14 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

Refs and gambling companies ?

Seemingly an implication that refs have been paid off by gambling companies. Bollocks.

I think the referees and VAR are doing a great job. Discuss.

11 hours ago, Munkunku said:

I think the referees and VAR are doing a great job. Discuss.

You're being very contrary. First it's the socks, now this. Are you dieting, by any chance?

15 minutes ago, Valerie said:

You're being very contrary. First it's the socks, now this. Are you dieting, by any chance?

I’m just telling it as it is. It’s not my fault all you lefty wokies can’t handle the truth!

(Check the chatbox)

Fans can't celebrate goals any more in case VAR rules it out ?

Watch any game , fans celebrate straight away ,and as madly as ever, we do at the Bridge, but when it dies down, everyone is " don't tell me it's gonna be ruled out FFS. " 

No one can restrain themselves once that ball hits the net, almost the best feeling in the world

 

Lord the way VAR is being used has ruined the game, I just find it hard to enjoy a game anymore.

Add that to the way our club is being run and is not a fun time.

We can reasonably expect more stand downs after last night's farcical effort. The ridiculous penalties aside, the ref justified the non-red card for a head butt on the basis that the head butt was pretty soft. FFS.

Slightly off subject but sin-bins to be trialled in football. Have been used in both codes of rugby for some years now.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/13018165/sin-bins-to-be-trialled-in-professional-football-as-part-of-new-ifab-law-proposals

Sin bins to be trialled in professional football as part of new IFAB law proposals

At its Annual Business Meeting (ABM) held in London on Tuesday, IFAB focused on measures to improve participant behaviour in football and increase respect for match officials; it was agreed sin bins for dissent and specific tactical offences should be trialled at higher levels

Tuesday 28 November 2023 14:52, UK

Image:IFAB has approved proposed trials whereby only the team captain may approach the referee

•  
•  
•  
•  

The International Football Association Board (IFAB) has approved proposed trials whereby only the team captain may approach the referee and for sin bins to be tested at a higher level.

The measures aim to improve participant behaviour in football and increase respect for officials.

Sin Bins the latest idea to tackle dissent and the 'it works well in rugby' is suspiciously similar to what we were told about VAR

Now I did watch a bit of the RWC a few weeks back when there was no decent footy on, they do VAR entirely different and from what I could see very competently

But VAR in football, especially VAR in English football is/ was a squandered opportunity and the VAR in play now is broken. Now experts may say that VAR has got 98% of the calls correct so that in itself is justification. Before accepting that can we have the stats on just a ref ? I suspect the error rates are similar, VAR should do better because not all of its calls our subjective just the controversial ones it seems.

Now onto this Sin Bin, bit like that kids show in the 70s with that Geez Mike Reid 'Runaround' where naught kids were sent for a few minutes if they cheated or whatever. Do we really want to see our beautiful game already half cocked by VAR introduce this ? Where potentially we have the surreal proposition of multiple players on both sides being temporarily removed from the match. The mind boggles really, will goalkeepers get sin binned ? If so who goes in goal. If more than 5 players from any team are sin binned that contradicts the FA's minimum player rule "A match is played by two teams, each with a maximum of eleven players; one must be the goalkeeper. A match may not start or continue if either team has fewer than seven players. If a team has fewer than seven players because one or more players has deliberately left the field of play, the referee is not obliged to stop play and the advantage may be played, but the match must not resume after the ball has gone out of play if a team does not have the minimum number of seven players".

Some of you may think I'm making up unlikely scenarios but did any of us foresee the VAR penalty conundrums with every EPL round played there seems to always be 1 or 2 pens that affected game outcomes but should not have been awarded, plus other silliness like Barcodes beating Gooners recently 1-0 etc etc etc.

It seems as though this rule change after being trialed with amateurs (lol) is going to be implemented by footballing authorities eventually, later rather than sooner hopefully. I put it to you all once that occurs coupled together with this awfully utilized EPL VAR it will no longer be our beautiful game but a mockery of it; orchestrated in part by the match officials in an unsuccessful attempt to cover up their 2 bob officiating ?

 

Just bored hearing and talking about VAR now and the latest bad decision and knowing there will be more at the weekend and the week after that and so on........................

Game is being ruined. We all wanted better officiating and moaned about refs but boy if we could banish VAR to the bin now I would do so without hesitation.

 

Dreadful decision in PSG vs Newcastle...

40 minutes ago, Bebe1980 said:

Dreadful decision in PSG vs Newcastle...

VAR official stood down.

Having seen the penalty in YouTube (I was out last night), I have to admit that it doesn't surprise me. It hit the body and then the arm. It shouldn't be a penalty, but we've seen these type of calls very often. We had a penalty call and James sent off against Liverpool for a ball that hit his leg and then his arm, which he had pretty close to the body, and we see some strange penalties for hand ball pretty often. I've said it many times in the last couple of seasons (and even before VAR was introduced), I haven't got a clue when a hand ball in the box can be a penalty or not, they seem to be changing the hand ball rule every time.

15 minutes ago, RMH said:

Having seen the penalty in YouTube (I was out last night), I have to admit that it doesn't surprise me. It hit the body and then the arm. It shouldn't be a penalty, but we've seen these type of calls very often. We had a penalty call and James sent off against Liverpool for a ball that hit his leg and then his arm, which he had pretty close to the body, and we see some strange penalties for hand ball pretty often. I've said it many times in the last couple of seasons (and even before VAR was introduced), I haven't got a clue when a hand ball in the box can be a penalty or not, they seem to be changing the hand ball rule every time.

There's been comment this morning that UEFA denies a penalty if the ball strikes body before arm. Which isn't true.

In April, the UEFA Football Board, a collection of former players and coaches which acts as an advisory body, said that deflections off the body onto the arm should not be penalised. However, this recommendation was not taken forward as it would be against IFAB guidelines of the handball law as a blanket exemption.

If all deflections off the body created an automatic exemption, players could get away with blocking crosses with their arms outstretched. Only if a player deliberate kicks or heads the ball and it strikes their outstretched arm is a handball offence automatically ruled out.

So, under the UEFA interpretation, it's a penalty. Yet the VAR has been stood down. Go figure.

6 minutes ago, RMH said:

Having seen the penalty in YouTube (I was out last night), I have to admit that it doesn't surprise me. It hit the body and then the arm. It shouldn't be a penalty, but we've seen these type of calls very often. We had a penalty call and James sent off against Liverpool for a ball that hit his leg and then his arm, which he had pretty close to the body, and we see some strange penalties for hand ball pretty often. I've said it many times in the last couple of seasons (and even before VAR was introduced), I haven't got a clue when a hand ball in the box can be a penalty or not, they seem to be changing the hand ball rule every time.

They are. They have taken out the bit about the ball deflecting off another part of the body before it hits the arm (which used to mean no handball), but the pundits last night on TNT sport still seemed to think the FA have kept that in the law. They haven't.

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

The absurdity of the current handball law is that the law is different according to where on the field the handball occurs. An accidental handball is not an offence unless it's committed by a player immediately before he scores (it used to be the case that it was offence if it struck the arm/ hand of the last player to touch it before it reached the player who scored, but they changed that the other year). Accidental handball anywhere else on the field is not penalised. Of course, it is the ref's subjective decision whether a handball is accidental, but immediately before a goal is scored it becomes irrelevant, and just making contact with the arm is penalised.

Quote

It is an offence if a player...

• scores in the opponents' goal:
  • directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
  • immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

What constitutes non-accidental handball is totally subjective, and the law takes into account the position of whether "their arm has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation".) What is subjective is deciding if the arm position is "justifiable by the player’s body movement for that specific situation". Last night, Livramento's arm was in an entirely natural position for a player rebalancing and running. It was a shocking decision.

With the Reece James handball on the line - when it bounced off his thigh onto his arm and he was sent off - the law is pretty clear: "Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence, the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs". Mind you, that was last season, so back then the law may still have included the bit about deflections off another part of the body - I really can't remember. 

Away from the handball law for a minute, I am puzzled by retrospective red cards.

We've had a few over the years. Marcos Alonso had one after a bad foul at Southampton, and Ramires had one a few years before that against Sunderland. (pretty sure Mike Dean lied at the hearings about not seeing the incidents, as TV footage showed him looking straight at them. Yes, he was ref both times, and retrospective action couldn't be taken if he had seen them at the time).

And yet, when VAR has been found to be wrong and the PGMOL has admitted red cards should have been awarded, players don't seem to be getting retrospective reds. Romero never got one last season for the hair pull on Cucurella, and Havertz never got one for his bad foul up at Newcastle the other week.

 

Retrospective red cards are down to whether the questionable act was or wasn't seen by match officials. If seen, retrospective red card unlikely. If not seen, action may - but not necessarily will  be - taken.

1 hour ago, dermott said:

Retrospective red cards are down to whether the questionable act was or wasn't seen by match officials. If seen, retrospective red card unlikely. If not seen, action may - but not necessarily will  be - taken.

And nowadays they will be even more rare, as VAR will have seen anything the ref missed and could alert him if they thought it was worthy of a red. Of course, sometimes the VAR reaches a decision and then changes its mind during the game. As happened in the Chelsea-Spuds game the other year when Lo Celso stamped on Azpi, and the decided within minutes he should have been sent off. Buthaving reached that decision, they still allowed him to remain on the field and allowed him to be subbed off and replaced, when Spuds should have been down to 10 men.

You could write a book about appalling refereeing in Chelsea-Spuds fixtures, with entire chapters on Taylor and Clattenburg - not to mention Graham Poll.

The ball hitting a body part before hitting their arm isn't anything new I thought? I remember we were given a penalty for it a couple years ago. 

Think that rule only applies to UEFA. 

2 hours ago, dermott said:

There's been comment this morning that UEFA denies a penalty if the ball strikes body before arm. Which isn't true.

In April, the UEFA Football Board, a collection of former players and coaches which acts as an advisory body, said that deflections off the body onto the arm should not be penalised. However, this recommendation was not taken forward as it would be against IFAB guidelines of the handball law as a blanket exemption.

If all deflections off the body created an automatic exemption, players could get away with blocking crosses with their arms outstretched. Only if a player deliberate kicks or heads the ball and it strikes their outstretched arm is a handball offence automatically ruled out.

So, under the UEFA interpretation, it's a penalty. Yet the VAR has been stood down. Go figure.

All a bit technical, surely what we need is some common sense... anyone could see that the ball hit Tino Livramento's body then his arm and it all happened so quickly that he knew nothing about it...

Acts of god, for me, shouldn't result in a penalty.

1 hour ago, Sconnie Blue said:

The ball hitting a body part before hitting their arm isn't anything new I thought? I remember we were given a penalty for it a couple years ago. 

Think that rule only applies to UEFA. 

As I posted above, the current wording of the law doesn't even mention it.

As refs take into account proximity of the arm to the ball being played when deciding to penalise a handball, it would be interesting to find out how much time Livramento had to move his arm out of the way after it bounced off his ribcage. I'd estimate his elbow was about 8 inches away.

Edited November 29, 20232 yr by Backbiter

10 hours ago, RMH said:

Having seen the penalty in YouTube (I was out last night), I have to admit that it doesn't surprise me. It hit the body and then the arm. It shouldn't be a penalty, but we've seen these type of calls very often. We had a penalty call and James sent off against Liverpool for a ball that hit his leg and then his arm, which he had pretty close to the body, and we see some strange penalties for hand ball pretty often. I've said it many times in the last couple of seasons (and even before VAR was introduced), I haven't got a clue when a hand ball in the box can be a penalty or not, they seem to be changing the hand ball rule every time.

The James one was a shocker, debatable penalty at best but sent off was completely out of order, he was not doing a Suraez diving for the shot. Penalties were given or taken off for no good reasons in the last few years via VAR, pretty much decisions were made to meet the flavor of the game.  They were not going to let PSG walk away with nothing, it's about as close to match fixing.

On 28/11/2023 at 20:41, General said:

Sin Bins the latest idea to tackle dissent and the 'it works well in rugby' is suspiciously similar to what we were told about VAR

Now I did watch a bit of the RWC a few weeks back when there was no decent footy on, they do VAR entirely different and from what I could see very competently

But VAR in football, especially VAR in English football is/ was a squandered opportunity and the VAR in play now is broken. Now experts may say that VAR has got 98% of the calls correct so that in itself is justification. Before accepting that can we have the stats on just a ref ? I suspect the error rates are similar, VAR should do better because not all of its calls our subjective just the controversial ones it seems.

Now onto this Sin Bin, bit like that kids show in the 70s with that Geez Mike Reid 'Runaround' where naught kids were sent for a few minutes if they cheated or whatever. Do we really want to see our beautiful game already half cocked by VAR introduce this ? Where potentially we have the surreal proposition of multiple players on both sides being temporarily removed from the match. The mind boggles really, will goalkeepers get sin binned ? If so who goes in goal. If more than 5 players from any team are sin binned that contradicts the FA's minimum player rule "A match is played by two teams, each with a maximum of eleven players; one must be the goalkeeper. A match may not start or continue if either team has fewer than seven players. If a team has fewer than seven players because one or more players has deliberately left the field of play, the referee is not obliged to stop play and the advantage may be played, but the match must not resume after the ball has gone out of play if a team does not have the minimum number of seven players".

Some of you may think I'm making up unlikely scenarios but did any of us foresee the VAR penalty conundrums with every EPL round played there seems to always be 1 or 2 pens that affected game outcomes but should not have been awarded, plus other silliness like Barcodes beating Gooners recently 1-0 etc etc etc.

It seems as though this rule change after being trialed with amateurs (lol) is going to be implemented by footballing authorities eventually, later rather than sooner hopefully. I put it to you all once that occurs coupled together with this awfully utilized EPL VAR it will no longer be our beautiful game but a mockery of it; orchestrated in part by the match officials in an unsuccessful attempt to cover up their 2 bob officiating ?

 

I don't watch a lot of Rugby, but I always get the impression that players are not deliberately cheating or play acting to con the ref ?

 

 

 

Edited December 2, 20232 yr by The Rising Sun
Info

On 29/11/2023 at 22:24, icecoolguy22 said:

The James one was a shocker, debatable penalty at best but sent off was completely out of order, he was not doing a Suraez diving for the shot. Penalties were given or taken off for no good reasons in the last few years via VAR, pretty much decisions were made to meet the flavor of the game.  They were not going to let PSG walk away with nothing, it's about as close to match fixing.

And they weren't going to let Croatia win the World Cup final against France in Moscow either.

Absolutely robbed by VAR and the ref 

18 hours ago, The Rising Sun said:

I don't watch a lot of Rugby, but I always get the impression that players are not deliberately cheating or play acting to con the ref ?

 

 

 

I watch a lot of rugby and it and football have little in common in terms of discipline and disciplinary procedures. Rugby refs are respected by players. You still hear players call refs "Sir". Team captains are authorised to raise concerns with refs. Backchat from players is dealt with by the offending team being marched back 10 metres. Yellow card is 10 minutes in the sin bin and reserved for tackle offences, deliberate knock ons, etc. 

Football could learn a lot from rugby.