Search results

Not from this picture! It may exaggerate the angle but it does illustrate that having hands behind your back doesn't mean it can't be an offence. See 6.34 of the highlights video for a player with hands behind and close to body.

Penalty claim for an odd one - defender stops shot with hands behind his back - but was that an unnatural position when side-on to the shot? (Or even deliberate?) But someone on a City thread posted this from IFAB. Irrelevant to the incident but does anyone know what IFAB document it's from...

Belatedly, I'm going to mention too a 76th minute incident where Doku was put through and Darren Cann raised his flag in exactly the usual circumstance for wait and see for keeping the flag down. Even more curiously, the TV editors didn't show a replay, or any angle that would confirm the...

Why not enough for a penalty for the Spurs handball? Unless you think JG gave handball for deliberate handball against Haaland (rather than just handball when scoring) then when the goal was disallowed, why wouldn't VAT look for a possible penalty? If the ball touched the Spurs defender's hand...

Another mess. Mr Gillett doesn't seem to disallow the goal immediately but apparently did. VAR starts checking. Conclusion is (I paraphrase): despite it looks like a defender or two may have committed a handball offence, it's decided that it didn’t conclusively not touch the scorer's arm so...

It doesn't mean that. Well done to the ref for sticking to the onfield decision.

What's with the antipathy to "what football expects"? It's from IFAB and it's in the book.

My impression was that VAR has had far fewer gaffes of late, but try this. Game already lost by City, but PSG's fourth goal disallowed for offside, then - after a very long wait - allowed as VAR judged it was deliberately played by a defender. So it was - but off the shoulder and head of an...

You know me so well.... I could start a new current thread about Palace v City...

So it's only not VC when it's a City player who gets their hair pulled? (I am going back a long way but one was SPA by a hair pull ...) Hence my question. From other replies it seems there has been a fairly recent "clarification" that it should be red.

I was wondering when that became a red card offence. He was probably just trying to pull his shoulder but couldn't find it though the hair.

How did he give 30 seconds extra when he blew at 8 seconds over the minimum of 5? When he blew it was 3 against 5 defenders and it only looked as bad as it did because 3 of the 5 stopped when the whistle went, but it was still SPAR (SPA by referee).

He stopped refereeing QPR after they played Millwall and he gave Millwall two penalties.

And neutral journalists (not many of them) are better qualified in the laws than ex-pros? The clip above doesn't tell much - it's more obvious on this: https://www.skysports.com/football/video/30998/13259476/its-a-nasty-one-var-shows-christian-norgaard-red-card-for-high-challenge-on-jordan-pickford

The HB also was on an arm that also hit the defender on the head. So three fouls and a handball. Starring Hugh Grant.

He did get a caution. If the referee saying "I saw that" counts.

How is this not VC? https://www.skysports.com/football/video/30998/13243100/arsenal-vs-liverpool-virgil-van-dijk-clashes-with-kai-havertz-off-the-ball And presumably these days with no VAR intervention there's no post-match review.

But still wouldn't take as long as it did....

So you don't agree with everything Gary O'Neil said...

Going over to converse just puts AR in firing line. As an AR if I wanted that to happen I'd be flagging (or buzzing). On coms: "Calling AR" AR here. Anything wrong? Player in offside position from header. Doing anything to be interfering? Not really, a bit of leaning on keeper who pushed back...