Then again a little later. This was deemed no offside and a goal. The ball went directly in from this kick. Perhaps a touch (Owen Gole) from Dier. 2nd white from top.
The second pic is on rigt sorry frozen hands at my son's tournament. Second picture there looks onside right? Was there a controversy?
Yeah, was on. Bit of a wait because it looked as close as the one they called off. S u b j e c t i v n e s s.
Trent handball could have been given. I guess no clear and obvious error, because the ref was looking right at it and said no? 2nd Trent handball Pep was whining about was not a handball at all. Sheffield offside, looks like the closest one yet. Need to get to summer and reassess the offside rule, and maybe the language about “clear and obvious”.
On the Trent handball - it hit Silva’s arm first (attacker) and then changed course to hit Trent. I’m still confused how it could be given? Other than the referees are ********ing crazy so you never know.
I think the worst case scenario out of that one would have been the ref called the PK, they go to VAR and see that Bernardo handled it first. So we'd get a free kick but we would've never seen that fabulous Fab strike.
So Mr. OP, Sir EruditeHobo, was Salah offside to you? Anyways, congrads on the 9 points clear. I would be damn confident right now, this might be it, the year!
This is a fair point, I don’t know either. Maybe there’s some language in the rule keeping it from being called... I’m too lazy to check.
Exactly. Facts of the case: the ball first hit Silva's arm which then deflected the ball onto TAA's arm. In theory, either handball could be deemed "intentional" or "accidental". This gives four possible scenarios/combinations: 1. Intentional/Intentional - if Silva's (the first) was intentional, outcome is FK to Liverpool. 2. Intentional/Accidental - if Silva's (the first) was intentional, outcome is FK to Liverpool (or ref can opt to play advantage) 3. Accidental/Intentional - Silva's accidental handball created a goal scoring opportunity (a penalty). Therefore outcome is FK to Liverpool (under new rules). 4. Accidental/Accidental - play on! This was the stated ruling of the ref and VAR. So it is conceivable play could have been stopped and a FK awarded to Liverpool. The important thing to note is NONE of the four possible scenarios result in a penalty to ManC. Note: I believe everyone agrees Silva's handball was accidental, so only scenarios 3 and 4 actually apply in practice.
Best outcome would have been... Ref thinks for a moment Blows for a pen They score But ref says 'nope" Points to Silva's arm Goal disallowed Would love to see Pep react to THAT
This isn't VAR necessarily, but can anyone explain why Silva's handball wasn't called? Maybe this is where I have it wrong, but I thought ALL attacking handballs in the box, intentional or no, were now deemed a foul. If this is correct, why wasn't it called? Presuming that as it wasn't called it means that the ball was still live, good, etc. Silva's handball notwithstanding?
I think that if it was seen (was it?) or if it resulted in a goal, it would have been. That rule usually only applies to when a goal is scored. There can be no handling of the ball (regardless of fault), by the attacking team, in the build up to the goal.
Ahh! Thanks. But we’re now getting close to quantifying the number of angels on a pinhead. But what we now have is handball with subclauses. 1. Firstly, it can only be retrospectively called. As in we have to wait to see how the action plays out before it’s decided whether or not it’s a foul. 2. It’s not a foul if it doesn’t lead to a goal/goal scoring opportunity, but coming off the hand of an attacker changes the trajectory, which puts the defender at a further disadvantage. 3. It’s not equally applied because if there’s any handball in the buildup by the attacking team (even if it’s the old fashioned ball-to-hand), then it’s called, but not so by a defender. VAR has its problems, teething largely, I believe and they will sort themselves out and it will become part of the game, but this handball rule will be changed.
1. Firstly, it can only be retrospectively called. As in we have to wait to see how the action plays out before it’s decided whether or not it’s a foul. Not really a problem? 2. It’s not a foul if it doesn’t lead to a goal/goal scoring opportunity, but coming off the hand of an attacker changes the trajectory, which puts the defender at a further disadvantage. Doesn't really matter as the attacking team can't score? Unless it's somehow much later in a sequence of play in which case the defending side has already had it's chance to defend? 3. It’s not equally applied because if there’s any handball in the buildup by the attacking team (even if it’s the old fashioned ball-to-hand), then it’s called, but not so by a defender. Doesn't really matter since it's the same for both sides? Just a rule change that needs getting used to.
No, fair enough, if that's the way they want to handle it, but it's the only rule that gets that treatment/exemption. It's not a foul unless a goal is scored, then it is a foul. But only if it happens in the box, because accidental handball aka ball to hand is not punished anywhere else on the field. But hey! It's their ball, their game, their rules; it just strikes me as a solution in search of a problem. The old accidental handball had this covered and I say this as someone who is generally in favor of VAR.