A&H

WSL - Man City vs Spurs

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
There is going to be real controversy after this game, and further calls for VAR to be added to the women's top level game. Spurs have just scored a frankly ridiculous goal. Cross came in and a Spurs forward had both hands straight up in the air way above her head. The ball clearly hit them, leading to a Man City defender knocking the ball onto her own post, where it rebounded hit the keeper and went it. It is honestly one of the most blatant handballs you are ever likely to see, I am astounded that none of the officials have seen it.
 
The Referee Store
There was also a really poor offside decision slightly earlier.

With the live TV coverage of the WSL this season, there will be far more scrutiny of the standard of officiating in the women's in England than ever before.

I see this as a hugely positive thing in the mid term, however do expect there to be some bumps in the road along the way!
 
Dream on 😁
Nothing disrespectful about appealing.
I don't mean mobbing the ref, I mean literally raising an arm and saying handball...
You mean like this?

Screenshot_20210913-181023__01.jpg


Nah. No one notices it. Not even us on replay. But do it like kasper schmeichel running to the referee rasing you voice, then you get the decision your way.
 
I didn't see many protests, but the BBC News article on it says ...

City players protested heavily in front of a stunned home crowd, but Tottenham held on to pick up their second victory of the season.

Can only assume they didn't at the time but did before the restart.
 
The part that confuses me is that there is nowhere else the AR should be looking except at the head levels of the players jumping to make an offside snapshot and or to determine goal kick versus corner kick. And from the angle of the Spurs players arm, I don't know how this isn't clear to the AR exactly what it struck.
 
The part that confuses me is that there is nowhere else the AR should be looking except at the head levels of the players jumping to make an offside snapshot and or to determine goal kick versus corner kick. And from the angle of the Spurs players arm, I don't know how this isn't clear to the AR exactly what it struck.
This is what I thought. Looking at the replays, I think the ref may well have been unsighted but I can't see any excuse for the AR not spotting this. She was looking straight at it, with no-one blocking her line of sight.
 
If I had to draw a picture of a handball offence where the arms aren’t in a natural position then I would draw that.

It’s bizarre that neither ref or Lino caught that one.
 
I think the officials may have seen the hands up, but just didn't think it had hit them. I had to have a second viewing to see the ball deviate.
 
There was also a really poor offside decision slightly earlier.

With the live TV coverage of the WSL this season, there will be far more scrutiny of the standard of officiating in the women's in England than ever before.

I see this as a hugely positive thing in the mid term, however do expect there to be some bumps in the road along the way!
As I said last week, two pretty clear offsides missed leading directly to goals last week.

Pick the best officials, regardless of gender, and the problems largely solved - slightly controversial but its just a numbers game - far more male referees than female ones.
 
I do wonder that if a VAR reviewed that goal, we’d still be waiting for a decision.

Did the Spurs player deliberately touch the ball? Possibly not if you consider two events immediately prior.
Did City #3 get a touch on the ball to deviate the flight of the ball?
Was the Spurs forward being held sufficiently by City #17?

Could either of the above justify the movement and position of the Spurs players arms? And if she was held, could you consider her actions as deliberate or an instinctive reaction?

Arguably, the holding was the first offence committed therefore, would a penalty to Spurs be the correct call?

Did the Spurs player score from the ball hitting her arm directly or immediately after? No, the ball was clearly going wide of the goal. The goal was ultimately an own goal scored by the goalkeeper, after another handball deflection by the City player.

The mind of the VAR could be frazzled by now!
 
Could either of the above justify the movement and position of the Spurs players arms? And if she was held, could you consider her actions as deliberate or an instinctive reaction?
Not sure how much was in jest, but arm above shoulder is separate from the justified position of the arms clause.

I would say this falls under the deliberate movement of the arm towards the ball (which doesn't always mean they meant to do it) but one could argue this falls under the "accidental but the arm was above the shoulder part".

Then you could ask if it was an immediate goal or just a handball in the APP. No matter which of the four paths you take, you get to the VAR having handball and no goal.
 
By 4 paths I assume you are referring to the bullet points in law 12 under “Handling the ball”.
I’m playing devil’s advocate a bit here but all four paths? Really?

#1 deliberately touches the ball with their hands/arm - as a consequence of being held, the handling of the ball is due to players not being in the place she expected to be with a free, unhindered passage.

#2 touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand /arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the players body movement for that specific situation - her arms make her unnaturally bigger but their position is justified by the prior holding off a specific situation.

#3 scores directly in the opponent’s goal - directly from their arm/hand. That didn’t happen. The ball was heading closer to the corner flag than the goal.

#4 scores directly in the opponent’s goal - immediately after the ball had touched their arm/hand, even if accidental. She never had control of the ball and no other Spurs player is nearby. (Apologies, there a single Spurs player with a possibility of playing the ball) After contact, the ball is played twice by City players.

You can’t use 3 or 4 to justify handling the ball is an offence here. 1 and 2 are certainly true if you ignore the holding offence but, arguable if you don’t.

My general point on VAR is that they should see the holding and as that is the first offence, a penalty should be awarded with suitable disciplinary action.

Or should it be the usual to hell with the laws, I’ll do what football expects?
 
Not sure how much was in jest, but arm above shoulder is separate from the justified position of the arms clause.

I would say this falls under the deliberate movement of the arm towards the ball (which doesn't always mean they meant to do it) but one could argue this falls under the "accidental but the arm was above the shoulder part".

Then you could ask if it was an immediate goal or just a handball in the APP. No matter which of the four paths you take, you get to the VAR having handball and no goal.

Uhh, the above the shoulder language is no longer in the LOTG at all . . . the analysis is whether the player made herself "unnaturally bigger."
 
Back
Top