You should work at Stockley Park! I particularly like the way your line has a margin for error
Baggies v Reds
- Thread starter Big Cat
- Start date
Surely you, of all people, are not advocating more line drawing.
The point surely, is that the player in an OSP is blocking the GK's view of the player who ended up playing the ball?
one
RefChat Addict
Yes absolutely. But I am suspicious about your image. The player in offside position has a very short neck and the top of his head is very flat while Alisson's neck looks like a giraffe
Last edited:
devonshire44
New Member
Learning from the example set by the best....You should work at Stockley Park! I particularly like the way your line has a margin for error
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
The ball didn't touch him, so play shouldn't have been stopped at all!
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Surely what makes this different from most other debateable free kicks is there was no contact between a WBA player and Liverpool player, WBA player wasn't close enough to challenge for the ball, it ran to him, and probably would have done anyway. All that's happened is that Mike Dean prevented Liverpool player challenging WBA player for the ball immediately. Such an error that as you say, one of the other 3 or VAR should be screaming in his ear?
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
1) It isn't FK v drop ball - its neither!
2) As I said about a previous series of incidents, when something like this happens, you will NEVER convince players/managers/fans that VAR is right to sit there and do nothing.
As you and others have said VAR is here to stay, but likewise so is 'football' asking why these sort of blatant errors are not corrected - just repeating 'VAR protocols' is not going to turn us all into VAR lovers!
It has to be something, he ha stopped play
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Fair (technical) pointIt has to be something, he ha stopped play
Similarly, picking incidents where VAR would be a terrible idea to allow to be involved as examples of when VAR "should" have got involved isn't going to persuade me that the entire concept is flawed either....
A referee can give a drop ball for when he interferes with play - which is clearly what MD thought he was doing here, but failed to be fussy about the restart going via his hands. Was he right to stop play for that? Maybe, but that aspect is subjective enough that it's non-VAR-able in any world.
And having stopped play incorrectly, what would have happened next even if VAR/an AR/4O had chosen to get involved? Well....probably a drop ball.... EDIT:
'd by James!
A referee can stop play and restart with a dropped ball when the ball touches him AND posession changes or promising attack started. Not for just being in the way, he still remains part of the field of play otherwise, as in this case.
Although this is not the first time in the PL a referee has stopped play and given dropped ball for interfering and the above not true. I think they are just going safe with it.
However, if you are suggesting that MD knew it was a dropped ball and was happy for fabinho to drop it and play on, then I think that would then make it reviewable (save for the changes in posession etc.)
That's correct, but as you say I think I was just going by what we've been seeing. My impression watching it live was that that's the reason he stopped play - because he thought he'd caused Fabinho to lose possession. And then when Fabinho went to take a quick FK, he let it go, given that stopping play again to insist on a dropped ball rather than a functionally-identical FK would have made his interference even worse!
The idea that he just "guessed" a foul does match the restart more I will admit, but doesn't particularly match up with what I saw live - his body language was apologetic which I don't think would be the case if he was whistling a foul, even if it was a bluff!
However I disagree with your final line - the current protocols still don't overrule the LOTG, so the window for that decision to be reviewed ends when the game is restarted, which in this case was when that short FK was taken.
Yes, but if a player infringes a restart then it would be reviewed.
For example, a player, taking a penalty, slips and touches the ball twice and the ball goes into the goal would be ruled out by VAR as the procedure for a penalty kick hasn't been followed. Or let's say ball was moving due to a gust of wind, var would review and order a retake.
If it was a dropped ball & the referee did not drop the ball the restart has not been taken correctly. That, I reckon, could be reviewed.
OK, I'm with you now.
We'd need to hear the comms really - if MD instructed a FK, or even blew his whistle, said nothing and then allowed the game to continue, I don't think there's a case. That incorrect decision to restart with a FK is not reviewable.
If he blew his whistle, instructed a drop ball and Fabinho ignored him, then yes - what we have in an "incorrectly carried out drop ball" that I think is maaaaaaaybe reviewable. But in that latter case, you'd have to ask why he'd allow the game to continue for so long knowing the restart was incorrect? Much more likely IMO that in the heat of the moment, he just made an incorrect decision on how to restart, and if that's true, I don't think there's any way it could be reviewed.