var and handball

T

Tuz_Not_Tuzz

Guest
Considering how Liverpool got a penalty against us when a ball was crashed into a sliding defenders hand from inches away that he had no chance of seeing or avoiding, how did the west ham guy get away with deflecting a shot from yards away that was on target yesterday against cheatski?
if the shoe was on the other foot and he had been an attacker and deflected it in, the goal would've been disallowed.
did they tweak the rules?
 
The whole VAR process is flawed.
Ex referees seem to be incapable of making sensible decisions and fractional offside decisions seem farcical to me.
Give attackers the benefit of any marginal doubt...Harvey Barnes should not have been punished yesterday.
Any decision taking more than 30 seconds to decide is too long. This is sport not mathematics ffs.
 
Hampshirefox said:
The whole VAR process is flawed.
Ex referees seem to be incapable of making sensible decisions and fractional offside decisions seem farcical to me.
Give attackers the benefit of any marginal doubt...Harvey Barnes should not have been punished yesterday.
Any decision taking more than 30 seconds to decide is too long. This is sport not mathematics ffs.
Click to expand...

Spot on. 30 secs. Unsure. Then the attacker gets the nod. There are so many good goals being disallowed. It’s ruining football but we know that anyway
 
There should be a time limit on the decsion of VAR. If they cannot find a just cause within 20 seconds to disallow the goal then it should stand. How can it be an obvious incorrect call if it takes nearly 2 mins somtimes to decide.
 
Last edited:
The only time more then 30 seconds should be allowed is if there are two or three separate incidents to review before awarding the goal. Often these are not all viewed.
 
2 Pints of Lager said:
If it takes as long as it did yesterday to reach a conclusion, it's not clear and obvious is it.
Barnes goal should have stood, they couldn't get the lines right in that either
Click to expand...
First thing I thought was that the line is diagonal and if it was straight across the pitch he was onside
 
Just make the line drawn on the screen 3x thicker than for the defender than the attacker. It'll mean the super tight decisions can be checked much quicker.

Call it an 'attacking advantage' line. it would remove some of the margin of error on when to freeze the frame.
 
Yorkfox said:
First thing I thought was that the line is diagonal and if it was straight across the pitch he was onside
Click to expand...
If you look at the lines ,the player beyond Dier has his head over it, even Diers shirt sleeve is level with Barnes toe.
Didnt think if the ball touch the sleeve or above it's not handball, if so not offside
 
You all seem to think they want it sorting out, you need to realise it's a tool they use to make sure another Leicester city champions doesn't happen and the big clubs get the spoils.
 
Read this morning that Mark Halsey said that they were told to give certain teams the benefit of the doubt.
No shit sherlock, we didn't know that!
 
Might as well share it here anyway. Not sure how reliable the comments are. How can you be sure to give x number of throw ins for
example.


.halsey.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top