Would it be easier if we gave the players sticks to use when jumping - it seems to help the Masai tribe not to use their arms --- - but I suppose VAR would award a penalty if the ball hits the stick !
That’ll prove fruitless for our players, seeing how challenging it is for them to hit a target 24 feet x 8.
What I'm surprised at is he didn't pick me up on my spelling....new....Knew..he's getting mild in his old age.
I had seen the error - but - I gave you credit for being able to spell ....... I just thought that you was struggling to type with your arms rigidly by your side. ...... I shall now adopt a knew way of laughing -- instead of ha,ha,ha -- var,var,var
Man U escape a Red card by use of VAR. Don't get VAR used when two footed off the ground challenge goes in earlier to overturn a yellow. I do not see how you can justify VAR being used in only SOME of the games. How unfair is that. If you are small you are not entitled to the same football justice as the big boys. Actually sounds a bit like the legal system in the UK anyway I'd guess.
Be careful what you wish for............. Perhaps I was being a little naive - hoping that VAR would rectify incorrect decisions - to allow a sense of fairness / justice, when the referee makes a wrong decision - or no decision !................. I wasn't expecting that the referee would use VAR to make worse decisions ! I've just been watching the Spurs v Man City game... I had my suspicion about the referee before the game - he seemed to be very friendly with David Silva in the tunnel ! Then we get to the penalty (NOT). How can the referee consider that Danny Rose 'handled' the ball ??? - Rose was clearly in the process of (a) falling before the shot came in - and (b), turning his back to the ball - which hit him, NOT arm towards the ball............. I would rather the referee be blind to an incident - than have him cheat....Still - justice was done with Loris making a save. We're going to have a lot of nonsense next season if tonight's referee is anything to go by.
Microscope ! As a Gills fan ( who also 'likes' Spurs ), I really shouldn't have any sympathy for Manchester City ---- but --- Having watched the City v Spurs game yesterday, I can't help but think that the result of the game was a little cruel on City. I have to admit that some of their play was beautiful -- they gave the Spurs fullbacks the rounaround ( particularly down Spurs' right ). City had many attempts on goal - and deserved to win the game ((not that I didn't have a little chuckle when the Jesus 'goal' was cancelled )). I have always been in favour of VAR - to ensure that any major mistake by the referee can be rectified during the game -- but -- I find the new interpretation of 'handball' to be utterly ridiculous. It always used to be that handball had to be deliberate -- not anymore. I suppose I can understand and accept the decision to cancel the goal by Jesus - because the passage of play may not have evolved if the ball hadn't made contact with Laporte's arm. If I have to accept that there will no longer be 'accidental' handball, what will happen, when the play is in a penalty area, if a forward 'deliberately' kicks the ball onto the arm of a defender ? -- Are we going to have a penalty ? --- it's got to be a penalty - we can't have double standards.
I saw the game and I feel, regardless of the new rules, that Manchester City had a perfectly good goal disallowed, and that VAR was implemented completely for different reasons than in was intended, in it's early days of introduction. I've always argued one rule will always lead to another with the introduction of technology to the game, once again yesterday that came to fruit. People in general think, VAR was introduced because it's what the fans, referee's and governing bodies wanted, it was not! It was implemented purely as a financial security for the businessmen of the game, the owners and directors of football clubs in the Premier League. I watched an interview with a Villa director and he said much the same, and used business as the reasoning. Well I don't know how City voted in it's implementation, but if they did vote for it, and if they lose the title by two points, then they blew their own foot right off! It will not stop here, VAR does not come cheap, as Brazil....https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/brazilian-clubs-reject-var-amid-cost-concerns/ - at least someone had the sense to reject it, but that was Feb 2018! Also while the armchair fans get even more comfortable, well be ready for American style commercial breaks during your sporting event, every minute of lost sponsorship costs the broadcasting bodies £600k....that's every minute. So get ready for the future when those minute(s) will be filled with VAR sponsorship breaks. After all that's what you all want isn't it.....a business and not a game? Yesterday was just anothe technological stain on football, the supporters never contested the goal, the players never contested the goal, nor did the ref.....but as is said in the comedy show, computer says no!
VAR isn't responsible for making the rules, if the rule is crap blame FIFA, all VAR did was to make a decision based on the handball rule.
As I said grumpygit, REGARDLESS of the rules, the supporters never noticed anything wrong, the tv viewers never noticed anything wrong, the players also from both sides accepted the goal and never noticed anything wrong and nor did any of the officials down on the pitch. VAR was not meant to be used for instances like this, we have expanded the rule even more, how long before we start scrutinising every second of the game. It was VAR and it's operators that ultimately made the decision. The IFAB says VAR is only to be used "to correct clear errors and for missed serious incidents" in those "match-changing" situations. I do not believe it was a clear error or one that was in such a way to affect the outcome. I do not believe any advantage was gained by the incident, nor was it intentional imho, this is just getting silly now, the goal was scored fairly. By upholding this decision we have dealt another death knell for the game. Yeah I know what the stupid rules say, that's the same as the crazy new rule for goal kicks, it's turned it into an utter farce!
First to declare my interest (again) that City are my Manchester team, and have been since I moved here in 1973. I reluctantly have to accept that Jesus' goal was correctly ruled out as all the VAR team did was correctly interpret the current rules which are that any goal created by an accidental handball is to be disallowed. The matter of clear error unfortunately isn't relevant, but it could be argued that the ref DID make a clear error as the Laporte 'handball' was not detected onfield. However I can't understand why City were not awarded a penalty in the first half - apparently putting your arm round a player's neck from behind and then pushing him over isn't considered to be a foul. It's still early days, and as the season develops a clearer pattern of VAR decision making will probably appear. I just hope that any current deemed injustices (including the Wolves non-goal last week) and points 'unfairly' won / lost will balance themselves out.
But isn't that what we already had before VAR? 'points 'unfairly' won / lost will balance themselves out.' Take the Liverpool keeper in the Super Cup, during the penalty shoot out - I never watched the game but later saw highlights, as soon as I saw it for the first time, my thoughts were the keeper is clearly off his line, subsequent still frames I've seen on social media verified that the keeper was indeed off his line. So despite an official now being on the line, despite VAR, an injustice was done if we are going by interpretation of the new rules. I think we have dug a bigger mess, than we originally started with and nothing can reward you for the loss of a trophy.
I take your point, but at least now we have the same 'ref'. VAR is more unforgiving, but hopefully consistent. On the penalties matter, yes, I noticed that as well. But if the penalty was scored then the keeper has not gained any advantage, so the goal will stand. It would normally only be re-taken if the keeper was off his line and saved the penalty. I THINK that that scenario has still to be tested in PL this season, although City had a penalty retaken against West Ham because the keeper saved it (within the rules) but a West Ham player who had encroached into the penalty area before the kick was taken then cleared the ball, and so had gained an unfair advantage. These are things that are very difficult for a referee / linesman (sorry, referee's assistant) to detect in real time, but which are, at the end of the day, cheating. Many events in games will never be able to be determined as black and white (apparently including 'comings together' in the penalty area), but hopefully VAR will at least ensure that those that can be determined are done so, and in a consistent manner. It's not that I think that City had the s***ty end of the stick on the Lamela / Rodri incident .... well, yes, actually it is.
RE penalties and encroaching from both sides, why not just use it as they do in a shoot out. All players behind the halfway line. That way it is a dual between player and keeper. Then just to show that there will be o crap taken, id they encroach over the halfway line, either a straight red, or a black and decker through the kneecap. That would soon stop them encroaching, and also really give the pansies something to moan and squeal about. Simples
Is this really what football has become though.... please log in to view this image Got to be honest, for me you've killed the game. Manchester City in my eyes won that game fair and square, IF they were (unlikely) to lose the title by two points, I hope the money men in the game will realise that technology can bite you in the arse as well has being the misguided financial insurance policy.
