Neither will I. But you're wrong he was shielding the ball which is outlined in the rules very clearly. OK for real this time.
No he attacked the man. Change up but with VAR. Today I thought we'd have two var free games and we almost did. The incident went against your "He didn't mean to do it but he's still guilty" Ruling. One of the jerries went up to head at goal. The Swedish keeper went to punch clear. Pow! a real haymaker laid the Jerry out. After a long break while the seconds worked on the downed girl. And a break while the VAR panel made up their group minds. They gave an 8 count to the Jerry and No pen or red card against the keeper. I was happy I was pulling for the Swedes.
you missed this bit: And time, too, for the governing bodies to get their act [together!] in order and give it a proper chance. Let's be honest: the way it has been implemented has made football look like amateur night. Failing to make provision for fans in stadiums to follow the course of a VAR decision is unforgivable. It's a textbook case of how to lose the battle for hearts and minds. I have 2 main beefs with VAR. 1. The people "managing" its introduction give the impression that they don't know what the hell they are doing, and that the whole thing has been rushed into duty without proper controls and training. I've seen very little that gives me confidence we won't see rules introduced then changed as an "oops" realization kicks in. 2, I am convinced VAR usage - with constant delays - will expand to essentially take over the game, a viewpoint that I base on seeing how poorly these guys have done so far and how much sway (big) clubs and TV interests have over the game's governing bodies. As far as "fans shouldn't get angry over VAR calling back tiny transgressions" ..... The article misses a very key point. Offside is the classic example. The rule was introduced to stop attackers getting an advantage - that's the only reason the law exists. However VAR has reduced this to a ridiculous level - having an irrelevant body part (eg arm or head) a FRACTION ahead provides no material advantage. Consider this: with VAR, an attacker with back to goal but with a heel an inch ahead of the attacker would be called offside. What possible sense does that make? Seeing offside called in an absolute fashion of course pisses people off. Summary: VAR is applying the letter of the law and ignoring the intent (spirit) of the law. That's all technology can do, it's up to the officials to apply sense to the thing but they aren't doing it. Solution: Amend the rule now that the officials can discern (thanks to slo-mo repeats) if the attacker actually had an advantage. As far as taking emotion out of the game..... Footie is one of the few sports where the play is intended to be primarily uninterrupted (yes we have FKs throw-ins corners and goal kicks but you know what I mean.) . We've grown up with a game that has a 'continuous flow'. Now VAR is introducing stoppages that can kill the emotion of goal celebrations. Hard to adjust! But given that many VAR decisions result in (a) continued subjectivity or (b) offside hair-splitting .... of course fans will throw their arms in the air. The best part of the game experience is being effed up! As far as other sports not having the controversy ..... VAR in the NFL and baseball does zero to the flow of the game so an irrelevant comparison. VAR in the NHL is damn rare and from what I've seen produces binary decisions for the most part. VAR in rugby ... I dunno, never seen it applied, but apparently it's been introduced well. Final (for now) point ... Nobody complains about the Goal Decision System because a pure binary application makes sense. So stop calling anti-VAR people Luddites!
Panama bounced from Gold Cup based on very poor handball pen call which VAR almost surely would have overturned, but there's no VAR in this tournament. Oh well! Them's the breaks, amigos... good luck next time.
crediting VAR for decisions "it would have made"? really? makes no more sense than arguing about what a ref did or didn't do ...
... the decisions that VAR "would have" or "could have" made is the whole reason the powers that be use the tech in top leagues and tournaments today. If your point is a shitty ref could have refused the call, I guess you're right. But I'm talking about VAR, not shitty refs.
really? you are joking, right? have you asked any Spurs fans how "obvious" our CL Final pen was a few weeks back? god almighty, man. you've got VAR so far up your rear end I'm surprised you can breathe.
I love the way you talk as if Var as if VAR is some sort of infalible artificial intelligence. It's not! It's 3 shitty refs who prolly have little or no field experience calling their subjective Opinions.
Then get better refs! You guys talk about refs like they represent VAR... no, bad refs need to uphold the principles of VAR better. VAR's just a process. You can do it poorly or do it well. For the World Cup, I literally stopwatched a majority of VAR incidents. Almost none of them went for multiple minutes, unlike the WWC this summer. That makes it an execution problem. Shuts down my what? He didn't mean what? I don't know what you're talking about. It's not like the CL pen at all. One is a player striking a ball into a player a couple yards away, another is a ball coming down from out of the sky from a longball, and a midair challenge between 2 players in which a ball pings off a head into a hand less than a yard away. That is a situation specifically called out in the rules as not a handball. So, that's literally different. That's why I said... it's different.
Bollocks. show me the rule that mentions either of those 2 things. hint: I'll save you time - that wording doesn't exist in the laws of the game - the rules don't give examples ffs, you're inventing it.
The language is if the ball comes directly off another player who is close, it's not a handball. The long ball came in, 2 people challenged, it pinged off attacker's head into a hand of the defender that challenged the long ball, they were shoulder to shoulder. This is different than a guy with his arm raised that's a yard and a half away, like in the CL final. I even think that's a tough pen to call to your point (on some level).... but don't act like these aren't different situations. That's silly.
It was a horror show of a call and I would expect most VARs to overturn it...but have you seen MLS? I wouldn't put any money on anything getting called right in that joke of a league. Which brings us back to your point, it's all about the quality of the refs...
OK lets back up. We're on two different tracks here. Your conclusion, well one of them when we were talking VvD and Lamela was "it doesn't matter that he didn't mean to kick Lamela. It's still a foul." I was talking about the WWC Sweden Germany game. The Swedish keep and a German forward went for the ball. The German tried to head it. The swede took a massive punch missed the ball and laid out the German. VAR said play on. I'm saying that she didn't mean to punch the German. But she did. By the logic (or lack thereof) you gave for the spurs game that means it's a PK.
no it isn't. it's this: http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/referee/laws-of-the-game Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: • the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) • the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) • the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement • touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement Hard as I look, I can't find what you stated: "One is a player striking a ball into a player a couple yards away, another is a ball coming down from out of the sky from a longball, and a midair challenge between 2 players in which a ball pings off a head into a hand less than a yard away. That is a situation specifically called out in the rules as not a handball." As you can see, the law - doesn't "specifically call out" a damn thing as "not a handball" - doesn't mention the ball "coming down from out of the sky" - doesn't mention "longball" - doesn't mention "midair challenge" - doesn't mention "head" other than that you were pretty close. unless the word "specifically" means something different where you live, of course.
They do! Better Refs. You know Sam and I are calling the anonymous people giving rullings from TV, refs. If you, a proponent of var want it to work then I suggest you get better refs. So far it seems like the FIFA chosen ones suck.
This is a complete misreading and misrepresentation of what I typed. The only reason I'm comparing these incidents is that you for some odd reason directly compared the CL final pen with this situation in the Gold Cup? Well... they're not the same! They're quite different. That's why I bothered to describe how and why. Then I said that this Panama situation has a specific section of the rules which says it's not a handball... and it does! Do you see me trying to talk about how far apart the players were in each situation? A guy challenging for a header shoulder to shoulder with an attacker that has the ball ping into his hand? There's a section in the rules outlining why that situation isn't a handball, I quoted them for you. I didn't say "the rules mention long balls into shoulder to shoulder challenges can't result in handballs!" I didn't say the rules have language about "the ball coming out of the sky"... I would never say that, I actually read the rules. And not just the ones from 2015-16, like those to which you just linked?