[Football] UEFA CL March 5/6 knockout stages.

[Stat Brother]

I genuinely think you already see this sometimes. A number of times now I've seen a tricky winger slowly move into the box with the ball, then do a quick jerky flick upwards (almost a scoop) with the ball, hoping it catches the jockeying defender in front of them on the arm. Have absolutely seen this.

I'd hate to think just how big a players arm would have to be for one of our wingers to hit it.

 

[Mellotron]

I'd hate to think just how big a players arm would have to be for one of our wingers to hit it.

Not really - I'm sure some stats released earlier in the season showed that our crossing has actually been really quite accurate this season, compared to most sides.

 

[Mellotron]

Consistency, that's all we want

View attachment 105424

View attachment 105425

Should whether the ball is going out of play be a factor? That one Murray was penalised for against Villa(?) a couple of years ago was clearly going comfortably over the bar. In which case, I think it should be at least downgraded to an indirect free kick rather than a penalty, surely?

 

[Is it PotG?]

Who decides on where the ball would have ended up?

 

[AmexRuislip]

Should whether the ball is going out of play be a factor? That one Murray was penalised for against Villa(?) a couple of years ago was clearly going comfortably over the bar. In which case, I think it should be at least downgraded to an indirect free kick rather than a penalty, surely?

Referee training tool for hand ball.

 

[Stat Brother]

Not really - I'm sure some stats released earlier in the season showed that our crossing has actually been really quite accurate this season, compared to most sides.

Yeah but where's the fun in that joke?

 

[Pavilionaire]

For me whether the defender has his back turned or not is immaterial, it is all about whether his arms are in a natural or unnatural position and - for me - his arms were helping him jump into the air.

To achieve balance and upward movement you have to use your arms.

All 3 ex-players in the studio said this and agreed it wasn't a penalty but the in-house referee swore blind it WAS a penalty. I am still in favour of VAR but if there are many more decisions like this it has potential - in the short term - to go very wrong.

 

[Easy 10]

It was entirely predictable that we would end up right here with VAR. The theory that it was only supposed to be used to correct "clear and obvious errors" was never going to hold water - once you introduce technology the genie is out of the bottle, and now we're seeing the results. Nobody could persuade me that the ref last night had made a clear an obvious error in initially NOT awarding that penalty. In his judgement it wasn't a deliberate handball, and IMO he was right first time. Nobody would've complained had it not been awarded, or if they had, they would not have been listened to seriously.

Instead VAR go involved when it needn't have, the ref wrongly changed his mind, and as a direct result, the wrong team was eliminated.

Nobody likes PSG anyway so it doesn't overly stick in the throat, in fact its very, very funny. But for all the wrong reasons. And I dread the day when WE'RE on the wrong end of a call like that, because it will be a very bitter pill to swallow.

 

[Mellotron]

Yeah but where's the fun in that joke?

Not like you to post things tongue in cheek.

 

[Bold Seagull]

For me whether the defender has his back turned or not is immaterial, it is all about whether his arms are in a natural or unnatural position and - for me - his arms were helping him jump into the air.

To achieve balance and upward movement you have to use your arms.

All 3 ex-players in the studio said this and agreed it wasn't a penalty but the in-house referee swore blind it WAS a penalty. I am still in favour of VAR but if there are many more decisions like this it has potential - in the short term - to go very wrong.

I'm not sure I've got the greatest confidence that consensus from Rio and the Owens is particularly conclusive. I thought Walton had it spot on - how can the ref not give it on those replays? Arm moving toward the ball - yes, arm away from the body - yes.

Bruno for example, will challenge with his arms either behind his back or tightly to his sides. Some might argue that using your arms to get additional height, and therefore being bigger for the block is at risk of your arm getting hit.

Be interesting to see what other opinions emerge and whether any ex pros are all in agreement with the BT Trio.

 

[drew]

It was entirely predictable that we would end up right here with VAR. The theory that it was only supposed to be used to correct "clear and obvious errors" was never going to hold water - once you introduce technology the genie is out of the bottle, and now we're seeing the results. Nobody could persuade me that the ref last night had made a clear an obvious error in initially NOT awarding that penalty. In his judgement it wasn't a deliberate handball, and IMO he was right first time. Nobody would've complained had it not been awarded, or if they had, they would not have been listened to seriously.

Instead VAR go involved when it needn't have, the ref wrongly changed his mind, and as a direct result, the wrong team was eliminated.

Nobody likes PSG anyway so it doesn't overly stick in the throat, in fact its very, very funny. But for all the wrong reasons. And I dread the day when WE'RE on the wrong end of a call like that, because it will be a very bitter pill to swallow.

Sorry but where has it been reported that the ref saw it and didn't think it was deliberate?. You seem to have made the assumption that the ref saw the initial handball but didn't give it. Where as I suspect he thought the ball had skimmed off the players back (unless he has subsequently admitted that he saw but didn't think it was deliberate). It was the VAR that saw the replay and told him it had hit the arm and therefore it was now up to him whether he thought it met the criteria for a penalty. I stand to be corrected but if he didn't see the handball in real time then it is an error.

 

[Easy 10]

Sorry but where has it been reported that the ref saw it and didn't think it was deliberate?. You seem to have made the assumption that the ref saw the initial handball but didn't give it. Where as I suspect he thought the ball had skimmed off the players back (unless he has subsequently admitted that he saw but didn't think it was deliberate). It was the VAR that saw the replay and told him it had hit the arm and therefore it was now up to him whether he thought it met the criteria for a penalty. I stand to be corrected but if he didn't see the handball in real time then it is an error.

The fact that he initially didn't give the penalty proves that he didn't think it was deliberate. However, the VAR got in his ear and said that he needed to review it. Which he did on the pitchside monitor, changed his mind, and awarded it.

To be clear - the referee CANNOT call the VAR for his opinion on an incident. The referee is supposed to ref the match as he normally would, make all his decisions in real time as he normally would, and only hears from the VAR if, in the opinion of the VAR, he has dropped a bollock.

The VAR got involved with that decision when it clearly should not have, because it was in no way a clear and obvious error not to award that penalty (as the subsequent debate on it has richly illustrated).

As a result, they got a massive decision wrong.

 

[Bozza]

The fact that he initially didn't give the penalty proves that he didn't think it was deliberate. However, the VAR got in his ear and said that he needed to review it. Which he did on the pitchside monitor, changed his mind, and awarded it.

It really doesn't prove that at all. It may be the case. But it may also be the case that he didn't know it had struck the defender's arm. I didn't know it, although I was sitting on a sofa watching on TV, and when I say "watching" I mean I was glancing at it every now and again.

Regardless, we have no proof that the referee knew the ball had struck the defender's arm.

 

[timbha]

I think it was Dalot (the shooter) who appealed for the handball immediately, whereas the commentators were more excited about the late scoring opportunity the ensuing corner might create.
The rule makers have backed themselves into a corner by not considering all the implications and possible outcomes before introducing VAR at CL level.

 

[Easy 10]

It really doesn't prove that at all. It may be the case. But it may also be the case that he didn't know it had struck the defender's arm. I didn't know it, although I was sitting on a sofa watching on TV, and when I say "watching" I mean I was glancing at it every now and again.

Regardless, we have no proof that the referee knew the ball had struck the defender's arm.

In which case, if he wasn't sure, then he doesn't award the penalty. Which he didn't. A referee must always be certain to award one.

So he INITIALLY made the correct call. But then the VAR got involved (again, on a highly subjective call), and as a result, he ended up making a duff call. And here we all are arguing about it. Wasn't VAR supposed to solve all this ?

 

[DavePage]

Only three possible reasons you have said this.
1: you are clueless
2: you are drunk
3: you are on a wind up

4 actually
4: if you are Bens Grandad

 

[drew]

In which case, if he wasn't sure, then he doesn't award the penalty. Which he didn't. A referee must always be certain to award one.

So he INITIALLY made the correct call. But then the VAR got involved (again, on a highly subjective call), and as a result, he ended up making a duff call. And here we all are arguing about it. Wasn't VAR supposed to solve all this ?

Keep digging!!!!

 

[Bold Seagull]

In which case, if he wasn't sure, then he doesn't award the penalty. Which he didn't. A referee must always be certain to award one.

So he INITIALLY made the correct call. But then the VAR got involved (again, on a highly subjective call), and as a result, he ended up making a duff call. And here we all are arguing about it. Wasn't VAR supposed to solve all this ?

Handball has always been subjective, the law is written subjectively.

Initially, he didn't make the 'correct call', just that for some people it wasn't handball, although that is clearly not an opinion held by everyone.

The only real fact in all this is that the ball DEFINITELY hit the player's arm in the penalty area. That isn't in dispute.

Not sure we're arguing, it is a relevant discussion.

And I wish we'd had it at home to Burnley too.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Sorry but where has it been reported that the ref saw it and didn't think it was deliberate?. You seem to have made the assumption that the ref saw the initial handball but didn't give it. Where as I suspect he thought the ball had skimmed off the players back (unless he has subsequently admitted that he saw but didn't think it was deliberate). It was the VAR that saw the replay and told him it had hit the arm and therefore it was now up to him whether he thought it met the criteria for a penalty. I stand to be corrected but if he didn't see the handball in real time then it is an error.

I wonder if the ref at home to Burnley saw the handball, but just thought it wasn't deliberated as the player scooped it around 180 degs.

 

[El Presidente]

Far from a Man Utd fan, but wouldn't it be great if they win the Champions League and Liverpool win f'all

Calling [MENTION=34942]Dr. No[/MENTION]