A&H

Manchester City v West Ham

Regardless of the offside being given first, a grab to the nether regions, are we not deeming that a red card offence?
 
The Referee Store
Degnann said:
Regardless of the offside being given first, a grab to the nether regions, are we not deeming that a red card offence?
Click to expand...

i would say it's more of a grab / grapple of the body / shirt / shorts that happens to make contact with his, ahem, nether regions.

clearly intent is irrelevant, as would be the case with SFP, but I don't see accidental contact like this as anything untoward. If it were intentional then a red would definitely be in order. sure many players would prefer a 2 footer rather than someone grabbing their balls!
 
YC for USB? give FK for offside then VAR can say it should be pen and RC.

Or give up the pretence that VAR is there to get the right decision.

As PGMOL can set its own protocol then instruct refs not to play advantage on offside in the PA in case it wasn't offside.
 
bloovee said:
YC for USB? give FK for offside then VAR can say it should be pen and RC.

Or give up the pretence that VAR is there to get the right decision.

As PGMOL can set its own protocol then instruct refs not to play advantage on offside in the PA in case it wasn't offside.
Click to expand...

If you give the free kick for offside you can't give the penalty, regardless of what VAR says.

If you remove the referees ability to play advantage for offsides in the PA, they will just award more IDFKs for offside. Why? Because the fact they are playing advantage shows that they are going with their AR when they flag for offside.

The only way I can see that they could have avoided this is if the referee waived the flag down and made the decision that no offside offence had occurred. That would have then allowed VAR to go and check the foul on Aguero.

Of course, the referee would have to have a good reason to believe that his assistant was wrong to waive the flag down
 
Last edited:
zarathustra said:
If you give the free kick for offside you can't give the penalty, regardless of what VAR says.

If you remove the referees ability to play advantage for offsides in the PA, they will just award more IDFKs for offside. Why? Because the fact they are playing advantage shows that they are going with their AR when they flag for offside.

The only way I can see that they could have avoided this is if the referee waived the flag down and made the decision that no offside offence had occurred. That would have then allowed VAR to go and check the foul on Aguero.

Of course, the referee would have to have a good reason to believe that his assistant was wrong to waive the flag down
Click to expand...
So under the protocol the ref can wait to see if a goal is scored then let VAR say whether the AR acting under PGMOL's own rules was right or wrong but if the not-actually-offside-forward is fouled before the ref blows for offside PGMOL hasn't changed the FIFA rules that would have meant the AR should not have flagged in the first place.

I think I've got it. It's a VARce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
Why shouldn't the AR have flagged if he thought the player was offside?

My understanding of the VAR protocol is that they should only hold their flag if it is a close on/off call.

If the AR thought he saw an offence, and that it wasn't a close decision then he was correct to flag.
 
Last edited:
I'm having trouble tracking some of the conversation here, but here are my observations as I understand the VAR protocols(not being able to see the video):
  • The EPL directs ARs to flag all OS, but permits the R to delay the whistle on close plays with a scoring opportunity. (In the rest of the world, the AR would delay the flag, say "delay-delay-delay" into the mic, and only raise the flag once the goal scored or the goal scoring opportunity arose.)
  • If, as is suggested, the R did not stop for the OS (for advantage or any reason), then the ball was in play when the grab took place. As I understand the protocols (at least in the rest of the world), that would make the grab reviewable for whether it was a clear and obvious penalty. If that was what the VAR concluded, then the OS would have to be considered, and if the OS was correct, the IFK would come out, and if the OS was incorrect then the PK should be awarded.
  • But if the R blew the whistle prior to the grab, there is no possibility of a foul as the ball is not in play. VAR would still look for clear and obvious SFP or VC and could award. But VAR cannot check for USB on the grab. (I *believe* that if the VAR recommends an OFR for VC/SFP the R can disagree with SFP/VC, but could sanction as USB.)
 
socal lurker said:
I'm having trouble tracking some of the conversation here, but here are my observations as I understand the VAR protocols(not being able to see the video):
  • The EPL directs ARs to flag all OS, but permits the R to delay the whistle on close plays with a scoring opportunity. (In the rest of the world, the AR would delay the flag, say "delay-delay-delay" into the mic, and only raise the flag once the goal scored or the goal scoring opportunity arose.)
  • If, as is suggested, the R did not stop for the OS (for advantage or any reason), then the ball was in play when the grab took place. As I understand the protocols (at least in the rest of the world), that would make the grab reviewable for whether it was a clear and obvious penalty. If that was what the VAR concluded, then the OS would have to be considered, and if the OS was correct, the IFK would come out, and if the OS was incorrect then the PK should be awarded.
  • But if the R blew the whistle prior to the grab, there is no possibility of a foul as the ball is not in play. VAR would still look for clear and obvious SFP or VC and could award. But VAR cannot check for USB on the grab. (I *believe* that if the VAR recommends an OFR for VC/SFP the R can disagree with SFP/VC, but could sanction as USB.)
Click to expand...
I make you precisely correct. Can't see the VAR getting much of that right however (OP for example)
 
Sheffields Finest said:
Who do I sent the Bill for my time reading all this?? Can someone please summarise as my head hurts!!!
Click to expand...

The AR flagged for an incorrect offside, there was a foul on Aguero, the ref went with his AR and played advantage thus ruling out the penalty because the offside happened first.

VAR didn't/couldnt review the foul for reasons that were explained several times.
 
zarathustra said:
The AR flagged for an incorrect offside, there was a foul on Aguero, the ref went with his AR and played advantage thus ruling out the penalty because the offside happened first.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is correct. Since the R let play continue, there is no reason the VAR could not review--the ball was in play when the potential PK foul occurred. And if VAR concluded a PK should have been awarded, then it should have reviewed to see if the OS, which came first meant there should be an IFK instead of the PK.

My *guess* (not having seen the play) is that the VAR did not think it was clearly erroneous to not have awarded the PK. Alternatively, the VAR made an error as to process, perhaps thinking that there was OS so no point in reviewing the potential PK.
 
socal lurker said:
I don't think this is correct. Since the R let play continue, there is no reason the VAR could not review--the ball was in play when the potential PK foul occurred. And if VAR concluded a PK should have been awarded, then it should have reviewed to see if the OS, which came first meant there should be an IFK instead of the PK.

My *guess* (not having seen the play) is that the VAR did not think it was clearly erroneous to not have awarded the PK. Alternatively, the VAR made an error as to process, perhaps thinking that there was OS so no point in reviewing the potential PK.
Click to expand...
Anything is possible with the EPLs version of VAR.

Could they go back and award an IDFK (if the offside had been correct) after the referee already played advantage
 
socal lurker said:
I'm having trouble tracking some of the conversation here, but here are my observations as I understand the VAR protocols(not being able to see the video):
  • The EPL directs ARs to flag all OS, but permits the R to delay the whistle on close plays with a scoring opportunity. (In the rest of the world, the AR would delay the flag, say "delay-delay-delay" into the mic, and only raise the flag once the goal scored or the goal scoring opportunity arose.)
  • If, as is suggested, the R did not stop for the OS (for advantage or any reason), then the ball was in play when the grab took place. As I understand the protocols (at least in the rest of the world), that would make the grab reviewable for whether it was a clear and obvious penalty. If that was what the VAR concluded, then the OS would have to be considered, and if the OS was correct, the IFK would come out, and if the OS was incorrect then the PK should be awarded.
  • But if the R blew the whistle prior to the grab, there is no possibility of a foul as the ball is not in play. VAR would still look for clear and obvious SFP or VC and could award. But VAR cannot check for USB on the grab. (I *believe* that if the VAR recommends an OFR for VC/SFP the R can disagree with SFP/VC, but could sanction as USB.)
Click to expand...
"The EPL directs ARs to flag all OS..."

There's your problem right there.

"The EPL directs ARs to flag all OS" even when they get it wrong and FIFA says they shouldn't.
 
zarathustra said:
Got any proper footage that shows the build up?

If the assistant flagged for offside before the foul occurred, then it's not a penalty.

If the foul occurred before the assistant flagged offside then the penalty should be awarded.

Whether he is offside to start with, and whether VAR can over rule a potential incorrect offside is another matter entirely.
Click to expand...
That doesn't make any sense. Play does not stop for the flag, it stops for the whistle. Anything back to the last restart could be considered if relevant for VAR (or prior to that for mistaken identity or RC for SFP and spitting).

The "offside first, foul second, no penalty" only applies if the attacker actually was offside.
If VAR shows that no offside offence occurred, and that a PK offence did occur, nothing in the protocol disallows giving that penalty, so why it happens is once again suggestive of certain groups making up their own rules for how VAR is used and looking foolish for it.
 
I've been away and got back to find this having elements of dipping into fan nonsense. It is just about OK at the moment, but please let me issue a reminder that if it goes off topic there will be bans issued to those causing it.
 
Nij said:
That doesn't make any sense. Play does not stop for the flag, it stops for the whistle. Anything back to the last restart could be considered if relevant for VAR (or prior to that for mistaken identity or RC for SFP and spitting).

The "offside first, foul second, no penalty" only applies if the attacker actually was offside.
If VAR shows that no offside offence occurred, and that a PK offence did occur, nothing in the protocol disallows giving that penalty, so why it happens is once again suggestive of certain groups making up their own rules for how VAR is used and looking foolish for it.
Click to expand...
But the referee played advantage which indicates they went with their AR.

So either, VAR checked and there was an offside offence, but as the ref had already played advantage there was no need to go back for the IDFK. Or, they checked and there was no offside, and they didn't judge the missed foul to be a clear and obvious error. Or they checked and got everything badly wrong.
 
zarathustra said:
But the referee played advantage which indicates they went with their AR.

So either, VAR checked and there was an offside offence, but as the ref had already played advantage there was no need to go back for the IDFK. Or, they checked and there was no offside, and they didn't judge the missed foul to be a clear and obvious error. Or they checked and got everything badly wrong.
Click to expand...
At what point do we see top officials in one organisation make the same choices about the same kinds of incident, and stop pegging it down to vague circumstances that clearly don't apply, instead of adherence to firm instructions on exactly what to do? (i.e. "as little as possible")
 
Nij said:
At what point do we see top officials in one organisation make the same choices about the same kinds of incident, and stop pegging it down to vague circumstances that clearly don't apply, instead of adherence to firm instructions on exactly what to do? (i.e. "as little as possible")
Click to expand...
When pigs can fly and Satan goes to work in snow plough?
 
This is one of those edge cases where the protocol/law may or may not cover. I'm afraid I may have to be on the side of our resident fan-forum members of a penalty should have been awarded, for reasons:
  • VAR sprit is to get the decision right in clear KMI's
  • It is clearly not offside (with tech currently used)
  • It is clearly a foul
  • Play was never stopped (flag is irrelevant) .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top