Darren England VAR
- Thread starter amref
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
See Liverpool's goal at Palace for what constitutes handball (or doesn't)
Not sure what game you were watching but VAR clearly checked it and it was fine.
Guimaraes's hand most definitely wasn't "out". It was tucked in tight to his midriff. Are you an Arsenal fan by any chance?
ladbroke8745
Censorship
Was it handball?
I watched the game and seen several highlights after and im still not convinced it actually touched him.
Im not saying it didn't touch him either.
But you're saying that you'd rule a goal out for a maybe here rather than a definite.
Last edited:
From all the replays they showed I couldn't see any clear evidence that it hit his arm. Graham Scott was asked about it on talkSPORT today (a huge improvement on Hackett and Halsey I have to say) and said he had a similar one as VAR. He spent two minutes looking at it from every available angle and couldn't be 100% certain, and he needed to be 100% certain, so he didn't recommend a review, Said this one looked exactly the same.
Howard Webb backs the decision of the penalty being overturned but the bizarre thing for me is that Jarred Gillett could not see a touch on the ball by Pope on the close up angles yet seemingly he could as soon as he saw the wide shot from above even though that looked far less clear cut too me.
The more I look at this, the more I'm agreeing this is not a penalty, there is a clear touch on the ball and perhaps importantly for the VAR Pope does not follow through to create the contact.
Also a mention for the job of the assistant trying to keep the players from getting too close, quite a bit chaotic to say the least.
The more I look at this, the more I'm agreeing this is not a penalty, there is a clear touch on the ball and perhaps importantly for the VAR Pope does not follow through to create the contact.
Also a mention for the job of the assistant trying to keep the players from getting too close, quite a bit chaotic to say the least.
Alex_the_ref
New Member
I wish they would do something about the players who just stand right next to the referees when they are reviewing an incident. Point stands for players of all teams (some worse than others). The referee really has enough in his ear without a running commentary from two sets of players. I'm sure mandatory cautions for a few weeks would soon settle the players minds
Honestly, I don't know if a deflection off the body is a consideration any more because they took that specific wording out the book
I'm OK with this not being a PK, but I'm not OK with being an NLS Referee and not knowing if such a deflection is still a HB consideration. Either it is or it isn't.... and the defining thing should be whether it's in the bloody book or not!
It's just absurd
Agree with this. Feels like its still an expected consideration but not in law, so where do we stand...
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
And I agree too (ooh, that’s almost a consensus!). The deflection off the body that then hits an arm in an unnatural position is the biggest area of uncertainty I have when it comes to judging handball offences. There is unquestionably recent PGMO guidance that supports the non handball call against Gabriel. However, from my side, I see no current justification for this approach, either in law or in keeping things fair. Once a player has put an arm in a position that is unjustified for their body movement, I don’t see why they should receive a ‘get out of jail’ card just because it initially hits another part of their body
one
RefChat Addict
It is/should ne a natural consideration for deliberateness. By natural I mean somthing we should consider (I do) regardless of if it is in the book or not. It makes sense that if a the ball with speed took a big deflection close to the player, he would not have time to react, so it is very unlikely the touch was deliberate.
This logic however wouldn't apply for unnatural position of the hand and making the body bigger. You don't need reaction time for those. If the incident is the one I think it is, then the unnatural position of the hand should have made it an offence.
And get rid of all mention of 'natural position' which has nothing to do with 'natural position'. Rather it's the accidental and non-careless eventuality of naturally extending the arm away from the body for a host of reasons (99% of the time)
I don't why I bother concerning myself with this stuff TBH
Rules were better 10 years ago... proximity, unexpected ball, hand towards ball, deliberate... blah blah
And it matters not what words are in the book
Confederations and Associations will concoct their own tact regardless and nobody will know what a HB offence is
I don't why I bother concerning myself with this stuff TBH
Rules were better 10 years ago... proximity, unexpected ball, hand towards ball, deliberate... blah blah
And it matters not what words are in the book
Confederations and Associations will concoct their own tact regardless and nobody will know what a HB offence is
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the Laws of the Game were once too unwieldy and needed to be slimmed down & more accessible for all. However, what has happened in my world is that although about the right size, some of the information that was lost still needed to be there, and some of the information we still have needed to be lost!
Agree. I know that PGMOL have put out guidance to their referees that a deflection off their own body should make it less likely to be penalised, but that isn't in the laws, and referees not under PGMOL don't get that guidance. I'm pretty sure UEFA don't give out any such guidance, and I'm 99% certain this would be penalty in any of their games. Does feel like PGMOL create their own interpretations, no issue with guidance being given out but it surely has to be supportable by the laws.
They already have... If it was ever there before.
Oh aye, you're quite right and I recall your enthusiasm when pointing this out before. However, whilst you are indeed completely right, it's a classic example of our Confederation, National FA, PGMOL and our entire branch of the tree, taking the correct wording and brainwashing us with terminology and interpretation that doesn't exist. I can't see how 'natural position' emanated from pundits when Howard Webb for one, uses the term freely when justifying VAR's input. And be honest, have you never called out 'natural position' in games of your own? We all do, because that's the ubiquitous term in use despite what's printed in our pamphlet
one
RefChat Addict
It's much simpler. They (we) can't keep up with the speed the wording of the laws change.
Mostly I would say the reason for it is because clubs often try & circumvent a law, which then requires tweaking. Other occasions it can be when to try and improve the speed of the game eg passes of the ball to the goalkeeper, but there are also occasions when changes to the Law can shoot themselves in the foot e.g goal kicks taken from either side of the goal area which was meant to speed things up, but actually slows things down,