I'm amazed by the lack of an appeal but for me this ticks every box for handball. I think this should have been handball under the previous laws as well. Thoughts?
If you haven't, watch the winner...super goal
Must be nailed on thenyep, hand ball for me too, definitely puts his arm out to block the shot...
I only ever call the ones that are actually deliberate hand ball.... the rest I deem are not so we played on regardless of what they thought!!Must be nailed on then
In fairness, there were no appeals from Dortmund players so my guess is that no one even suspected a problem real time.
Agree, this has always been an innate issue with the choice of a system where checks have to be initiated by an external VAR, combined with football's insistence that a restart means any decisions before that point are locked in stone. For the VAR to hold up play, he has to have time to at least watch one replay to see if there's something that requires further investigation and it's always been plausible that the ball could go out and back into play in that time.Which seems a pretty big issue in the whole VAR process and application
I know i have maybe been close with something on the box, watched the tackle carefully, thought about it, played it back in my head, but no reaction from attacker, no mass appeal, its out for a corner and nothing about whats going on says penalty, so, corner it is.
Disclaimer that does not mean no appeal means no pk, am talking isolated example where you do feel, wait, am only person thinking this, have i got it right?
Oh yeah, definitely f'ed that one up. I was once absolutely sure a tackle was a pk and the defender must have gone through the back of the attacker to get to the ball. Point to the spot, turns out in the only one on the pitch, nay the entire park, that thinks that was a pk. Not too proud of myself but turned it into a corner kick and all was well. That convinced me that angles can be extremely deceiving.
Yeah, that's what I'm doing now. Sometimes gives me a bit of grief: 'Why'd you wait so long?' in reality this is often no more than a second but that's an eternity in football. A well timed 'just making sure I'm not making a massive mistake' often helps in dealing with those comments. And if they're protesting I took so long, they're already past protesting the foul or if it was oneperfectly fine and understandable, and credit you changed it
With experience, it taught me just to hold off ( i never gave mine), the mind does play tricks on us and sometimes we do actually believe what we think we have seen...
Yeah, that's what I'm doing now. Sometimes gives me a bit of grief: 'Why'd you wait so long?' in reality this is often no more than a second but that's an eternity in football. A well timed 'just making sure I'm not making a massive mistake' often helps in dealing with those comments. And if they're protesting I took so long, they're already past protesting the foul or if it was one
That's lucky and some of the occasions where swearing is absolutely useful. What we're the players' reactions?i was AR in a televised game where ref did as you, had already decided defender could not possibly touch the ball, tackle came in, gave pen.
I got him over ( days before coms), said, its not a pen, give a drop ball.
He said, no, its a pen
I said, no, fcking drop ball.
He knew i was deadly serious, and went with me......phew
That's lucky and some of the occasions where swearing is absolutely useful. What we're the players' reactions?
Agree, this has always been an innate issue with the choice of a system where checks have to be initiated by an external VAR, combined with football's insistence that a restart means any decisions before that point are locked in stone. For the VAR to hold up play, he has to have time to at least watch one replay to see if there's something that requires further investigation and it's always been plausible that the ball could go out and back into play in that time.
Either a referee-initiated check system (as per rugby) or a captain/managers challenge (as per cricket, tennis, NFL.....) system would get round this issue and both would be better systems IMO.
I was all prepared to quote laws telling you that you were wrong, but then found out that you weren't! That surprises me because I genuinely cannot remember an incident where the referee stops play to initiate a review without seeming to get a signal from the VAR first. And it also seems to conflict with the principal that the referee has to make a decision first - in this case, if he's made the decision that it isn't a penalty, it seems like it would be very odd for him to then insist on a check that undermines his decision.VAR procedures explicitly allow the R to initiate a review.
Agree completely, but because of the way VAR has been designed, we're discussing this incident because the VAR failed to get the check done in time to recommend a delayed restart and/or the referee didn't spot the possibility he missed something - so this has become a mistake by the officials. If a manager/captain challenge system was in place, the failure to initiate a review would have been the fault of one of the teams, making the referee just a bystander rather than the cause of the problem.I don't think it would have made any difference here because it seems neither the referee or any of the players had an idea that it was a penalty. The VAR was the most likely person to spot it but obviously any system relies on someone spotting it, either live or on a replay. There's no way of completely overriding that reality.
As discussed in my previous post, I accept that the referee could have initiated a review, but find that very inconsistent with the idea that he's expected to first make a firm decision and then immediately doubt himself in order to do this. And the VAR should be constantly checking every possible incident, not just sitting on their hands until the referee starts to panic down the comms system, so the referee's confidence in his decision should (in theory!) be irrelevant to the standard system of ongoing background checks.I don't think it's correct to suggest that the referee or players make no contribution to the review process. If the referee had thought there was a casae for a penalty or a player had appealed to him for it, I'm sure the VAR would have looked more closely at it.
. And it also seems to conflict with the principal that the referee has to make a decision first - in this case, if he's made the decision that it isn't a penalty, it seems like it would be very odd for him to then insist on a check that undermines his decision.