Jump to content
speeeeeeedie

Premier League Stuff

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Having a second look enabled the referee to ensure that he made the right decision as per the current rule, which he did.

Jamie Carragher was critical of the rule regarding handballs, you seem to have got that mixed up with him being critical about VAR.

I dont agree with VAR purely because it removes too much spontaneity but I dont blame it for things it cannot warrant any blame for, and I accept that more decisions are correct with VAR than without, that is undeniable. 

The decision was not correct initially, the rule is IMO stupid but the initial decision not to give a penalty was not following the rule.

 

The decision was right the 1st time round. By giving the refs a second look means more and more bottled the decision and leave it to VAR. So VAR did give the penalty cos it suggest the ref go and have a second look at a decision that is right first time around. If you can't see that VAR has no place in the beautiful game of football then there is no point continuing this conversation then. It just make the game I enjoyed watching so much look so amateurish and Joke. Bring back football with no VAR. Thank god it not in championship. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ewood Ace said:

That's where the game is heading now. The footballing authorise have made a complete mess of the handball rule constantly messing about with it when it had been fine for years. All that is needed is common sense, sadly that is in short supply in the footballing authorities jobsworths and with the referee's in this country. Too many refs and jobsworths who make and interpret these rules have no experience playing the game and it shows with things like this.

The penalty certainly wouldn't have been given without VAR. Look at the Palace penalty last week at Old Trafford even the bloke who kicked it a Lindelöf's hand didn't appeal for a penalty. 

It might not have been, but the penalty SHOULD have been given based on the current rule. VAR enabled the correct decision to be made. The issue is not with using VAR, the problem is with the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always generally been against VAR, but I'm also against games being ruined like the one at Preston yesterday where the guy was sent off for slipping and losing his footing.

I can see why the ref sent him off, but if he had looked at it again he would have seen it was an unfortunate slip and acted accordingly. Unless of course slipping technically means you are "out of control", which wouldn't surprise me with the rules at the moment.

My big issues are the marginal offsides which are so tight that they may be given offside incorrectly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, chaddyrovers said:

The decision was right the 1st time round. By giving the refs a second look means more and more bottled the decision and leave it to VAR. So VAR did give the penalty cos it suggest the ref go and have a second look at a decision that is right first time around. If you can't see that VAR has no place in the beautiful game of football then there is no point continuing this conversation then. It just make the game I enjoyed watching so much look so amateurish and Joke. Bring back football with no VAR. Thank god it not in championship. 

 

It wasnt chaddy, it was a penalty based on the current rule.

Bottled the decision? He went over to the monitor and made the decision himself.

You have even taken the rant that Carragher went on regarding the rule which is causing the controversy, and twisted it to make out that he was slagging off VAR!

There isnt any point continuing this conversation, you are correct, because you clearly dont know what you are talking about. The blame goes with the rule, not VAR. Because you are against VAR, as am I, you cannot look past pinning any flaws with the rules down onto VAR to further justify your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, roversfan99 said:

It might not have been, but the penalty SHOULD have been given based on the current rule. VAR enabled the correct decision to be made. The issue is not with using VAR, the problem is with the rule.

The problem is a lack of common sense with refs. Under no circumstances should that the today at Palace yesterday and at Old Trafford and Southampton last week be given hand ball. VAR again led to the wrong decision today. Without VAR none of those penalties are given and no one would complain about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chaddy’s raging here, gone full Pelé

Edited by Mattyblue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Problem then is you’d get players deliberately booting the ball at defender’s arms to win penalties - that can’t be good for the game surely?

If they were that accurate with the ball why not just score.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

It wasnt chaddy, it was a penalty based on the current rule.

I've just read the rule (or BTSports report of it):-

If the ball hits a player who has made their body "unnaturally bigger" then a foul will be awarded. IFAB determine that a hand/arm above shoulder height is rarely a “natural position” with some exceptions such as when a player is falling permitted.

IFAB says that having the hand/arm above shoulder height is rarely a "natural" position and a player is "taking a risk" by having the hand/arm in that position. 

Extra leeway will be permitted when it comes to ricocheted handballs when it comes off a nearby player or if they cannot see the ball.

 

Having read that I'm not sure it's right by the law anymore. He's jumping but his arm isn't not above shoulder height so you could argue it's not unatural if you are twisting and jumping. Also it definitely comes off a nearby player AND he can't see the ball.

There is enough leeway there for the referee to not give it IMO. 

Edited by Hasta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hasta said:

I've always generally been against VAR, but I'm also against games being ruined like the one at Preston yesterday where the guy was sent off for slipping and losing his footing.

I can see why the ref sent him off, but if he had looked at it again he would have seen it was an unfortunate slip and acted accordingly. Unless of course slipping technically means you are "out of control", which wouldn't surprise me with the rules at the moment.

My big issues are the marginal offsides which are so tight that they may be given offside incorrectly.

 

I understand what you are saying about marginal offsides but I think the problem is that only the current interpretation would keep the decision making objective.

It would be impossible to bring in concepts that we have seen in the past such as daylight and benefitting the attacker because that would just open up a can of worms. I suppose you could say you have to be a certain distance offside, say 1 yard, but that would make it even 

Ultimately, offsides are always correct via VAR because in essence, if you are 1mm offside, you are offside.

Obviously, the only alternative would be to not use VAR at all. So the debate is, do we want it whereby we always get the correct decision, even if someone is 1mm offside, and we see probably more goals disallowed as a result. Or do we go back to basing it solely on the linesman, whereby you will get mistakes, but you wont waste any time doing so, and it wont involve analysing each goal forensically.

Just now, Ewood Ace said:

The problem is a lack of common sense with refs. Under no circumstances should that the today at Palace yesterday and at Old Trafford and Southampton last week be given hand ball. VAR again led to the wrong decision today. Without VAR none of those penalties are given and no one would complain about them.

Whilst no one would complain if those penalties weren't given, that wouldnt mean that the decisions were correct, the only reason that people would be happy is because I think the majority realise that the rule is flawed.

It cannot be escaped that all VAR has done is allowed the correct decision as per the rulebook to be reached.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, rigger said:

If they were that accurate with the ball why not just score.

Because the goal doesn't run towards you are follow you around the pitch. Also there are 11 men stopping you getting clear shots at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, roversfan99 said:

Ultimately, offsides are always correct via VAR because in essence, if you are 1mm offside, you are offside.

Except the system was said at the start of last season to only be up to 30 cm accurate. So you could be 25 cm onside but given offside (and vice versa). 

I think it needs a sort of "umpires call" like at cricket. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hasta said:

I've just read the rule (or BTSports report of it):-

If the ball hits a player who has made their body "unnaturally bigger" then a foul will be awarded. IFAB determine that a hand/arm above shoulder height is rarely a “natural position” with some exceptions such as when a player is falling permitted.

IFAB says that having the hand/arm above shoulder height is rarely a "natural" position and a player is "taking a risk" by having the hand/arm in that position. 

Extra leeway will be permitted when it comes to ricocheted handballs when it comes off a nearby player or if they cannot see the ball.

 

Having read that I'm not sure it's right by the law anymore. He's jumping but his arm isn't not above shoulder height so you could argue it's not unatural. Also it definitely comes off a nearby player AND he can't see the ball.

There is enough leeway there for the referee to not give it IMO. 

His arm was definitely high up but I suppose as you say the jeopardy comes from where the ball was headed from.

The thing with decisions like this is that they cannot be made anything but subjective. Offsides, even though we might not like how forensically they are looked at, you are either on or offside. This sort of decision will always require a level of opinion.

If we concluded that the decision was still correct, the ire should be aimed at the rule if we had a problem with it. If we concluded that the decision was incorrect, all VAR has done is given the referee further looks at and further evidence to make an informed decision. So if he still got it wrong, the individual referee deserves the criticism. In neither situation is VAR to blame, all VAR has done is facilitated further evidence.

I know I am appearing to be VAR's biggest defender but I am personally not a big fan myself but it is never to blame for incorrect decisions. Its a further tool to help a referee make a decision but if that decision is subjective then its imposible to lose that possibility of the individual referee making a poor call.

IMG-20200927-WA0009.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

The problem is a lack of common sense with refs. Under no circumstances should that the today at Palace yesterday and at Old Trafford and Southampton last week be given hand ball. VAR again led to the wrong decision today. Without VAR none of those penalties are given and no one would complain about them.

You can’t subjectively apply common sense to a rule book. Either it’s allowed or it’s not. VAR enables the rules to be better implemented. People complained about referee decisions before VAR so this isn’t new but blaming the technology is missing the point. Referees are STILL making decisions based on the rules, they just have more information available. Removing VAR just increases the likelihood of guesswork and even more mistakes. The problem with VAR is the rule book itself. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, rigger said:

If they were that accurate with the ball why not just score.

It’s easier to hit someone’s arm than score, especially from an acute angle and a couple of yards away, say somewhere near the goal line near the corner of the box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Whilst no one would complain if those penalties weren't given, that wouldnt mean that the decisions were correct, the only reason that people would be happy is because I think the majority realise that the rule is flawed.

It cannot be escaped that all VAR has done is allowed the correct decision as per the rulebook to be reached.

The reason no one would have complained is because they weren't handballs. If those 4 incidents are handball why wasn't handball given for Chelsea's equaliser last night that is as much a handball as any of them. Last week there was what I thought was a handball and under any rule at Arsenal for West Ham. VAR is not reaching the correct decisions all it means is that matches have 2 incompetent refs instead of one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, magicalmortensleftpeg said:

You can’t subjectively apply common sense to a rule book. Either it’s allowed or it’s not. VAR enables the rules to be better implemented. People complained about referee decisions before VAR so this isn’t new but blaming the technology is missing the point. Referees are STILL making decisions based on the rules, they just have more information available. Removing VAR just increases the likelihood of guesswork and even more mistakes. The problem with VAR is the rule book itself. 

When the rule was that handball had to be deliberate which it was for years, then common sense had to be applied unless you were a mind reader. And that rule worked fine for years. But the jobsworths had to interfere and try to make football and exact science but football is not an exact science and that is the problem now we have jobsworth making the rules and incompetent refs implementing them who have never played the game.

Edited by Ewood Ace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@roversfan99 from your picture you posted of the handball, The ref is looking right at Dier so why hasn't he given the decision in the first place? He clearly seen him so why hasn't? Also why hasn't the officials failed to apply basic discretion. Dier had his back turned and jumped naturally when the ball hit him from 2 yards away, are players now require to have eyes in the back of their heads? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ewood Ace said:

The reason no one would have complained is because they weren't handballs. If those 4 incidents are handball why wasn't handball given for Chelsea's equaliser last night that is as much a handball as any of them. Last week there was what I thought was a handball and under any rule at Arsenal for West Ham. VAR is not reaching the correct decisions all it means is that matches have 2 incompetent refs instead of one.

 

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

@roversfan99 from your picture you posted of the handball, The ref is looking right at Dier so why hasn't he given the decision in the first place? He clearly seen him so why hasn't? Also why hasn't the officials failed to apply basic discretion. Dier had his back turned and jumped naturally when the ball hit him from 2 yards away, are players now require to have eyes in the back of their heads? 

The decision or decisions werent made by VAR, they were made whilst using VAR for further evidence. @magicalmortensleftpeg hits the nail on the head, all VAR is doing is providing further evidence to allow the referee to make a decision. 

The blame in each of these situations or even regards an inconsistency, if we believe that the decision(s) did not follow the rules then goes to those individual referees, who even with additional support in terms of views of the incident, failed to conclude to the correct decision. 

Failing that, if we believe that the rule is flawed, then the authorities deserve the criticism for the rules they have set regarding handballs, not VAR.

VAR invariably gets the blame because it is an easy scapegoat, but it is not what is causing these penalties to be given. The rule is flawed, and the individual decisions are not objective ones like offsides are or goal line decisions are, they require an element of interpretation. No technology could remove that. All it can do is provide the maximum available evidence for the referee to conclude from.

With todays handball, the hand was in an unnatural decision, so to an extent, it is understandable as per the law. The contention comes from the distance Carroll headed the ball from, ie this rule from @Hasta's earlier post, "Extra leeway will be permitted when it comes to ricocheted handballs when it comes off a nearby player or if they cannot see the ball."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

VAR invariably gets the blame because it is an easy scapegoat, but it is not what is causing these penalties to be given.

It is what is causing them to be given, without VAR that penalty would not have been given, the penalty at Palace yesterday would not have been given, ones at Old Trafford and Southampton last week would not have been given. VAR is trying to turn football into an exact science which it is not and never has been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ewood Ace said:

It is what is causing them to be given, without VAR that penalty would not have been given, the penalty at Palace yesterday would not have been given, ones at Old Trafford and Southampton last week would not have been given. VAR is trying to turn football into an exact science which it is not and never has been.

It isnt, because that is impossible. In instances where it can be an exact science, ie offsides, it becomes one. For other instances, take the decision today, it simply provides more evidence, more views, for the referee to make an informed decision.

What it cannot do is totally eliminate that the risk that the referee, even with additional evidence, can still make a decision that everyone agrees with, or indeed one that seems to be a mistake.

Your logic is that VAR caused decisions to be wrong, as if it has some active influence. All it did in those situations is give the referee further evidence and further views of what happened. The actual law is the main issue, it is counter productive to give hand balls for things like that. If we feel like the decision was wrong factoring in the law, perhaps based on the distance from which the ball came from, then it is not VAR's fault. It is the referees fault. He watched the incident a few times, once the possibility of an offside was ruled out precisely. He then viewed it a few times so he was in no doubt about what he thinks he has seen. 

The question is, do you think the decision was correct as per the letter of the law. If so, then the actual rule/law is to blame. If not, then blame the referee, hes made a mistake. All VAR did was let him watch it again a few times.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

It isnt, because that is impossible. In instances where it can be an exact science, ie offsides, it becomes one. For other instances, take the decision today, it simply provides more evidence, more views, for the referee to make an informed decision.

The ref was stood right in front of it looking right at it. No video could have given him a better view than the one he had when he chose not to award a penalty

9 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

Your logic is that VAR caused decisions to be wrong, as if it has some active influence.

The 4 penalties I mentioned were all given because of VAR, if there was no VAR then none of them would have been awarded. In the 2 years that we have had VAR in this country there has been more confusion and controversy regarding handball than there were in the previous 60 years I have been watching football. Because instead of using common sense with regard to handball it is trying to make an exact science of it.

Edited by Ewood Ace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ewood Ace said:

The ref was stood right in front of it looking right at it. No video could have given him a better view than the one he had when he chose not to award a penalty

The 4 penalties I mentioned were all given because of VAR, if there was no VAR then none of them would have been awarded. In the 2 years that we have had VAR in this country there has been more confusion and controversy regarding handball than there were in the previous 60 years I have been watching football.

There have been numerous times before VAR in which tweaks to the rules caused plenty of confusion and controversy. Off the top of my head, when they brought in the "interefering with play" interpretation regarding offsides, when they brought in the deliberate and non deliberate hand ball rules. The issue is that they have changed the handball rule again.

Looking at something numerous times from various angles is unequivocally giving someone a more educated knowledge of what happened over seeing it once from one angle really quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

The decision or decisions werent made by VAR, they were made whilst using VAR for further evidence

But like my original point was why hasn't the ref made the original decision since the ref is looking right at Dier so why hasn't he given the decision in the first place? He clearly seen him so why hasn't? Also why hasn't the officials failed to apply basic discretion. Dier had his back turned and jumped naturally when the ball hit him from 2 yards away, are players now require to have eyes in the back of their heads? so why does ref need VAR help? Can you answer any them. Or has the ref bottled the decision knowing that VAR will save him? 

 

56 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

VAR invariably gets the blame because it is an easy scapegoat,

you are wrong here cos without VAR in the game, the refs would have to make a decision without interference from other people not on the pitch. 

Maybe have a system where refs make a decision and if VAR is 100% sure that it wrong then over rule it. Like Cricket with Umpires and LBW's. But this current system is confusing and takes far too long to make a decision. Plus these silly and stupid lines for offsides are ridiculous and making a mockery of the game of football I enjoyed watching

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.