INT v LIV
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
Personally I thought it was two really bad VAR interventions. The handball one I can just about accept on the basis that the threshold has always been lower for handball in UEFA competitions. But the penalty to Liverpool is just encouraging cheating, Wirtz felt a slight pull on his shirt and flung himself to the floor. It wasn't a penalty, and it certainly wasn't a clear and obvious error.
Yes, both bad decisions, not deliberate or unnatural handball. How can these things be interpreted differently in UEFA competitions. Surely the point of LOTG, that they are the same across all football. Never a penalty, so things evened out in the end. But some strange decisions all game
Are they bad decisions though or are they actually correct decisions in terms of how UEFA expect officials to penalise these situations?
I think it was Anthony Taylor who says when he's officiating in Europe he does it differently than he does in the Premier League and it's clearly obvious UEFA are more strict on everything from handballs, contact, yellow/red cards etc.
I think it was Anthony Taylor who says when he's officiating in Europe he does it differently than he does in the Premier League and it's clearly obvious UEFA are more strict on everything from handballs, contact, yellow/red cards etc.
The LOTG, young Kes, say it is an offence if a player scores in the opponents goal immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental. I assume this is the bit you're referring to?
I haven't seen it either, but the OP describes a different player scoring the goal to the one whose arm the ball hit, therefore it can't come under this part of law.
"Young Kes"
I like that. Say it more often.
Having re-read the OP, I can of course see the issue here and of course he's/you're correct.
Footnote: Nice to see your fellow L3 (James) and of course the Ozzie one backing you up on this. Surprised Russell hasn't jumped on me too!!
Oppressed Of Somerset.
This is the problem. Why publish the LOTG for all refrees, if UEFA are going to interpret differently to the PL. I might start doing my own interpretations on Sunday, and see how far I get.
If the ref thought Etitike had deliberately moved his arm, or it was an unatural position, then fair enough, but as it was played onto his arm at close range and at a fast pace from VVD, I can’t see how it meets either conditions
Its ok. U can still pick us up on our grammar, innit!"Young Kes"
I like that. Say it more often.
Having re-read the OP, I can of course see the issue here and of course he's/you're correct.
Footnote: Nice to see your fellow L3 (James) and of course the Ozzie one backing you up on this. Surprised Russell hasn't jumped on me too!!
Oppressed Of Somerset.
The laws are the laws, but as we regularly see with VAR almost all decisions in football are subjective. This isn't a new thing, as an example much more physical contact has always been allowed in England, and some other Northern European countries, than it is in Southern countries like Spain and Portugal. There's an argument to say the gap has narrowed in the past 10 years or so but there is still a gap. Same with handling, if I watch a Spanish game any time the ball hits a hand or arm in the penalty area I'm pretty sure a penalty is coming, and usually a caution as well. Handball decisions that would never be given in England.
And of course this makes it very difficult for FIFA officials as they have to referee differently when on UEFA duties than when in their domestic leagues. But I can't see that these differences will ever be fully erased.
redref2005
New Member
That's not fair though is it? Wirtz for all his dive afterwards was denied the chance to challenge for the bouncing ball as he was being pulled back by the defender. This in any ordinary situation is a foul and often a yellow card to the aggressor. Surely it shouldn't matter what the affected player does afterwards to try and show that they were fouled? If fouled players always stayed upright and didn't go down would they ever get a foul given for them? I think this is mostly down to ref's being afraid to give stuff nowadays in case they get it wrong.
Disagree, if he had tried to get away and the defender had kept hold him him then that would be what PGMOL call sustained holding and a penalty would be justified. Instead he felt a very slight pull on his shirt and threw himself to the floor. If the holding was with any kind of significance he wouldn't have been able to do that, try falling over if someone has properly got hold of your shirt, you can't as they are holding you up.
redref2005
New Member
I guess we saw two different things. To me he is clearly held and as he is in a standing upright position he is unable to get any leverage away from the player pulling him back. It would a different situation if both players were running and the offending player pulled him as he would fall backwards. I'd like to see how you'd react if someone pulled your shirt from behind whilst you were standing still trying to move. Go on, ask someone who you can trust to do it to you and see if you do it differently?
I played centre half even though I'm quite small, I know that even if I had a full hold of an attacker twice my size they wouldn't be able to throw themselves to the floor (and yes, I do speak from experience as I did a lot of holding). Wirtz was held momentarily, but at the time he did his flop to the ground he wasn't being held.
Given your user name I'm going to take a wild guess you are a Liverpool fan?
redref2005
New Member
I'm Welsh so I like red but anyway, it's not the situation here. I think defenders are getting away with it so many times as ref's aren't clamping down on this sort of behaviour. It's like when defenders also sheperd the ball out of play, half the time they are nowhere near the ball and can foul the attacking player in the name of defending their position.
This situation would be the same for any team not just Liverpool. The pulling lasted about 2 second's which isn't much in the grand scheme of things but a lot can hasppen in that time and potentially this player could have controlled the ball and played it to a team mate to shoot, but as they were being held they couldn't reach the ball. The dive afterwards should have no bearing on the ref's decision in my eyes as ref's often don't seem to make a decision unless a player has fallen.
This situation would be the same for any team not just Liverpool. The pulling lasted about 2 second's which isn't much in the grand scheme of things but a lot can hasppen in that time and potentially this player could have controlled the ball and played it to a team mate to shoot, but as they were being held they couldn't reach the ball. The dive afterwards should have no bearing on the ref's decision in my eyes as ref's often don't seem to make a decision unless a player has fallen.
I actually think that in real time, it looks fairly innocuous and the ref decided he wasn't going to be fooled or influenced by Wirtz's theatrics.
Seeing the slo mo version of it that VAR obviously reviewed however, casts it in a different light (for me anyway) and I think it's clear that he was impeded from lunging for the ball, even if only momentarily and so I think the penalty decision was correct.