Jump to content
IGNORED

Fabinho


Numero Uno

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Up The City! said:

PGMOL made no mention of that in their explanation.

 

They didn’t need to. They were only asked to check TAA and deemed it to be ok.

i like Liverpool but I thought it was handball. But if you want to penalise TAA, you have to go back to Silva too.

Basically it’s a mess.

Should we stop play?  Possibly. But then you don’t get Fabinho’s goal.

It needs a serious rethink. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAR just isn’t fit for purpose in its current guise. There’s so much good it could be used for and isn’t and what it is being used for is ridiculous. 

The whole thing needs shelving until there’s a clear and consistent plan around it’s application, however that would be an admission that they’ve got it wrong, so it won’t happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said:

VAR just isn’t fit for purpose in its current guise. There’s so much good it could be used for and isn’t and what it is being used for is ridiculous. 

The whole thing needs shelving until there’s a clear and consistent plan around it’s application, however that would be an admission that they’ve got it wrong, so it won’t happen. 

I think what bothers me is the fact that the rules seem to be being adjusted and modified as the season goes on. I don't really see how you can have a fair competition if the threshold for a decision changes from week to week. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silva handball was classed as accidental for it didn’t set up a goal.

TAA was looked at and was classed as a Natural Position even though his arm moved to the ball. Also it stopped Sterling behind him having an attempt at goal. Which I believe VAR is suppose to check but I think didn’t.

If the ref had gone to the screen and looked or even blew straight away and said unsure if it’s a penalty will look at the screen. Would of sorted it instead he bottled it and then VAR was left to choose penalty or disallow the goal.

As everyone in studio on Sky said it’s a penalty and next week will be given which is the trouble with VAR no consistency in decision making and just frustrates everyone.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

Silva handball was classed as accidental for it didn’t set up a goal.

TAA was looked at and was classed as a Natural Position even though his arm moved to the ball. Also it stopped Sterling behind him having an attempt at goal. Which I believe VAR is suppose to check but I think didn’t.

If the ref had gone to the screen and looked or even blew straight away and said unsure if it’s a penalty will look at the screen. Would of sorted it instead he bottled it and then VAR was left to choose penalty or disallow the goal.

As everyone in studio on Sky said it’s a penalty and next week will be given which is the trouble with VAR no consistency in decision making and just frustrates everyone.

 

....but had a goal resulted the same "handball" would have been classed as deliberate and would have been penalised.

This is the absolute farce of the way the laws have been "tweaked" to make their application prescriptive, so that exactly the same offence can be interpreted by the officials in completely different ways dependant on who commits the "offence, or where on the pitch it takes place! 

In the penalty area the same handball incident is judged differently dependant on whether it is committed by a defender or an attacker - what's all that about. Pretty soon they will have a ruling so that it is foul if a little player is kicked by a big player ( over 6 foot tall and weighing over 12 stone) , but not if it's the other way around. VAR will apply a digital ruler to determine a players height and the offending player will have to use a pitch side set of drift scales to determine his weight.

However they will not think through what will happen when 2 big players tackle, or 2 small players,  each other so will probably introduce rock, scissors paper to decide the outcome.

Watching MOTD it seems to be that almost as much time is spent discussing VATR incidents as there is discussing the games themselves. If the measure of a referee's ability is how anonymous he is during a game, then VSR is an unmitigated disaster!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, downendcity said:

....but had a goal resulted the same "handball" would have been classed as deliberate and would have been penalised.

This is the absolute farce of the way the laws have been "tweaked" to make their application prescriptive, so that exactly the same offence can be interpreted by the officials in completely different ways dependant on who commits the "offence, or where on the pitch it takes place! 

In the penalty area the same handball incident is judged differently dependant on whether it is committed by a defender or an attacker - what's all that about. Pretty soon they will have a ruling so that it is foul if a little player is kicked by a big player ( over 6 foot tall and weighing over 12 stone) , but not if it's the other way around. VAR will apply a digital ruler to determine a players height and the offending player will have to use a pitch side set of drift scales to determine his weight.

However they will not think through what will happen when 2 big players tackle, or 2 small players,  each other so will probably introduce rock, scissors paper to decide the outcome.

Watching MOTD it seems to be that almost as much time is spent discussing VATR incidents as there is discussing the games themselves. If the measure of a referee's ability is how anonymous he is during a game, then VSR is an unmitigated disaster!

 

I agree, the laws have been tweaked here and there so much now I honestly think the officials on pitch and in VAR don’t know what they are.

Perfect example Sheff Utd goal offside for toe was in front.

Fair enough but that was first phase of attack goal was scored 2nd phase so should of stood.

Reason: Liverpool scored at Soton last time when Salah was offside and VAR said  goal would of stood for goal was scored by Keita in 2nd phase so offside wouldn’t of mattered.

Go to Saturday and VAR says phases don’t matter and goal is disallowed for was offside initial attack. Even Sheff Utd manager said wasn’t it a different phase so why was goal not allowed. If your getting decisions which are ok one week but not next, how can anyone take it seriously. I think refs are now not making decisions and waiting on VAR to correct them instead of officiating as they should. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wayne allisons tongues said:

I agree, the laws have been tweaked here and there so much now I honestly think the officials on pitch and in VAR don’t know what they are.

Perfect example Sheff Utd goal offside for toe was in front.

Fair enough but that was first phase of attack goal was scored 2nd phase so should of stood.

Reason: Liverpool scored at Soton last time when Salah was offside and VAR said  goal would of stood for goal was scored by Keita in 2nd phase so offside wouldn’t of mattered.

Go to Saturday and VAR says phases don’t matter and goal is disallowed for was offside initial attack. Even Sheff Utd manager said wasn’t it a different phase so why was goal not allowed. If your getting decisions which are ok one week but not next, how can anyone take it seriously. I think refs are now not making decisions and waiting on VAR to correct them instead of officiating as they should. 

So do I!

Although he usually talks a load of bull, talking about VAR the other week Adrian Durham commented that he felt that the standard of refereeing has got worse under VAR rather than better. I am sure that refs feel in no mans land at the moment. If they make a decision, they must be  worried that it will get overturned, making them look bad. Accordingly, in the face of a contentious decision do they think it better to not make a decision, knowing that if VAR looks at it and still does nothing, the ref will appear exonerated ( even if the decision is wrong) but if VAR makes a different decision, then that is what it is there for? For the referee, the added bonus is that if a decision is wrong, then it now seems that everyone will jump on the "blame VAR" bandwagon.

Unfortunately, the danger is that increasingly more and more decisions will be made by someone sitting in a studio and not the on field referee.

To protect their integrity I think referees should be encouraged to review VAR decisions on the pitch side monitors, so they at least give the appearance of refereeing games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Up The City! said:

The simplest thing is for teams to have an allocated amount of checks per game. Saves having every single decision reviewed then so overall saves time.

Completely agree, make it the manager’s choice to review.  Use it, abuse it, lose it.  One appeal only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Completely agree, make it the manager’s choice to review.  Use it, abuse it, lose it.  One appeal only.

Yep. Soon as the review call is made by the manager then game should stop dead right there. If the review is no penalty/red card etc then the other team gets a free kick where the ball was when play was stopped. Stop the clock at the same time. It's such a simple solution its bloody glaringly obvious.

Fabinhos goal was a great goal, but it was only scored because Man City were busy appealing, of course you should play until the whistle but the human instinct is to appeal. For those that saw the blatant hand ball they probably were just waiting for VAR to award the penalty so naturally switched off. The ref was probably even waiting for VAR to intervene. 

I 100% believe had Liverpool not of scored then a penalty would have been awarded, no doubt about it. However it was bottled due to it being at Anfield. 

That decision robbed us of watching a contest. For Man City not only had they had a blatant penalty denied and the possibility of taking the lead, they then had a double blow of conceding. Instead of being 1 nil up they was 1 down and then the 2nd quickly followed due to this double blow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/11/2019 at 04:14, Bullbag said:

Everyone choosing to completely blank out the fact that Bernado Silva has handled the ball into TA-A' path.

Because of that, the right decision was made on and off the pitch.

It was outside the area so therefore VAR could not get involved in that and they cant take it into account when making the penalty decision, that 1st hand ball is up to the ref and the ref decided no hand ball, it wasn't a hand ball for me either.

But it does make you wonder did they take it into consideration when they shouldn't have? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Up The City! said:

Yep. Soon as the review call is made by the manager then game should stop dead right there. If the review is no penalty/red card etc then the other team gets a free kick where the ball was when play was stopped. Stop the clock at the same time. It's such a simple solution its bloody glaringly obvious.

Fabinhos goal was a great goal, but it was only scored because Man City were busy appealing, of course you should play until the whistle but the human instinct is to appeal. For those that saw the blatant hand ball they probably were just waiting for VAR to award the penalty so naturally switched off. The ref was probably even waiting for VAR to intervene. 

I 100% believe had Liverpool not of scored then a penalty would have been awarded, no doubt about it. However it was bottled due to it being at Anfield. 

That decision robbed us of watching a contest. For Man City not only had they had a blatant penalty denied and the possibility of taking the lead, they then had a double blow of conceding. Instead of being 1 nil up they was 1 down and then the 2nd quickly followed due to this double blow.

Perhaps those that had already seen Silva's handball didn't stop and played on.

As for stopping the game when a manager makes a review call, is there not a danger that managers would make spurious calls in order to stop a breakaway by the opposition? I know that TAA's handball incident was not spurious, but imagine it had been completely innocuous , Liverpool broke away ( as they did) and then Pep called for a review as they were bearing down on the Man City penalty area. The game is stopped immediately and then the review shows no offence committed, it would be the equivalent of Fernandinho "accidentally" pulling an opposition player back to prevent a quick break!

In your opinion Man City had a blatant penalty denied, and therein lies the fundemental problem at the moment. They have interfered with the laws so much that no one really knows how handball decisions are being judged. Just look at how the question of Silva's handball was explained to MOTD by the VAR people. Any handball by an attacker in the penalty area is immediately penalised if a goal results, no matter how it arises,  but in this case as no goal resulted it was ignored when considering TAA's handball incident.

So was  it handball or not?

As Ive mentioned in another post, how often do we hear pundits say , when referring to a challenge in the penalty area not being given as a foul and a penalty, anywhere else on the pitch that is given as a foul? It seems that they are changing the rules so that the same offence carries greater penalty ( ir less) depending where on the field it is committed, and in the case of penalty area challenges, in my view almost certainly because of the impact ( a penalty and likely goal) and the controversy that will likely ensue.

Then we come to the question of hands/arms being in an unnatural position and how this is judged, not forgetting that they now appear to have done away with the question as to whether the offender had any intent to handle the ball. Accordingly, a defender can be pushed over by an attacker, raise his arms to balance himself against the fall and a shot from behind him ( that he cannot see) hits his outstretched arm, yet it is likely to be judged a penalty because of the unnatural position!

There has been too much interference in the laws, which although not perfect, had served the game perfectly well for decades. Add in VAR and we have a perfect storm, whereby it seems that pretty well everyone ( players, managers and fans) would now want VAR discontinued, but the authorities having committed to it will not give it up.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...