Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sir Tokyo Sexwale

VAR

Recommended Posts

Stat Man Gaz has created a monster - he's getting hundreds of replies to him on twitter & has turned his phone off as he can't cope

 

Has anybody seen Statman Gaz and Stu Brennan in the same room by the way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Statman should do up a league table with every single VAR call going against us and every VAR call going for City, they'd maybe abe a handful of points closer, maximum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thing is a VAR decision going for/against you doesn’t give a binary change in the outcome of the game

 

The mad thing is that the mentalist is suggesting that having more correct decisions is the only reason Liverpool are miles ahead. What sort of argument is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FA now backing calls to give players the benefit of the doubt in marginal VAR offside decisions, saying it kills the excitement of the game.

Edited by Duncan Disorderly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jonathan Wilson put forward a scenario weeks ago to illustrate a potential flaw in the differing treatments of handball. 
 

Ball is driven against defender’s arm inside the penalty area from a short distance, Unavoidable, no penalty. Defender hoofs ball upfield and forward runs onto it and scores. VAR examines the build up and decides that the assist came from a handball. Unintentional though it was the goal must be disallowed and the “offence” punished. Handball within his own area means a penalty must be awarded. 
Schrödinger’s handball. 

Then it almost happened at Burnley. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hightown Phil said:

The handball that leads to a goal has to be in an attacking area so it wouldn’t happen. 

Where is there reference to an attacking area in the new wording? Interested to know. 

Edited by Ripley
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Ripley said:

Where is there reference to an attacking area in the new wording? Interested to know. 

I think it was that Dale Johnson fella on twitter a few weeks ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hightown Phil said:

I think it was that Dale Johnson fella on twitter a few weeks ago.

Why did they look at the VVD one against city then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Hightown Phil said:

I think it was that Dale Johnson fella on twitter a few weeks ago.

Well “that Dale Johnson fella“ isn’t Ifab and its wording is he? Surely nothing would be as loosely expressed in the laws/guidelines as the “the attacking area”? Happy to be corrected but I can’t see it. 

So the Wilson scenario may indeed be valid. In which case it is better for the attacker not to score. If he does, it’s chalked off and there is a penalty at the other end; if he fails to score nothing has happened. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He isn’t IFAB but he has a good grasp of it. Can’t remember if it was him but it’s what I read. It’s about being a part in a goal which isn’t really possible if it’s 100 yards away. You aren’t ever going to see an accidental handball result in a pen cos someone scores anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So do we think that the Burnley pen would've been given last week if they hadn't gone up the other end and scored straight after it? Cos I was under the impression that it was accidental and wouldn't have been given in "normal" circumstance

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...