A&H

Sheffield United - Tottenham

The Referee Store
SG1's are obviously under intense pressure to keep the players on the FOP
CK is a decent ref... there can be no other explanation when we see whistle blowers being lenient on TV every week. LOTG not worth the paper
 
Very poor not to come back for Spurs free kick... ref was clearly signalling advantage, which has not been allowed to accrue!

And elbow looks like a straight red to me. Has a look where Son is first, then smacks him Was it reviewed?
 
Very poor not to come back for Spurs free kick... ref was clearly signalling advantage, which has not been allowed to accrue!

And elbow looks like a straight red to me. Has a look where Son is first, then smacks him Was it reviewed?

But it did accrue, they scored. VAR can't take it back for the free kick before advantage, all it can do is penalise the unintentional handling.

Correct decision, but a daft law change.

Agree that Norwood is a very lucky boy.
 
The disallowed goal just illustrates how IFAB are murdering the game with their attempts to forensically reach the right outcome, getting further and further from their intention in doing so

I agree, they can't go back to the FK.... more madness
Is it surprising that CK made a mistake with Norwood, almost immediately after knowingly disallowing a goal contrary to the spirit of the game?
 
But it did accrue, they scored. VAR can't take it back for the free kick before advantage, all it can do is penalise the unintentional handling.

Correct decision, but a daft law change.

Agree that Norwood is a very lucky boy.

How has it accrued? If the referee had spotted the handball in real time (not easy of course) then presumably he'd have given Spurs a free-kick as that offence happened first.

The fouled Tottenham player didn't have any opportunity to play the ball - the Sheffield United player kicked it against him! I don't see how you can say that advantage has accrued there.
 
I remember reading that the law was changed because it didn't feel right that a goal is scored as a direct consequence of the ball hitting the arm (presumably after the Boly goal v Man City last year when he went for a diving header from about 14 yards out and it hit his arm and went in).

But it clearly doesn't feel right to disallow a perfectly good goal due to the consequences of a foul from the opposition. The law did not need changing. Every time they tinker with the handball law they make it worse for the game and alot worse for the spectator, the majority of which don't know the laws intrinsically (and why should they).

The law should simply be was there a deliberate handball by the offender in the opinion of the on field referee at the time. Absolutely no clarity required and no sentences in law describing arm positions and silhouettes etc. The only thing that can come from an attempt to clarify is further confusion. Was it a deliberate handball or not in the eyes of the referee, the end.
 
How has it accrued? If the referee had spotted the handball in real time (not easy of course) then presumably he'd have given Spurs a free-kick as that offence happened first.

The fouled Tottenham player didn't have any opportunity to play the ball - the Sheffield United player kicked it against him! I don't see how you can say that advantage has accrued there.

He played advantage, he was still signalling it as the goal was scored. But VAR can only go back for the handball, not the original foul. Daft law, daft VAR protocols, but the officials on the night got it spot on.
 
Here is a question.

If Kane collects that ball goes inside the full back and squares it to whoever was a few yards away and they score, is that allowed?
 
These top teams getting dodgy VAR decisions....Who was rattling on about that I can't remember!!! ;)
 
He played advantage, he was still signalling it as the goal was scored. But VAR can only go back for the handball, not the original foul. Daft law, daft VAR protocols, but the officials on the night got it spot on.

Where does it say that?
Obviously the VAR can't tell the referee if he missed a foul but if he played an advantage I'd have thought it should be fine to say 'advantage wasn't possible because of X', just as if a referee went to play advantage but then the assistant raised a flag for offside.
If a referee played advantage in the penalty area because the ball was running through to a striker who scored and VAR subsequently judged to be offside, are you really telling me the referee couldn't go back and give the penalty?
Obviously if the offence happens after the advantage (e.g. a player is fouled, advantage is played, cross is then overhit) then you can't have a second go but here advantage was effectively never possible.
 
Here is a question.

If Kane collects that ball goes inside the full back and squares it to whoever was a few yards away and they score, is that allowed?
Under the 19/20 interpretation of the Laws, it's likely still to be ruled out. In the 20/21 version, it's likely to be given.

Overall, as others have said, many of the recent introductions to football such as the attacking accidental handball clause and VAR itself, whilst well intentioned, have woefully backfired. It seems to be a case of be very careful what you wish / ask for ... complaints about goals coming from accidental handballs led to that introduction - IMO a backward step. Complaints about officials making very occasional human error mistakes led to VAR - IMO a blight on what should be a free flowing game.

To quote a Gary Lineker tweet tonight .. "The Game's Gone" :(:(:(
 
Under the 19/20 interpretation of the Laws, it's likely still to be ruled out. In the 20/21 version, it's likely to be given.

Overall, as others have said, many of the recent introductions to football such as the attacking accidental handball clause and VAR itself, whilst well intentioned, have woefully backfired. It seems to be a case of be very careful what you wish / ask for ... complaints about goals coming from accidental handballs led to that introduction - IMO a backward step. Complaints about officials making very occasional human error mistakes led to VAR - IMO a blight on what should be a free flowing game.

To quote a Gary Lineker tweet tonight .. "The Game's Gone" :(:(:(
His tweet about BLM was interesting too!!
 
Where does it say that?
Obviously the VAR can't tell the referee if he missed a foul but if he played an advantage I'd have thought it should be fine to say 'advantage wasn't possible because of X', just as if a referee went to play advantage but then the assistant raised a flag for offside.
If a referee played advantage in the penalty area because the ball was running through to a striker who scored and VAR subsequently judged to be offside, are you really telling me the referee couldn't go back and give the penalty?
Obviously if the offence happens after the advantage (e.g. a player is fouled, advantage is played, cross is then overhit) then you can't have a second go but here advantage was effectively never possible.

I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong, but I thought the restart following a VAR goal check could only be a goal or a free kick for the offence confirmed by VAR, e.g. IDFK for offside or in this case DFK for handling. I didn't think they could go back to award a free kick, I might be wrong though. Either way, there can't be any argument that disallowing the goal wasn't the correct decision, it has hit his arm and no matter how accidental that was it is a foul in the current laws.
 
BC2E781E-B18D-4789-946E-0BBA2558E4B8.jpeg
On a side note, we (SUFC) are officially now safe.....thats despite what all the experts actually agreed on!!!
 
Back
Top