The Ref Stop

Jesus - VAR

Agreed on the goalkeeper off the line thing.

Can't get much more objective than that in law (and requires far less VAR 'scrutiny' if you like than offside) yet that is left to the on field officials?

Whether or not you're for VAR that inconsistency not justifiable.

Is it? There were several penalties retaken in the WWC after encroachment by keepers on the advice of VAR. PGMOL may well do it differently, only time will tell as I don't think we've seen any encorachment yet this season.
 
The Ref Stop
Is it? There were several penalties retaken in the WWC after encroachment by keepers on the advice of VAR. PGMOL may well do it differently, only time will tell as I don't think we've seen any encorachment yet this season.
In the sense that it's pretty easy to see in a standard freeze frame, without having to zoom into the most minute degree to show that someone's shoulder may have been a millimetre offside.
 
People complained for years about refereeing decisions. Now people complain about VAR, but they can't complain, you can't create a monster and then have a moan that it is a bit horrible.

It hit LaPorte's arm, so under the current law it has to be disallowed.
Put the flipping law right then.......how forking simple is that?
 
What a load of £&@llocks, the new HB law is just £&@te, hang your heads in shame IFAB. Good riddance to common sense!
 
Good decision on the handball by VAR. Good law change as well in my opinion and one that was necessary.

I do enjoy watching the Twitter rants though.
 
My views are influenced by being a Tottenham fan, a football fan and a referee. From the start, I was against the introduction of VAR, fearing it would reduce the spectacle for fans. I was against the change to the HB law as it broke with the fundamental simplicity of the past where the law was the same for all players regardless of where they were on the pitch. Truly accidental contact with the hand was never penalised.

Despite the goings on today (and in the Champions League) my views remain unaltered. In my opinion, the changes are harming the game and undermining the on field referees.
 
I think what is absolutely barmy about this incident is if the ball hits the defenders arm its no handball and penalty, how can two incidents exactly the same have two different outcomes.

I must add the officials have got it spot on going by the letter of the law, no criticism to them.
 
I think what is absolutely barmy about this incident is if the ball hits the defenders arm its no handball and penalty, how can two incidents exactly the same have two different outcomes.

I must add the officials have got it spot on going by the letter of the law, no criticism to them.
Made me laugh on MOTD as they started really well explaining the new law then went on to say it would be a penalty if a defender did it :wall:
 
Did they spot the tug on Laporte's arm before he "handled" the ball? If they did, would they have told MO to award a penalty? Or while looking for an offence by the attack is in the remit, looking for fouls by the defence isn't?
 
Did they spot the tug on Laporte's arm before he "handled" the ball? If they did, would they have told MO to award a penalty? Or while looking for an offence by the attack is in the remit, looking for fouls by the defence isn't?

Im not sure they would have given they never gave the one on Rodri first half.
 
If the attacker was impeded or fouled, causing the HB (in the context of Jesus' disallowed goal on the eve of the Sabbath), would the goal have stood? I'm sure the answer is yes, but don't know how that would be reconciled with the Good Book. Guess the chronological order of incidents
 
Last edited:
Made me laugh on MOTD as they started really well explaining the new law then went on to say it would be a penalty if a defender did it :wall:
I was sure I heard them say that it wouldn’t be a penalty if the defender did it.

May have to re-listen.
 
Historically goals punched or slapped in don’t look good and don’t do good for the game. Maybe the broad brush of the new law wasn’t really intending this particular outcome but we are where we are!
 
If the attacker was impeded or fouled, causing the HB (in the context of Jesus' disallowed goal on the eve of the Sabbath), would the goal have stood? I'm sure the answer is yes, but don't know how that would be reconciled with the Good Book. Guess the chronological order of incidents
Think you would have to award the penalty. A goal cannot be scored following a HB whether deliberate or accidental. So if the player was fouled then HB and goal you would have to disallow the goal so the only option is to go for the penalty
 
I was sure I heard them say that it wouldn’t be a penalty if the defender did it.

May have to re-listen.
I might have misheard, myself.

Edit: inserted a comma before the spelling and grammar police arrive 🤣
 
Exactly this. Switch to an appeal based system and VAR will look hugely less intrusive/interfering.
Good idea, have SG1 officials sit there for 90+ minutes in front of a screen, ignoring key errors and waiting for a manager to appeal an obvious offside! Brilliant!
 
Back
Top