Arsenal Vs Hull

[bester]

Apparently the attacker being pulled was interfering with an opponent, the pull starts before the pass was even made

Some strange explanations given too Dale Johnson from PGMO as well

Arsenal 1-0 Hull City: Another 1-0 for relentless Arsenal - but did Martin Odegaard spare VAR blushes?

Arsenal move six points clear at the top of the Premier League after beating Hull City - but did Martin Odegaard's goal save the blushes of the VAR?

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[cwyeary]

I support Spurs but this is just absurd. There is never an offside offense before the holding foul.

 

[Paul_10]

I suspect and hope this gets played on the next mic'd up show because I'm curious whether the VAR highlighted the offside and tells the ref the offside should come before the foul or was it the referee decided the offside should take precedence over any foul.

If it's the first one then why bother sending the ref to the screen if your just going to give offside and if it's the second one then it looks like the ref has made a mistake in law.

I think as Darren Cann says though, maybe in situations like this, offside should be prioritised if the ball is basically heading towards the player in a offside position and to add to that if the ball gets deflected away from the offside player then the holding has no impact on the play as the striker wouldn't get the ball in anycase.

 

[socal lurker]

FWIW, in The Athletic Graham Scott agreed it should be a PK.

 

[Ori]

I got this same decision wrong and was called up on it as league ref sec was watching.

Now I feel better watching a premier league referee make the same mistake.

I do think it’s a tough law and it should be changed to prioritise the offside.

Match of the Day analysis: Why Arsenal should have been given penalty against Hull City

Former Premier League assistant referee Darren Cann explains why Arsenal should have been awarded a penalty for a foul on Kai Havertz in the Premier League champions' 1-0 win over Hull City.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Tim Punter]

Would have been a bit ironic if that was given as a penalty after last week's shirt pull at Anfield. Maybe they were trying to rectify last weeks mistake!

 

[bester]

@Paul_10 If the ball wasn't heading towards the offside player then VAR would determine the pull has no impact on the game and not give a penalty for that reason.

Red herring in this one as the foul is made before the pass, the defender doesn't even know where it's going for sure.
Don't find reasons not to punish blatant pulls.

 

[CaptainsPlease]

It would have been interesting if Arsenal hadn't won the match and subsequently protested the result due to this outcome being wrong in Law.

 

[RustyRef]

I can't help wondering if this is down to some kind of weird Pro Ref interpretation / guidance where despite what the laws say they expect this to be given as offside.

Otherwise we have a situation where an elite FIFA referee and assistant referee in the VAR booth don't know the offside law, and neither do all 4 on-pitch officials. It is unfathomable, surely one of them would have at least questioned the outcome.

 

[Paul_10]

I can't help wondering if this is down to some kind of weird Pro Ref interpretation / guidance where despite what the laws say they expect this to be given as offside.

Otherwise we have a situation where an elite FIFA referee and assistant referee in the VAR booth don't know the offside law, and neither do all 4 on-pitch officials. It is unfathomable, surely one of them would have at least questioned the outcome.

Except as Dale Johnson posted, this has happened before and it was explained on the mic'd up show the law itself and the logic behind it.

I hope we do hear the audio on it but like Palace v Chelsea last season where a VAR may of misinterpreted the law, it was not shown and I wouldn't be surprised if this is the case again.

 

[RustyRef]

Except as Dale Johnson posted, this has happened before and it was explained on the mic'd up show the law itself and the logic behind it.

I hope we do hear the audio on it but like Palace v Chelsea last season where a VAR may of misinterpreted the law, it was not shown and I wouldn't be surprised if this is the case again.

Yes but they were in previous seasons, doesn't mean guidance has been given out since.

 

[Archer]

Ah, Ye Olde Classic:

1. Controversial decision
2. Gets criticised
3. PGMOL issue clarification
4. Controversial decision
5. New guidance adhered to
6. WELL WHAT ABOUT LAST TIME

 

[DJIC]

I can't help wondering if this is down to some kind of weird Pro Ref interpretation / guidance where despite what the laws say they expect this to be given as offside.

Otherwise we have a situation where an elite FIFA referee and assistant referee in the VAR booth don't know the offside law, and neither do all 4 on-pitch officials. It is unfathomable, surely one of them would have at least questioned the outcome.

I agree, very strange, even at my grass roots level of knowledge, having seen this play out in a Newcastle match last season, foul comes before offside.

Regardless, to restart with offside seems incorrect, if there is no shirt pull then he hasn't committed an offside offence.

I think the law is correct as it is, foul precedes an offside offence, otherwise can you trip, pull, punch an offside player & it will be offside regardless, noting a sanction (RC) to the offender if appropriate?

 

[DJIC]

Also both Keith Hackett & Mike Dean both originally stated offside was the correct call, only to reflect & change their minds.

So surprisingly we have MO, KH & MD all incorrect in law.

 

[bester]

This is about as textbook as you can get with what IFAB meant as not an offside offence.
You get some edge cases with this part of the law but this certainly isn't one of the them.

 

[Gabriel]

I can't help wondering if this is down to some kind of weird Pro Ref interpretation / guidance where despite what the laws say they expect this to be given as offside.

Otherwise we have a situation where an elite FIFA referee and assistant referee in the VAR booth don't know the offside law, and neither do all 4 on-pitch officials. It is unfathomable, surely one of them would have at least questioned the outcome.

I was wondering this. Surely there is no way that 2 of our officials who are being slated as potential UCL final officials this year, alongside 4 other onfield officials (one of whom is probably going to get a FIFA badge sooner rather than later), would all get this wrong. It's baffling.

 

[RustyRef]

Whilst not saying it directly, Graham Scott today seemed to suggest that it was an intentional decision rather than not knowing the laws. He also mentioned how people would fail to have understood how a penalty was given but no DOGSO. It can't have been DOGSO as Havertz being offside means there was no possible way he could have scored, so it could only be a penalty with no sanction. All a bit of a mess really.

 

[one]

This EPL interpretation has a very strange and I'd go as far as saying stupid consequence. If a defender knows an attacker is in an offside position but not getting involved in play, the defender can foul the attacker in order to earn a defensive free kick.

You commit a foul, you earn a free kick.

 

[Paul_10]

I think we should just see what the audio says(if they release it) before we cast too many judgments. Maybe the referee as apparently being an ex footballer at a certain level used his "common sense" approach and give the offside whilst perhaps forgetting or not knowing the law as it's written.

 

[RustyRef]

I think we should just see what the audio says(if they release it) before we cast too many judgments. Maybe the referee as apparently being an ex footballer at a certain level used his "common sense" approach and give the offside whilst perhaps forgetting or not knowing the law as it's written.

He certainly couldn't have done that alone though as he has to say what the restart will be before the VAR process is finished. So if he said he was going offside surely one of the two senior FIFA officials in the VAR booth would have questioned that?

I'm not sure we'll get the audio from this one. Whilst it was controversial it hasn't affected the result, so the path of least damage to Pro Ref would be to brush this one under the carpet.