for 13 added minutes so it's a bit of a weird one to bring up.
 
SER19 said:
it was one of the few positive changes. but even now when they do add more, time wasting in stoppage time almost always goes unpunished and little happens. Newcastle are by a distance the biggest cheats in the league.
Click to expand...

Agreed on the first point but Newcastle aren't exactly benefiting from 10 mins added time when they're a goal up.
 
Chipper said:
No, handball has never been given for the ball just hitting your hand.

You seem to be aware of this when you talk about the ball being whacked at you from close range, and how that isn't handball which is exactly what happened.
Click to expand...

Loads of penalties have been given for exactly that.

If that handball happens in the box, there's probably a penalty being given for it.
 
Pexbo said:
Fair play to the ref today, 10 mins added time and then he added 3 mins on top of that.
Click to expand...

he did, but was ultimately his fault for allowing it to the degree he did. there's a lot to be said from a defensive pov for breaking up any rhythm of opposition. should be the easiest thing in the game for refs to control
 
FortunaUtd said:
.

They just had to defend a narrow lead for 13 added minutes so it's a bit of a weird one to bring up.
Click to expand...

Withnail said:
Agreed on the first point but Newcastle aren't exactly benefiting from 10 mins added time when they're a goal up.
Click to expand...

No i disagree. the ref deserves some credit for actually adding proper time on, but there is an absolute world of difference defending a stop start, broken rhythm game, than defending one where time wasting is stamped out. we see it all the time. I would much sooner a standard 45 + 3 when losing, then 45 + 12, but with the game gone fully dead every few minutes. Its by design for a reason, and serves them very well. They could go another 15 minutes today without conceding if theyre allowed to continue to time waste as they are.

Forest did it to us too for example, and somehow 6 minutes got added. the ball was in play for about a third of that six.
 
SER19 said:
No i disagree. the ref deserves some credit for actually adding proper time on, but there is an absolute world of difference defending a stop start, broken rhythm game, than defending one where time wasting is stamped out. we see it all the time. I would much sooner a standard 45 + 3 when losing, then 45 + 12, but with the game gone fully dead every few minutes. Its by design for a reason, and serves them very well. They could go another 15 minutes today without conceding if theyre allowed to continue to time waste as they are.

Forest did it to us too for example, and somehow 6 minutes got added. the ball was in play for about a third of that six.
Click to expand...

Well I agree there. I was disagreeing with the point about choosing their own amount of added time as clearly it would have suited them if he blew up on 90.

The time-wasting allowed is a bit a joke. How many times do you see a goalie get a yellow for time-wasting and then continue to waste time after getting carded, only for the ref not to add all of the time it took to book him etc on at the end.
 
Withnail said:
Well I agree there. I was disagreeing with the point about choosing their own amount of added time as clearly it would have suited them if he blew up on 90.

The time-wasting allowed is a bit a joke. How many times do you see a goalie get a yellow for time-wasting and then continue to waste time after getting carded, only for the ref not to add all of the time it took to book him etc on at the end.
Click to expand...

I dont have recent ones, but when ten hag complained about it, newcastle were taking 3 seconds longer on every goal kick on average than every team in the league. Now we can assume that when they were having a good season, in plenty of games they were dominant they weren't doing this. The time they take when winning and seeing a game out is actually scandalous, but then they also do it in ways that aren't measured. Officially the ball is 'in play' when a keeper just collapses on a soft shot, or catches a cross and falls. they do this every single time when winning. They go down to a stop watch - i am convinved a coach gives them a shout when its due.

theyre a horrible team, and I dont doubt the reason it gets so little attention is because they have an english manager.
 
Thoughts on the Brighton penalty? Seems very harsh, although not completely outrageous to me.
 
saivet said:
Thoughts on the Brighton penalty? Seems very harsh, although not completely outrageous to me.
Click to expand...
Same I'm probably slightly more on the fence, it's like he clearly headers him enough to at least break his stride but it doesn't feel like enough for a pen. Weird one. If it wasn't given I don't think anyone would be yelling pen.
 
saivet said:
Thoughts on the Brighton penalty? Seems very harsh, although not completely outrageous to me.
Click to expand...

I'm happy to be corrected but I honestly cannot remember another penalty called after a clash of heads in the box like that. This happens all the time. Two guys go for a header, one gets there slightly beforehand, and then they knock heads. In this case, Saliba even gets the ball. Joao Pedro heads it, it comes off Saliba's head, then the two heads clash.

Every time a player goes down in the box and the commentators say there was a clash of heads, the game has to be stopped, etc its basically this same thing happening. But we don't get penalty shouts whenever its an attacking player.
 
Last edited:
Powderfinger said:
I'm happy to be corrected but I honestly cannot remember another penalty called after a clash of heads in the box like that. This happens all the time. Two guys go for a header, one gets there slightly beforehand, and then they knock heads. In this case, Saliba even gets the ball. Joao Pedro heads it, it comes off Saliba's head, then the two heads clash.

Every time a player goes down in the box and the commentators say there was a clash of heads, the game has to be stopped, etc its basically this same thing happening. But we don't get penalty shouts whenever its an attacking player.
Click to expand...
That's my issue with it. You see those given as free kicks all the time but never for penalties.

I suppose the slight difference with this one is it's not cross into the box, so the clash of heads impacts the player trying to get on the end of their initial header.
 
saivet said:
That's my issue with it. You see those given as free kicks all the time but never for penalties.

I suppose the slight difference with this one is it's not cross into the box, so the clash of heads impacts the player trying to get on the end of their initial header.
Click to expand...

This happens on second balls a lot too though, not just initial crosses. And in this case Saliba actually heads the ball too. Both players head the ball in quick succession and then their heads clash. Something like this happens literally every game probably like 10 times and I've never seen a penalty awarded.
 
It's never a penalty and I would be livid if it was given against us. What also beggars belief for me is how for situations like this the minimal contact is considered good enough to give a penalty but then you see so many instances where the player clearly gets taken out and they say not enough to give a penalty
 
Joao Pedro penalty given and Gordon penalty when heavily bodychecked in the head is not given? Crazy double standards.
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
It's never a penalty and I would be livid if it was given against us. What also beggars belief for me is how for situations like this the minimal contact is considered good enough to give a penalty but then you see so many instances where the player clearly gets taken out and they say not enough to give a penalty
Click to expand...

I'm waiting to see what that snake Oliver gets up to tomorrow. If, by some miracle, we are managing to hold Liverpool, you just know that Oliver will be on the lookout for a way to screw us over. I hope no United defender breathes too hard near Salah when he's near the box.
 
Moriarty said:
I'm waiting to see what that snake Oliver gets up to tomorrow. If, by some miracle, we are managing to hold Liverpool, you just know that Oliver will be on the lookout for a way to screw us over. I hope no United defender breathes too hard near Salah when he's near the box.
Click to expand...
Wasn't the two bookings for the same offence at Anfield?
 
Weird one. If someone gets to the ball first with their foot, and a defending player then kicks the attacking player's foot it's a penalty no doubt. No reason it shouldn't be the same for heads also, but you never see them given.
 
Carl said:
Weird one. If someone gets to the ball first with their foot, and a defending player then kicks the attacking player's foot it's a penalty no doubt. No reason it shouldn't be the same for heads also, but you never see them given.
Click to expand...

Not only do you never see them given with heads, but in this case the better analogy would be a player touching the ball first and then the second player deflecting the ball - ie, actually blocking the kick - and then their feet clashing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.