Arsenal v Bayern

Just reading the Sky piece on the controversial calls and it's disappointing to read the final bit questioning the referees lack of experience at this level and suggesting he wasn't ready to do a game of this level because he's potentially missed two penalties.

Given the general consensus seems to be the total opposite then it's an odd(and probably lazy) opinion to throw in there. I did however like the comparison of the Gabriel's handball decision to Bairstows stumping in the cricket where he left his crease because he thought over was called and he was stumped behind. Bairstow wasn't gaining any advantage and the spirit of the game was questioned and the same applies here I feel, in law it's a handball offense but there was no advantage gained from it as Bayern players were no where near or going for the ball and Gabriel clearly wasn't aware the game was 'live'. The referee used discretion and common sense even if his alleged wording probably could of been better.

The Sky article also question why the VAR check for Arsenals potential penalty was so quick given another angle may of suggested it could of been a penalty but for me, if one angle backs the referee call then you got to stick by it, clearly some feel it should of been a pen but the fact there is a large amount of English pundits/media suggests Saka initiated the contact suggests the VAR was right not to overrule in that situation.

The Harry Kane elbow is borderline red for me, I think the lack of a swing is what made the ref go yellow there but other referees would of went red I'm sure. The classic orange card and the referees on field decision sits fine with me.

Mr Dean said:

The ball is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves, which is what happened.

I understand the spirit of the game argument but I'm of the opinion that IFAB makes the laws and referees apply them including the ones we don't like. If IFAB wanted referees to have discretion here, they ought to have written it into the laws (and to my knowledge, they haven't).

Knowing which laws to apply and which to ignore is tricky; the safest option is to apply all as written.

Click to expand...

Hmm the correct procedure is that the ball is kicked and clearly moved.

If the referee decides the restart has not been taken, then it hasn’t been taken. The referee is the sole arbiter and decides when play starts and stops, not the actions of players, or signals. Yes, you also need a correct procedure…

I don't like the referee's supposed explanation of why he didn't give the pen for handball. However, I do like that he didn't give it as for me Gabriel didn't realise the kick had been taken, so the get out of jail card with this one is for the ref to agree IMHO. Saka's? Never a pen.
Edit: To add, the reason I don't like the explanation is because if we didn't penalise "a kid's mistake", there would be next to no fouls etc actually penalised. Just like you could do away with the offside rule if that was the case.

I bet, next time Gabriel isn't sure he kicks it back !

Gabriel said:

I don't like the referee's supposed explanation of why he didn't give the pen for handball. However, I do like that he didn't give it as for me Gabriel didn't realise the kick had been taken, so the get out of jail card with this one is for the ref to agree IMHO. Saka's? Never a pen.
Edit: To add, the reason I don't like the explanation is because if we didn't penalise "a kid's mistake", there would be next to no fouls etc actually penalised. Just like you could do away with the offside rule if that was the case.

Click to expand...

You don't know that is exactly what the referee said. Tuchel said that he did, but sadly over the years managers have had a habit of misquoting, intentionally or otherwise, what referees said to them after games.

This must be an absolute nightmare as a referee, you are damned if you do and damned if you don't, and for it to happen to a referee in his first ever Champions League knockout game has to be very challenging. Arsenal do this at almost every goal kick, a centre half or the keeper gives it to the other centre half and he then plays it to the keeper, it had happened many times in the game before this point. I'm leaning towards spirit of the game saying it was a mistake and therefore not a penalty, and I'm pretty sure he will be backed by UEFA. The media are focusing on the referee blowing the whistle, but this is irrelevant as the whistle isn't needed for a GK restart. If I was thinking fast on my feet I might even claim that the whistle meant I wasn't ready for the restart to dig myself out of a hole.

talkSPORT had Keith Hackett on to discuss the incidents in this game, and he yet again tied himself in knots and demonstrated why he has no credibility. On the possible Saka penalty he said it was very subjective so he would have liked to see VAR ask the referee to go and have another look, which is exactly what VAR cannot do. Subjective and clear and obvious error are mutually exclusive, so clearly VAR couldn't get involved based on his argument. On the potential handball he said it was 100% a penalty, but I suspect when he was refereeing there is no way on earth he would have given that. Somewhat comically someone on Twitter then pointed out that there's no way he would have even seen it from the centre circle where he spent most of his games whilst refereeing.

Just saw the Saka pen appeal properly.

Just embarrassing. The commentators, Hackett etc. should be ashamed.

RustyRef said:

This must be an absolute nightmare as a referee, you are damned if you do and damned if you don't, and for it to happen to a referee in his first ever Champions League knockout game has to be very challenging. Arsenal do this at almost every goal kick, a centre half or the keeper gives it to the other centre half and he then plays it to the keeper, it had happened many times in the game before this point. I'm leaning towards spirit of the game saying it was a mistake and therefore not a penalty, and I'm pretty sure he will be backed by UEFA. The media are focusing on the referee blowing the whistle, but this is irrelevant as the whistle isn't needed for a GK restart. If I was thinking fast on my feet I might even claim that the whistle meant I wasn't ready for the restart to dig myself out of a hole.

talkSPORT had Keith Hackett on to discuss the incidents in this game, and he yet again tied himself in knots and demonstrated why he has no credibility. On the possible Saka penalty he said it was very subjective so he would have liked to see VAR ask the referee to go and have another look, which is exactly what VAR cannot do. Subjective and clear and obvious error are mutually exclusive, so clearly VAR couldn't get involved based on his argument. On the potential handball he said it was 100% a penalty, but I suspect when he was refereeing there is no way on earth he would have given that. Somewhat comically someone on Twitter then pointed out that there's no way he would have even seen it from the centre circle where he spent most of his games whilst refereeing.

Click to expand...

Re Harry Kane alleged elbow, Hackett also said Kane swung his arm. He didn't. He seemed to position it to protect himself. There was no swing as such. He also said Kane was looking for Gabiel. Not necessarily. Top level players also have a glance over their shoulder to see where their team mates are positioned. That comment basically adds fuel to the "never played the game" criticism of referees

RustyRef said:

You don't know that is exactly what the referee said. Tuchel said that he did, but sadly over the years managers have had a habit of misquoting, intentionally or otherwise, what referees said to them after games.

Click to expand...

Hence the reason I put supposed explanation.

santa sangria said:

Hmm the correct procedure is that the ball is kicked and clearly moved.

If the referee decides the restart has not been taken, then it hasn’t been taken. The referee is the sole arbiter and decides when play starts and stops, not the actions of players, or signals. Yes, you also need a correct procedure…

Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make is that the ball was undoubtedly kicked and it clearly moved. This is a matter of fact. Therefore, strictly according to law, the goal kick was taken.