"Shouldn't matter" is the operative clause. It plainly does.
Palace v Man City FAC
- Thread starter ladbroke8745
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
one
RefChat Addict
Unlike you and I who can get indefinite time to look at a single frame at the time of our choosing, the AR looks at a number of fast moving objects continuously. Unlike offside, they don't get a lot of practice at this scenario. If you look at this in real time, Henderson is about a yard inside the PA with a fraction (tenths) of a second. That creates a lot of doubt.
And if the VAR recommends an onfield review, and the referee doesn't think it's DOGSO - the decision is still no FK?
Oh, I think he did. As he's running after where the ball has been punched to, he looks back - as in "Have you really missed that?"
Neither still shows either of those conjectures.I am going to argue in defence of VAR using semantics like a lawyer would
Is it an obvious GSO? Yes - this is the bar for a referee
Is it clear and obvious that it is an obvious GSO? No. This is the bar for VAR which would be much higher than for the one for referee (mathematical equivalent is when you square a number)
This shows where the ball would have ended up without the offence and offender
View attachment 8150
This shows where the defender would have ended up without the offence and offender
View attachment 8151
The protocol is obviously wrong if the bar is exponentially higher.
And if the VAR doesn't know what is meant by "overall movement is towards the offender's goal" it's obvious this was an obvious mistake.
Last edited:
No. Once at the monitor the referee can make any decision including changing the restart of play.
I was reluctant to use the word cheat but that's what it was. Henderson comes out of his area and goes back inside the PA before reaching out to handle the ball. Perhaps he'll do the Maradona thing and say it was the hand of God.
Unless the officials tell us what they think they saw, I'm assuming the AR thought Haaland had kicked the ball.
Did the mysterious "match commander" have a say?
Last edited:
You’ve totally made that up. He looks over both shoulders, turns and makes a pass. He’s clearly looking at players around him. He also has no interaction with the assistant referee stood right next to him by the touch line. He has no idea it was handball. There’s also no reaction from the players when the ball next goes out of play. Nobody realises it’s handball.
Judging by your posts, I think your city glasses have been put back on …
I'm still not convinced its a definite DOGSO because he has to regain control of the ball first and the slower he does that the chances of scoring decrease quite drastically from the angle.
Wouldn't say this is your typical DOGSO that we've seen in the Prem and there's a lot of If, Buts and Maybes involved in it. For me thats enough reasonable doubt for it not to be enough to be a DOGSO.
Think someone said about it being Haaland and hes never gonna miss it. If we're basing it entirely on the players, then surely we've gotta take into consideration he has played 8 major finals for City and scored in none
Think in truth it could've gone either way and there probably would've been outrage both ways. Palace have been unfortunate in the past with decisions so maybe yesterday was our lucky day!!
Wouldn't say this is your typical DOGSO that we've seen in the Prem and there's a lot of If, Buts and Maybes involved in it. For me thats enough reasonable doubt for it not to be enough to be a DOGSO.
Think someone said about it being Haaland and hes never gonna miss it. If we're basing it entirely on the players, then surely we've gotta take into consideration he has played 8 major finals for City and scored in none
Think in truth it could've gone either way and there probably would've been outrage both ways. Palace have been unfortunate in the past with decisions so maybe yesterday was our lucky day!!
Because that isn't how the protocol works. To recommend a review VAR must deem that the referee has made a clear and obvious error, they can't just pass the decision to the referee to make himself.
You've missed my point (and that touched upon by others above)
LothianRef
Member
The VAR protocol mentions “clear and obvious errors” OR “serious missed incidents” can be reviewed. Given no handball was given, surely this is a textbook missed incident?
You conveniently missed off:
"in relation to:
a. Goal/no goal
b. Penalty/no penalty
c. Direct red card (not second yellow card/caution)
d. Mistaken identity (when the referee cautions or sends off the wrong player of the offending team)"
So unless the VAR believes one of the above has been missed no review can be recommended
one
RefChat Addict
I know you know. And you know I know. But... in that case it's DOGSO is the incident that is serious, not the handball.If it denies an obvious goal or obvious goal scoring opportunity
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Please watch the video of the original pass again
What point have I missed? I'm talking about how VAR actually works and the protocol the officials must work to, rather than what we would like to happen. They cannot get the referee to look at the incident until they have first deemed him to have made a clear and obvious error.