Search results

(apologies for the “corrupt” bit on the X link, couldn’t find any other video of the incident - obv not endorsing that)

Thoughts on Dan Burn’s disallowed goal for offside? Not sure on the VAR protocol - fairly sure it can’t be a goal because an offside offence has been committed, and can’t be a PK because the ball was not in play at the time of the push, but can they award a re-take of the DFK? Pushing the...

Worth mentioning that the “number of covering defenders” and “distance to goal” criteria are significantly relaxed when the GK is way out of goal. At that point almost any possession with control in the attacking half is an OGSO.

Agree fully with that - penalty goal for anything that is currently in the laws as denying a goal, and a penalty kick for anything currently the laws as DOGSO

Correct decision, but if ever there’s a time for Law 18 that’d be it. I’d be giving the goal and saying (wrongly) that the second foul wasn’t a foul.

Deflection as well? I get distance and speed, as even if it’s close by, you’ve deliberately put your arm where the ball is likely to go. With deflection though the point is that you had no reasonable way of knowing where the ball would end up.

Well exactly - I would give neither but the PSG one would have made more sense given that he had time to judge the trajectory of the ball.

The two PSG VAR calls on handball against Newcastle - one two seasons ago and one today - are the two worst examples of “European” handball laws I think I’ve ever seen…this one is a double-deflection, the second being off PSG attacker’s arm, onto the hand of the defender with no time at all to...

Looked like an offside offence to me, with Haaland effectively shielding the ball from the defender - Chris Sutton seems to think otherwise on commentary. Any thoughts?

On a similar theme - could you justify a red at the end for Martinelli for endangering the safety of an opponent? Pushing a player who’s down with a potentially serious injury is very poor form

Fine with people taking different interpretations on the VAR threshold, but slightly concerning that 2 out of 5 on the panel thought it wasn’t even a foul.

But aren’t those almost universally given in Europe? PL sure, no pen - but to say that’s a clear and obvious error under the European interpretation seems off.

As a Newcastle fan - it’s a pen and should never have been overturned.

I don’t think this met the threshold for VAR intervention outlined at the start of the season, and hope that the PGMOL apology dissuades re-refereeing of other similar incidents. In general I think when a player is not making a challenge or committing a holding offence, and his actions are not...

Indeed - would sum it up as "if you move into the line of the ball to block it, you have to do that without using your hands or arms."

It’s a bit like when a striker uses his arm to “cushion” the ball to help control it when it gets played over the top. In those cases the hand is by his side in a natural position, but it’s still an offence because it’s a deliberate handball.

Looked a pen to me - the mitigations being listed (hands by side, deflected) are for when the defender is too close to get out of the way, so you start examining his motives before the ball was struck. There’s enough distance between him and the ball (even after the deflection) for him not to...

Surprised the going away from goal thing is even being mentioned - firstly because it’s the illegal action that takes it in that direction, and secondly because a shot from a wider angle with no keeper in the net is much more likely to be scored than a central 1-on-1

I know direction of attack and covering defenders are OGSO considerations, but is it not still an OGSO anyway if he’s going past the keeper? Do we think Haaland is unlikely to score if the GK is out of the picture?

Clearly endangering his opponent and out of control. And not massively helpful for refs trying to educate people that getting the ball isn’t a defence when that’s the case.