Top VAR drama!
- Thread starter es1
- Start date
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
If the penalty had been given for handball originally, I presume the referee would have allowed rebounds etc. I'm not sure I can actually remember an example from my time watching top level football where a referee has not allowed a rebound at the end of a match.
If so, my instincts are a rebound should also be allowed after a VAR penalty, as otherwise you are essentially penalising the attacking team for the referee not having spotted the incident initially.
If so, my instincts are a rebound should also be allowed after a VAR penalty, as otherwise you are essentially penalising the attacking team for the referee not having spotted the incident initially.
Not really because assuming the same team scores (as has a penalty review) in that period of time, they'll give the goal and not bother with the PK review.... Another VAR flaw... Two bites of the cherry... We see this quite often
In fairness, such a situation like this would be exceptionally rare so I'm not surprised if there are people who don't know every single detail of the laws.
Anyways the right decision was made, how it took so long and why d
It seemed we did not have the semi offside technology in force I don't know, is it because they were placing the line on the ball instead of a defender?
As a neatrul, the fact it got disallowed does make it a much more interesting final match day.
I never particularly like the "two bites of the cherry" argument, but I think it's especially irrelevant here.
It's hard to construct a rebuttal that doesn't simply boil down to: so what? Team should have had a 90% chance of a goal followed by 30 seconds more of play before FT. In the time it's taken to establish that, they've scored and the game has then ended - I'm fine with that. And if they don't score, we go back to the game state as-is when the penalty decision was missed, give the penalty and then play the 30 seconds.
Either of those outcomes is perfectly fine with me, I don't really understand the problem (outside of default levels of anti-VAR anger)?
Seen it lots of times where a team has come close to scoring in the period of play whilst a PK is being checked and ultimately reviewed and PK awarded. Hence. two bites at the cherry. Anyway, it's not anti-VAR anger
The point being, if the teams come back out for the PK, only the time for the PK should be allowed because the period between the PK incident and the full-time whistle is not dead-time when frequently we see the team in question having a second attempt on goal
Come back out, keeper saves it (or rebounds off post/bar), game over. Easy to understand. Put it in the second LOTG book the game now needs
The side of the ball, as the ball would be closer to the goal line than the player.
onthebrink
Well-Known Member
I think it would be a much bigger VAR flaw if you were to rule out a subsequent goal by the same attacking team because VAR was going back for an earlier penalty.
I think that's debatable. Once the Genie's out the bottle though, lots of unintended consequences of VAR have revealed themselves
It's pantomime stuff when the players have to come back to the FOP after the final whistle. Can't have another period of play if the PK rebounds!
But that's the point - it's not another period of play. It's the same period of play again because the first was effectively wiped out by the VAR decision.
But it wouldn't be if the same team scored in that period of play whilst the check took place
To repeat myself - so what?
The offended-against team has benefited - that's literally the point of the laws, the point of advantage and the point of VAR. I don't see why there's any problem here?
The absolute whiplash I just got spotting your tweet saying this just now haha!
Think @JamesL has made it fairly clear why it's not quite right though
And I won't repeat myself. We'll move on
There's a difference between knowing a law and understanding a law. This is an example of a player who doesn't understand it
In the first few pages of 'The Art of Refereeing', the Author talks about an unhealthy relationship between Referees and players (the wider football community). We're too keen to mock their lack of understanding of the Laws. It's the same in many disciplines and sports. All footballers want, is for us to show up and give the game a sense of fairness and promote the enjoyment as best we can. I don't blame them for not picking the book up. Besides, most Referees couldn't articulate the offside Law, so why should players be able to do so. Indeed, most Referees struggle with the book full-stop cos it's a jumbled mess of a pamphlet. Perhaps if the book was re-written from scratch (or two books re-written from scratch) by people who are competent at doing so, it would be more accessible and much easier to interpret by Refs and players alike
In a nutshell and having seen it from both sides, both players (and the wider footy community) and R's are guilty 'us & them' attitude
ChasObserverRefDeveloper
Regular Contributor
I agree that play should have finished once the penalty was saved, as the offence took place a second before the full-time whistle, so if awarded then the penalty would have been in time extended for that purpose.
Definitely agree with this. I've spent some time in the sin bin for calling a referee smug as a player, nothing infuriates me more than an arrogant referee.
I once received an elbow to the back in full view of a referee and, after a prolonged period on the floor with ice, I stood up and said to him "I know the rules, he can't just stick an elbow in like that, it's a strike" he replies "it's laws actually". Which, whilst correct, as a player feels like he cares more about pedantry than my safety and the actual content of the laws.
This kind of thing encouraged me to take the course and attempt to referee in a way that doesn't treat players like they're stupid. I will say "the law is etc etc" but I won't correct a player if they say "what's the rule" because in that moment they don't give a sh*t.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Masochistic tendencies are vital to referee in this climate!
If you are a defender paid millions of pounds a year it is criminal that you don't know the law that you will encounter several times in every single game. The heating industry has a governing body, but a boiler engineer isn't going to get away with saying he didn't know about a regulation shortly after he's blown a house up. Don't try to defend the indefensible