Jesus - VAR
- Thread starter Big Cat
- Start date
Clearly Handball!
I think you're missing the point(s)
Not going to happen given it is in the first season in England. It might get changed over time obviously, but what is there will be there for at least this season.
They have used it for encroachment, West Ham were penalised last week for it.
Only it wasn't Jesus who handled it. Must've been an act of God! That's what a lot of games are being decided upon
Why? Am I missing something obvious or did they get the correct decision?
Don't get me wrong, I wasn't the biggest advocate of VAR and I predicted things like this might happen. But now it is in people can't complaint, it's like complaining about people speeding outside your house so the police put speed checks in and you get caught yourself, you can't blame anyone else.
Dem blooming disciples then! 
VAR, killing football since 2014
Bromleyref
New Member
So if a goal is scored from a penalty (all goals are checked right?) and the replay clearly shows infringement by attacking players (an objective infraction of law) would VAR require a retake?
I was under the impression that they have a bit more discretion when it comes to those decisions which I think is difficult to justify when you see how it’s implemented with other decisions (the Sterling goal last week being a prime example).
Not the best analogy. I didn't call for VAR, so I can say what I like
VAR will only get involved if it affects the play. So for example, the keeper encroaches and saves the kick, or a defender / attacker encroaches and influences play (as Declan Rice did leading to the retaken penalty against West Ham)
Strangely, although we've seen VAR fumble with subjective stuff in the past, it's now forensic inspection of 'some' black & white stuff which is causing controversy. I think recent events have emphasised how VAR has evolved into something which has no relation to C&O
Correct, We can disagree with the current handball law but it was applied perfectly today. Given that intent has been taken out for handling when a goal is scored, this is now no different to offside, it is black and white and either the attacker handled it or he didn't. The ball hit Laporte's arm, and even though it was totally accidental the only option now is a free kick and disallowed goal..
But there is some subjectivity as to which factual offending they'll look at. It's a can of worms
Bromleyref
New Member
I really don’t see how they can justify that.
Encroachment (and keeper off the line) is arguably as objective as it gets when it comes to the Laws yet they’re introducing an objective element.
Which we don’t see when it comes to other laws.
They’re not making it easy for themselves.
Clear and obvious is only when it is subjective. The ball hitting the arm, a player being offside, etc, isn't subjective and is totally black and white.
Is their some sort of FA conspiracy or something?
I’ve not seen anything on the news?
I’ve not seen anything on the news?
A loosening of the Law with respect to goalkeepers and the goal line on PKs
How can offsides and HB be justified when this other stuff is ignored? An argument is weakened by exceptions
Anyway we've digressed. I'm not debating what's correct in Law, I'm only interested in the wellbeing of the game
Bromleyref
New Member
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.
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.