Fabinho

[Davefevs]

4 hours ago, downendcity said:

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!

If you give them 1 challenge per game, and say 5 seconds from the event to trigger that challenge, then if they want to waste it part way through a breakaway then that’s their choice.  Tough shit if they then have no challenges left later in the game.

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!

completely bonkers isn’t it.

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.

 

 

 

 

[Up The City!]

5 hours ago, downendcity said:

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.

 

 

 

You raise a good point and one I hadn't considered. Maybe something like in the NFL where you lose a review or whatever if the review upholds the on field referee decision? Or to stop the spurious calls maybe VAR needs to say we've potentially seen something in real time do you want to use your review on this incident.

For me all this hand ball stuff is nonsense, it's not hand ball anymore, its arm ball. Should be restricted to just the actual hand imo.