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

[dsr-burnley]

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.

That's nothing to do with VAR. If the ball is dead, you can't give away a free kick or penalty or score a goal. You never could.

But, as it always has been and still is, you can be booked or sent off for something that happens when the ball is dead. VAR can still get someone sent off if he commits violent conduct behind the ref's back, even if the ball is out of play.

 

[Mellotron]

That's nothing to do with VAR. If the ball is dead, you can't give away a free kick or penalty or score a goal. You never could.

But, as it always has been and still is, you can be booked or sent off for something that happens when the ball is dead. VAR can still get someone sent off if he commits violent conduct behind the ref's back, even if the ball is out of play.

OK - understood.

Therefore, what happens in the following scenario;

Ball is dead. Ref's back is turned. Defender lamps Striker in the penalty area. VAR has a word in ref's ear. He spots it and gives a red. Is it also a penalty? Or is it restarted however it was going to be anyway? (Goal kick etc)

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

OK - understood.

Therefore, what happens in the following scenario;

Ball is dead. Ref's back is turned. Defender lamps Striker in the penalty area. VAR has a word in ref's ear. He spots it and gives a red. Is it also a penalty? Or is it restarted however it was going to be anyway? (Goal kick etc)

https://www.dutchreferee.com/offences-when-the-ball-is-not-in-play/

It's explained on the link above with a couple of videos to show example, one of which is very similar to what you mention (unfortunatly the video is cut short before the game is restarted after the red card).

The laws state if the ball is out of play and an offence is committed it does not change how play is restarted. So in the scenario you mention then a penalty shouldn't be awarded.

 

[Change at Barnham]

[TWEET]1379521409408454660[/TWEET]

 

[Justice]

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.

Not with Southgate as manager

 

[Badger Boy]

It's a fairly clear error from the referee. I can understand in real time how he got it wrong but I don't understand why he'd blow the whistle and deny himself the chance of getting the decision right. If he doesn't blow the whistle, VAR tell him that no foul occurred and it's a good goal. But he made the error of blowing the whistle for absolutely no reason at all, he should have let Bellingham tuck it into the net and then give himself the chance to consider whether or not it was a foul.

Once again, VAR isn't the problem there - it was the referee applying the rules. Education and training for the referees is the answer and they'll get it right - he simply needed to not blow his whistle immediately. Frankly, even having done so I think he should have given the goal - it was a fair goal and it's a Champions League match. It doesn't really matter how the officials get to the correct outcome - all that matters is that they get it right.

 

[blue-shifted]

It's a fairly clear error from the referee. I can understand in real time how he got it wrong but I don't understand why he'd blow the whistle and deny himself the chance of getting the decision right. If he doesn't blow the whistle, VAR tell him that no foul occurred and it's a good goal. But he made the error of blowing the whistle for absolutely no reason at all, he should have let Bellingham tuck it into the net and then give himself the chance to consider whether or not it was a foul.

Once again, VAR isn't the problem there - it was the referee applying the rules. Education and training for the referees is the answer and they'll get it right - he simply needed to not blow his whistle immediately. Frankly, even having done so I think he should have given the goal - it was a fair goal and it's a Champions League match. It doesn't really matter how the officials get to the correct outcome - all that matters is that they get it right.

Well, it's not more training needed, because the rules tell referees that if they see a foul the should blow the whistle straight away. The ref applied the law correctly, even if he saw it wrong.

Disagree that the ref should have still given the goal. The primacy of the refs whistle must remain intact, otherwise there will be playing on after it in every situation.

 

[blue-shifted]

Not with Southgate as manager

Well, he's given him his debut at 17. Not sure what else you expect Southgate to do?

 

[mikeyjh]

I may be missing something here but is it not the case, and always has been, that in Europe they referee the old 'foot up' somewhat more aggressively than in England? I've often thought that maybe we should watch and adapt a little more of the continental style over such things if England are to be successful.....

 

[amexer]

It's a fairly clear error from the referee. I can understand in real time how he got it wrong but I don't understand why he'd blow the whistle and deny himself the chance of getting the decision right. If he doesn't blow the whistle, VAR tell him that no foul occurred and it's a good goal. But he made the error of blowing the whistle for absolutely no reason at all, he should have let Bellingham tuck it into the net and then give himself the chance to consider whether or not it was a foul.

Once again, VAR isn't the problem there - it was the referee applying the rules. Education and training for the referees is the answer and they'll get it right - he simply needed to not blow his whistle immediately. Frankly, even having done so I think he should have given the goal - it was a fair goal and it's a Champions League match. It doesn't really matter how the officials get to the correct outcome - all that matters is that they get it right.

Agree once ref had blown game has to stop. Just very strange he didnt wait for a couple of seconds. Even stranger yellow card was not rescinded

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Agree once ref had blown game has to stop. Just very strange he didnt wait for a couple of seconds. Even stranger yellow card was not rescinded

There was no way of rescinding the yellow card Bellingham got as the video replays cannot be used to change the decision due to when the ref blew his whistle, this includes the yellow card as far as I am aware.

However it seems as though the yellow card given to Can for the penalty that was overturned on VAR was never rescinded during the game either which makes absolutely no sense. As the ref decided there wasn't actually a foul after checking the video screen how can the card still apply? We've seen refs rescind cards when when video replays have been used and decisions changed in the Premier League this season so unless the rules are different in European competitions I don't see anything other than another ref cock up here.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

Prompted by the non-penalty for Welbeck over the weekend, I was thinking about the phrase 'I've seen them given' and how absurd it is. Granted referee can get it right 100% of the time, but the fact that people are justifying these mistakes and passing them off as something one ref would give, but not another, is ridiculous. I should add that I don't know what the answer is – or even if there IS one – I'm just a bit frustrated by it.

It also means that a lot of the time VAR is subjective, not objective, which can't be a good thing. Depending on whether it's a 'seen them given' VAR or not, there is never going to be 100% agreement with some decisions.

The one last night was a bit daft, but once that whistle has blown, I'm not sure how the mistake can be corrected...

 

[Badger Boy]

The one last night was a bit daft, but once that whistle has blown, I'm not sure how the mistake can be corrected...

To be honest, my take would simply be the referee should have the ability to say he'd dropped a clanger and he was wrong. He could get both captains to the monitor, show them the footage and explain his decision based on the evidence and give the goal. Rescind the yellow card - both decisions would be correct, irrespective of whether or not the laws of the game currently allow it. What matter is the correct decision is made. Dortmund should have been level at 1-1 in the game and it's a totally different match.

I think football is getting closer to appropriately using the technology. The reversal of the penalty decision was absolutely spot on and was a clear example of the technology being used correctly. We need the game to get to the point where every decision is the correct one when it really matters - goals, penalties, etc.

 

[Bry Nylon]

I think football is getting closer to appropriately using the technology. The reversal of the penalty decision was absolutely spot on and was a clear example of the technology being used correctly. We need the game to get to the point where every decision is the correct one when it really matters - goals, penalties, etc.

That sounds like a recipe for endless reviews, replays, technical interventions, appeals, counter-appeals and referrals to monitors. For me that would destroy the rhythm of the game and create a disjointed and technocratic version of football that I would have no interest in watching.

This pursuit for 100% perfection risks destroying everything that make football so brilliant.

 

[AZ Gull]

Prompted by the non-penalty for Welbeck over the weekend, I was thinking about the phrase 'I've seen them given' and how absurd it is. Granted referee can get it right 100% of the time, but the fact that people are justifying these mistakes and passing them off as something one ref would give, but not another, is ridiculous. I should add that I don't know what the answer is – or even if there IS one – I'm just a bit frustrated by it.

It also means that a lot of the time VAR is subjective, not objective, which can't be a good thing. Depending on whether it's a 'seen them given' VAR or not, there is never going to be 100% agreement with some decisions.

The one last night was a bit daft, but once that whistle has blown, I'm not sure how the mistake can be corrected...

The sentence I have bolded is, for me, the fundamental problem with VAR.

In principle, I think most people would say the ability to review critical decisions, to ensure there are no serious miscarriages of justice (ie things like Thierry Henry's handball for France against Ireland, or close offsides such as our ruled-out effort against Millwall in the FA Cup) could only be a good thing. But with the exception of offsides, most of the instances that come under review are subjective, which means you are now adding a second referee's opinion into the mix. By definition, with VAR, you have now completely undermined the assumption that the referee is the final decision-maker in all matters.

Despite initially being in favour of VAR, given the problems that VAR itself has introduced (the lack of transparency for stadium spectators, the delays, the loss of spontaneous goal celebrations), I think I have shifted in my view and now feel that overall VAR probably isn't worth the hassle (or maybe should be used ONLY for offside decisions and anything else that is purely a matter of fact).

 

[dsr-burnley]

There was no way of rescinding the yellow card Bellingham got as the video replays cannot be used to change the decision due to when the ref blew his whistle, this includes the yellow card as far as I am aware.

However it seems as though the yellow card given to Can for the penalty that was overturned on VAR was never rescinded during the game either which makes absolutely no sense. As the ref decided there wasn't actually a foul after checking the video screen how can the card still apply? We've seen refs rescind cards when when video replays have been used and decisions changed in the Premier League this season so unless the rules are different in European competitions I don't see anything other than another ref cock up here.

Can's yellow card was for dissent. And even if eventually proved you had good reason to dissent, if you do it in intemperate language or with excessive arm-waving, your booking still stands!

 

[METALMICKY]

The sentence I have bolded is, for me, the fundamental problem with VAR.

In principle, I think most people would say the ability to review critical decisions, to ensure there are no serious miscarriages of justice (ie things like Thierry Henry's handball for France against Ireland, or close offsides such as our ruled-out effort against Millwall in the FA Cup) could only be a good thing. But with the exception of offsides, most of the instances that come under review are subjective, which means you are now adding a second referee's opinion into the mix. By definition, with VAR, you have now completely undermined the assumption that the referee is the final decision-maker in all matters.

Despite initially being in favour of VAR, given the problems that VAR itself has introduced (the lack of transparency for stadium spectators, the delays, the loss of spontaneous goal celebrations), I think I have shifted in my view and now feel that overall VAR probably isn't worth the hassle (or maybe should be used ONLY for offside decisions and anything else that is purely a matter of fact).

Very well summarized and reflects my feelings. Sadly, the cat is out of the bag and really can't see them restricting the scope of VAR to the factual as you suggest.

 

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

Can's yellow card was for dissent. And even if eventually proved you had good reason to dissent, if you do it in intemperate language or with excessive arm-waving, your booking still stands!

I thought it had been given for the foul, didn't realise it was for dissent, I'm sure Can had a few choice words for the ref.

 

[Shooting Star]

I was furious when I watched the highlights this morning. Referees make mistakes, I sympathise with that. However, this should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet as the ref's whistle will become the kryptonite of VAR - blow early and VAR can't be used. I certainly don't think refs are doing it deliberately, but they need to very, very swiftly get into the habit of allowing play to continue as Bellingham was absolutely robbed of a brilliant goal.

 

[Surrey Phil]

High foot surely?