Doesn't the LOTG literally refer to intent when it comes to contacting the ball with your hand? If we take the Marcelo handball against Bayern as an example, I really don't see how VAR would help. The ref saw everything the first time and he has a better feel for the speed of the cross when he's standing there near the incident than any TV replay can provide.
I think VAR will make things better in the long run, but I totally agree with you about slo-mo and handballs, and a few other things. Slow-mo really changes a lot of things. They should not use slo-mo as far as I'm concerned. I actually think VAR has been good in the MLS games I watch, but that is mostly Rapids games. I just hope it doesn't get overused. Keep it to obvious errors and clear situations.
I think there is nothing wrong with using slo mo to determine if contact was made with the hand. I agree that slow mo can be misleading in regards to intent. Normal motion can be used for deciding intent.
Yes. But what I am trying to say is that it is easier in many cases to see if a hand is in a natural or unnatural position when a ball makes contact. I think VAR will be a good tool help a Ref distinguish this in most cases.
IFAB set to clarify ‘handball’ definition next week: http://www.insideworldfootball.com/2019/02/22/ifab-set-clarify-handball-definition-next-week/
“The new text will clarify those situations where players can expect contact with the arms to be penalised and where they can expect not to be penalised,” Elleray told the Times. “It will significantly reduce the grey areas around handball… we will be identifying those areas where non-deliberate contact will be penalised and when it won’t be.” “There will still be a reference to deliberate handball – there’s never been any discussion about getting rid of that, and any deliberate handball will be penalised in any situation.” - From this I gather they will emphasize those who put their hands in unnatural positions or deliberately put their hands up in the air within the area... ... even if their intent is not to touch the ball. I said this during the World Cup and I will say it here. There is no reason a defender should EVER put their hands above their heads in the penalty box. If they do it they only have themselves to blame for penalties.
Other official rule changes: 1) You don't have to kick the ball out of the penalty area on a goal kick anymore. I never really understood the purpose of that rule anyway so good riddance. 2) Only Defenders can be in the wall within the area of a FK. Will make for less conflicts and clashes by offensive players trying to bang into the wall.
IFAB adds clarity to handball rule, and clamps down on subs time wasting: http://www.insideworldfootball.com/...larity-handball-rule-clamps-subs-timewasting/
I have no qualms about the no goal will be allowed by hand (intentional or otherwise.) It will make things clear cut for officials to just say it is not a goal. The subs times wasting off the pitch rule is rather interesting. Hopefully they give yellows to players who will try to walk off the field the longest way possible.
I welcome any clarity added to the handball rule. This one most definitely does not "significantly reduce the grey areas around handball" but every little bit helps.
It reduces the grey area when it applies to goals off the hand or plays that lead to goals due to a hand.
Yeah, I agree. It helps on the offensive end. On the defensive end, in Europe, they usually wouldn't call a PK anyway if the arms were by a player's side in a natural position, but this might help improve consistency worldwide .
Where improvements were really needed is with the offside law, IMO. As I learned after the incident in the Spurs v Arsenal match last weekend, apparently you could still be charged with a foul if you foul someone who is in an offside position! That's BS if you ask me, and brings more subjectivity to whether a player is involved in the play or not. They gotta adjust that law ASAP!
In that Spurs-Arsenal instance I think that VAR would have changed it to an offside but England does not have VAR so they relied on the refs on the field who got it wrong. Plain and simple.
True, but lets pretend there was VAR and/or the linesman saw the offside: If Kane didn't go for the ball the ref should still give the penalty (if I'm not mistaken). That's just crazy to me!
On ESPNFC they had an official they weekly ask questions to and in this instance he looked at the rule book and said it was offside and that takes priority. But it was crazy that the officials on the field saw it differently.
Yep, if a player, Kane in this instance, doesn't challenge an opponent for the ball or doesn't attempt to play the ball when fouled, the foul happens before he's deemed offside. Had that player challenged an opponent for the ball/attempted to play the ball instead and then got fouled the foul happens after he's deemed offside. IMO it was a bad call. Kane was attempting to play the ball/challenging an opponent for the ball. The offside offence should have been penalised as it occurred before the foul challenge.
I don't think the camera angle was right to tell if the AR got it wrong. But perhaps if England had VAR, they'd have the proper camera angle available. I'd call that one not an obvious error though. I wonder if VAR will cause a change in the offside rule. Right now, if any part of the body that can score is offside the goal is not allowed. But if VAR will call back too many goals, perhaps the rule should change to the attackers hips or something. The spirit of the law and all that should not result in your toe making you offside.
Call back too many goals? On the contrary, many people around here believe that VAR is adding too many goals to games not taking away. There were many penalties scored in the World Ciup due to VAR that would have gone unnoticed in years past.
Yes, it definitely added penalties (and thus goals) due to handballs. But it is calling back goals too, due to offsides and other reasons.
This is the first time I have heard of this complaint. Most of the decisions are the correct ones from what I have seen.
The big problem with VAR isn't that the calls are right or wrong. The problem is that there is a foul on every single play if you look closely enough. So by using VAR, refs are adding discretion, not objectivity.
That is why they try to use it only in rare cases and not on every play. Game deciding types of plays and scoring situations need extra scrutiny in my opinion. And if there is clear and obvious evidence that the call was wrong on the field it must be changed.
Ironically there was a controversial VAR call for a penalty in the Champions League. That one was a bit harsh I will concede.