[Football] Dortmund's Bellingham 'disallowed goal' at Man City

[cjd]

Harsh decision.

What a player though, just 17 FFS! Fantastic composure in the after match interviews too. Just 17, ridiculous!

The way he and Foden played tonight, the future looks very bright for England.

The real tragedy for England is the manager.

 

[A1X]

My problem is this will just get lumped by many on the anti-VAR pile when in reality what it shows is the terrible standard of officiating which is increasingly being shown up throughout the upper levels of football

 

[amexer]

Thanks to VAR penalty was not given. Law about yellow cards must change as farce the 2 yellows received were not rescinded. Assume both of these players could miss semi or final with further booking

 

[blue-shifted]

My problem is this will just get lumped by many on the anti-VAR pile when in reality what it shows is the terrible standard of officiating which is increasingly being shown up throughout the upper levels of football

Officiating is poor, I completely agree.

But the level of acting, diving and cheating is incredible. It's at a level where it must have been meticulously rehearsed. The man on the street couldn't convincingly pretend to have been fouled in the way these players can.

Ederson must be completely shameless. But sides like Villa are doing this on an industrial scale.

The same managers who go out criticising refs are surely devoting whole training sessions to play acting. I lay the blame at their door rather than the refs

 

[happypig]

If the rule makers altered VAR's remit to allow reviews of possible simulation it would cut down on such cheating.

 

[dsr-burnley]

different rules for VAR in european games?

No, same rule. Burnley had one disallowed when Mee jumped for a header and was taken out by the goalkeeper, but Barnes scored the rebound. The ref had blown for a foul by Mee before the ball went in so the goal couldn't be allowed; they never did give a clear indication why the penalty wasn't given.

And Wood had one disallowed for offside when the ref blew after he had gone round the goalkeeper but before the ball went in the net. There was no point VAR drawing lines on the pitch (which would probably have shown marginal offside, but it was close) because the whistle had gone.

 

[dsr-burnley]

If the rule makers altered VAR's remit to allow reviews of possible simulation it would cut down on such cheating.

I agree. But the problem is that the FA doesn't think it's cheating. The FA thinks that if you brush someone's shoulder and he takes a dive, screaming in agony, then it's a foul; if he doesn't fall over, it's not a foul. Three quarters of fouls given today are given because the "fouled" player has dived. They wouldn't be given if the player didn't dive.

 

[WhingForPresident]

Harsh decision.

What a player though, just 17 FFS! Fantastic composure in the after match interviews too. Just 17, ridiculous!

The way he and Foden played tonight, the future looks very bright for England.

Yup, if we had the right manager there's no reason why we can't be on the same level as France in the next few years. Having Southgate and Boothroyd in charge of the best crop of young players we've had for decades is a travesty.

 

[Mellotron]

Reminded me a bit of Stephen’s getting kicked against boro and being sent off and seeing us eventually miss out on promotion. How else was he supposed to get the ball?

This. Stephens was admittedly a bit later and higher but the impact was the same - Ramirez kicked Stephens studs, which will hurt.

 

[Mellotron]

Bellingham lucky not to get a red card. Got the ball, but studs slightly showing, opponent kicks him and falls over. What Ederson should surely have done is rolled down his socks, made a cut on his leg, then knocked the yellow card out of the ref's hand to make him change it to a red?

Oh yes, you reminded me that Ramirez also struck the referee. Usually the stuff of a 9-10 match ban.

 

[dazzer6666]

My problem is this will just get lumped by many on the anti-VAR pile when in reality what it shows is the terrible standard of officiating which is increasingly being shown up throughout the upper levels of football

Exactly - the whistle went before the ball was in the net - the goal cannot count, the game stopped at that point. It was crap reffing.

 

[Mellotron]

I also disagree with this ruling that if the referee has already blown, VAR can't then be used to correct egregious errors.

That basically means if the referee has blown, you can effectively instigate martial law behind his back until the game is started again. Shoot someone? Fine, ref's already blown, have at it.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Officiating is poor, I completely agree.

But the level of acting, diving and cheating is incredible. It's at a level where it must have been meticulously rehearsed. The man on the street couldn't convincingly pretend to have been fouled in the way these players can.

Ederson must be completely shameless. But sides like Villa are doing this on an industrial scale.

The same managers who go out criticising refs are surely devoting whole training sessions to play acting. I lay the blame at their door rather than the refs

Trevor Sinclair with a pathetic defence of Emerson on TS this morning

 

[blue-shifted]

All parties are complicit in this

The players. Many of them have no shame
The managers. Instigate and defend it
The fans. Defend it if it's their team
The media. Refuse to call it out
The refs. Don't blow for a foul if a player is fouled but stays on their feet
The refs assessors. Don't pick up refs for the above
The authorities. Far too lenient in setting deterrents and issuing punishments

 

[dazzer6666]

I also disagree with this ruling that if the referee has already blown, VAR can't then be used to correct egregious errors.

That basically means if the referee has blown, you can effectively instigate martial law behind his back until the game is started again. Shoot someone? Fine, ref's already blown, have at it.

Not really - ref is still on control of what goes on...........and the contra to that is if you allow VAR to essentially over-rule a ref's whistle, players will play on after the whistle has blown if they think a mistake has been made, hoping VAR will correct it. It can't work.

 

[beorhthelm]

No, it's the same rules.
Just like Lee Mason blowing his whistle before Lewis Dunk put the ball in the West Brom goal. The referee blew his whistle tonight before Bellingham rolled the ball in the net.
In both cases VAR couldn't be used because the ref had blown his whistle to stop the game before the ball went in the net.

you remember incorrectly, VAR was used for the Dunk goal, after ref had given the goal, went over and determined whistle blown before ball crossed line, stuck off goal. if ever there is an investigation into corruption in football, i hope that incident is looked at very closely.

 

[Mellotron]

Not really - ref is still on control of what goes on...........and the contra to that is if you allow VAR to essentially over-rule a ref's whistle, players will play on after the whistle has blown if they think a mistake has been made, hoping VAR will correct it. It can't work.

The whole point of VAR is to correct egregious errors, and support the ref in case there is something he has missed.

 

[Change at Barnham]

you remember incorrectly, VAR was used for the Dunk goal, after ref had given the goal. if ever there is an investigation into corruption in football, i hope that incident is looked at very closely.

Ah yes, I do remember incorrectly.
I forgot that VAR was used for the Dunk goal. Which makes the whole decision even less palatable.

 

[Change at Barnham]

An interesting observation of the incident in The Athletic readers comments written by Ajay M:

To everyone saying “Don’t blow your whistle”, that’s the rule with offsides but only with offsides. When it’s deemed a foul, the whistle is blown immediately, no play on. If the ref thinks it’s a tight call and wants to let them play, then when it goes to VAR it has to be a clear and obvious error in order to reverse it.

There wasn’t a foul, it shouldn’t have been called. But if the ref is going to say there is a foul, he has to call it then and play is stopped. Maybe they will find a way to fix this, but it’s hard to think of a way to let them keep playing when the ref has called a foul.

Interesting to finally see fans calling for more VAR. Understandable, too, as these are the sorts of decisions you would hope VAR could correct. Maybe this will spur some changes.

 

[MJsGhost]

No, it's the same rules.
Just like Lee Mason blowing his whistle before Lewis Dunk put the ball in the West Brom goal. The referee blew his whistle tonight before Bellingham rolled the ball in the net.
In both cases VAR couldn't be used because the ref had blown his whistle to stop the game before the ball went in the net.

you remember incorrectly, VAR was used for the Dunk goal, after ref had given the goal, went over and determined whistle blown before ball crossed line, stuck off goal. if ever there is an investigation into corruption in football, i hope that incident is looked at very closely.

With the Dunk incident, wasn't it a case of VAR being consulted until they established that the ref had blown his whistle again (before the ball had crossed the line) and therefore VAR couldn't intervene to change the original decision (no goal, despite Mason subsequently giving the goal, before reverting to his original decision).

So it was a case of VAR determining that VAR had no jurisdiction and therefore couldn't be used to alter the ref's original course of action (so you're both right really)

All this does is show what a monumental farce the Lee Mason incident was