I think Sterling’s challenge was reckless and a yellow was fair. He’s attempted played the ball and caught the player on the follow through, not with excessive force. Although the still images look similar There’s a difference for me between an awful challenge (Aubameyang) and catching a player when attempting to kicka ball (Sterling)
Tottenham Hotspur vs Man City
- Thread starter Sheffields Finest
- Start date
Not really, Dean misjudged it, but if Aurier did get the ball first, VAR wouldn't have overturned it...
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
A random question but if Man City had scored in the interim whilst VAR was checking the penalty would the goal have counted or would they have gone back for the penalty?
I think Twitter would have gone into meltdown and all power would be lost to Stockley Park!!
Im sure these two don't speak each others native tongue but I'm hope they had a beer afterwards!!! It was handbags at 2 paces!!
Is assume they’d give the goal and move on but that brings up a good point. Although city don’t know what the outcome is about to be, it’s essentially over 2 minutes where city can go gun-ho. Concede and it’s gets overturned for their penalty, score and they get an incredibly long advantage
Seen it again, RED card dirty git!
one
RefChat Addict
This is much better. How is this orange? Not possible red for me. Certain. Classic over the ball studs into shin. You don't need a lot of speed in this to make it a red.
More importantly, what would've happened if Spurs had scored between the pen incident and the VAR decision being made 2 mins later? Go back to the first offence I assume and disallow the Spurs goal. Imagine the stadium! Would the VAR officials still be objective if that happened or would they be more inclined not give the penalty because of the Spurs goal? Tough one.
You can see the game being stopped soon when there's an incident in case of a goal being scored whilst the decision making process is happening. In the same way you can see penalties restarting with a goal kick of they're missed because of the encroachment issues etc.
I am for VAR, but my concern is that the game will fundamentally change due to VAR and the current remit which is for law changes to suit referees at the top level and not the game. The new handball rule for instance, appears to be there to protect against controversial decisions (ball hitting the arm and either going straight in or creating a GSO). This change is from the Boly goal against City last year I believe which went in off the arm. But the law change has made things much worse, not better, because the number of times the ball goes in direct from the arm/hand is far less than the amount of times in touches the arm/hand before a goal is scored. It's safe refereeing which in turn worsens the game as a spectacle.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
Goal would definitely be disallowed if Spurs scored and penalty needed to be awarded - it's happened before outside England.
Play is meant to be stopped when the ball is in a neutral area if VAR recommends a review. The problem with just stopping it in the interim is people will become frustrated having to wait for a decision and it will feel a waste in all the instances where the decision isn't changed.
And this is where we need to work on what gets reviewed. And how long it takes to review it. It should be one look, that's a pen, done. Not oh let me see it again from this angle, that angle, every angle before the decision to review. Which should go to ref and let him have the various angles if he wants them.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
Did you not think it was a penalty yesterday?
I thought it was pretty clear, especially with the benefit of replays, so the right decision was reached.
You'd ideally want them to make the decision quicker but for whatever reason they didn't. Perhaps it was taking a while to find the required angle? Perhaps they were checking something else in the APP first, to check there wasn't an offside?
It was what, 2+ minutes from incident to VAR decision? They could've stopped the game almost immediately, sent Dean to the monitor and had it all done in 1 minute - without 2 mins of wasted play.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
But they're only going to stop play is there's clear evidence the origiinal decision is wrong, even in leagues where they use the pitchside monitor.
I think it's also making a big assumption to think the process would be any quicker if they'd use the monitor. I saw some stats recently about the average VAR review time and the PL seemed quicker than most other leagues.
I asked this at a referee workshop and nobody knew the answer.
The other question asked was if Spurs scored in the two minutes would they get a penalty to go 2-0 up?
Maybe a VAR review means the game ALWAYS stops immediately. But what is the "non possible penalty team" with possession are 1-0 down in a cup match?
Who's the person off here that e-mails David Elleray all the time? Maybe they could ask the question.
The main point is avoiding the potential for a goal to be scored and then chalked off, I think that is preferable to everyone involved.
Goals are cancelled, I remember it happening in the Dutch league last year. To my surprise, it doesn't actually specify this in the protocol. Interestingly, it does say:
"If play continues after an incident which is then reviewed, any disciplinary
action taken/required during the post-incident period is not cancelled,
even if the original decision is changed (except a caution/sending-off for
stopping a promising attack or DOGSO)."
Of course they are they don't look at the monitor!
Of course it was a penalty. I think you have missed my point. Clear and obvious needs to be that. If you have to look at something over and over to make a decision it can't be clear and obvious, can it?
Again the point is we need to look at what and how things are checked and reviewed.
2 minutes whilst play continues is unacceptable which ever way you want to spin it
Precisely my point.