|
Keeper66
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Handball decisions aren’t made on the basis of where the ball might be going, the laws of the game don’t refer to that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
So, if the are going to use the VAR to give a penalty when a defender not only hasn’t tried to use his arm to advantage, but has no idea where the ball is, then why not go the whole way and add Hawkeye.
If the shot was going over the bar or wide or going straight to the keeper, then regardless of where his arm was, the defender has gained absolutely no advantage.
Then if we want to ruin the game further, we can add snicko and hotspot to make 100% sure there was contact between ball and hand,
oh and then we can wire up players with pressure sensors, so the VAR can determine if contact was “sufficient”.
Enjoy the technology guys. Think I might get myself an NPL side next season and go back to enjoying the rawness of the (so called) beautiful game.
|
|
|
|
|
miron mercedes
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xHandball decisions aren’t made on the basis of where the ball might be going, the laws of the game don’t refer to that. Thank you .....finally someone who has actually read the laws of the game ...the number of times I read a supposed expert ex Socceroos say something was a penalty in their eyes without actually stating why astounds me. They actually say things like "it was headed towards goal so that was a clear pen for me " !!!! Most have never read the Laws of the game rules and have simply formed opinions based on what they feel the laws "should be "...not what they actually are. I don't get all the controversy over the handball laws...they are pretty bloody clear . At present the overarching consideration is "was it done intentionally ?" There are some guidelines like "is it hand to ball or ball to hand , how far from the striker of a ball was the player whose hand came into contact with the ball , was the arm in an unnatural position "....these are simply guidelines a ref can use to determine if it should be considered intentional. Sometimes intent will never be clear so that's where a ref has to go with his gut . Sometimes they get it right sometimes they don't . I see absolutely no reason to change anything about handball. Stop changing the rules...the game has been getting along fine with those rules .
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xHandball decisions aren’t made on the basis of where the ball might be going, the laws of the game don’t refer to that. Thank you .....finally someone who has actually read the laws of the game ...the number of times I read a supposed expert ex Socceroos say something was a penalty in their eyes without actually stating why astounds me. They actually say things like "it was headed towards goal so that was a clear pen for me " !!!! Most have never read the Laws of the game rules and have simply formed opinions based on what they feel the laws "should be "...not what they actually are. I don't get all the controversy over the handball laws...they are pretty bloody clear . At present the overarching consideration is "was it done intentionally ?" There are some guidelines like "is it hand to ball or ball to hand , how far from the striker of a ball was the player whose hand came into contact with the ball , was the arm in an unnatural position "....these are simply guidelines a ref can use to determine if it should be considered intentional. Sometimes intent will never be clear so that's where a ref has to go with his gut . Sometimes they get it right sometimes they don't . I see absolutely no reason to change anything about handball. Stop changing the rules...the game has been getting along fine with those rules . This. Amateur refs at local parks seem to be able to apply common sense to these decisions, while the game at the highest levels seems intent on coming up with new definitions and interpretations that result in ridiculous outcomes.
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xHandball decisions aren’t made on the basis of where the ball might be going, the laws of the game don’t refer to that. Thank you .....finally someone who has actually read the laws of the game ...the number of times I read a supposed expert ex Socceroos say something was a penalty in their eyes without actually stating why astounds me. They actually say things like "it was headed towards goal so that was a clear pen for me " !!!! Most have never read the Laws of the game rules and have simply formed opinions based on what they feel the laws "should be "...not what they actually are. I don't get all the controversy over the handball laws...they are pretty bloody clear . At present the overarching consideration is "was it done intentionally ?" There are some guidelines like "is it hand to ball or ball to hand , how far from the striker of a ball was the player whose hand came into contact with the ball , was the arm in an unnatural position "....these are simply guidelines a ref can use to determine if it should be considered intentional. Sometimes intent will never be clear so that's where a ref has to go with his gut . Sometimes they get it right sometimes they don't . I see absolutely no reason to change anything about handball. Stop changing the rules...the game has been getting along fine with those rules . This. Amateur refs at local parks seem to be able to apply common sense to these decisions, while the game at the highest levels seems intent on coming up with new definitions and interpretations that result in ridiculous outcomes. Mate amateur refs wouldn't even give a foul if someone broke every bone in your body.
|
|
|
|
|
LFC.
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xIf modern footballers didnt take part in the dark arts aka cheating, then we would not need var. Handball decisions are getting more ridiculous every week. That Man U pen - No intent, arm not in unnatural position, facing away from the ball but somehow a penalty. IFAB should simply change the rule to this: If the arm is away from the body - handball. That way, especially in the penalty area, defenders will know absolutely that if they take an action that physically might cause their arm to move away from the body ie jumping or sliding to block a shot then they are committing a foul and should expect to be penalised if the ball strikes the arm. it will change the way defenders behave and will probably result in more shots on goal which is a good thing. The only area that the ref should have some discretion is when defender and attacker are contesting a ball in the air. the defender should have the same opportunity to win a ball in the air as the attacker and that would necessarily require using the arms to jump so a contested ball onto an arm for example could still be play on. The only addition I would make is some sort of clause to negate the option of someone deliberately hitting the ball at your arm/hand from close range. That would leave us where we are now - interpretive decisions based on the individual ref. There are always going to be interpretive decisions, irrespective of what you do (e.g., physical fouling). This will significantly reduce interpretive decisions relating to handball, of which there will always be others anyway (did it hit arm or shoulder, for example). Football is not, and I hope never will be, a black and white game. Football is not black and white and it's the main reason Var can never work, you can't have 2 referees, refereeing a game of football. Because football is a game of interpretation, it is complete folly to expect Var to work. How much evidence do people need. In one incident you can have 50% saying penalty, 50% saying no penalty. Then you have a referee make 1 decision, then psychologically told to reverse it, by another referee in a room. Meanwhile 50k and 500m sit and watch a referee looking at a tv screen on the side of the pitch. Football a simple game ruined by suits, who want to jazz it up. Also that shot was going to the moon, no penalty. Here here spot on, and as mentioned leave the game alone. Modern world input the need to change for what ?! The game is brilliant as is. Just improve officials on policing the shirt pulling/divers, feck the tech.
Love Football
|
|
|
|
|
playmaker11
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 12K,
Visits: 0
|
Interesting one from the Saudi league https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_iRoMxAVyQ
By now, American Samoa must have realised that Australias 22-0 win over Tonga two days earlier was no fluke.
|
|
|
|
|
MarkfromCroydon
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
GREAT decision.
I take back every bad word I've ever said about VAR.
Today, I LOVE it.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Can someone explain to me the second penalty here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU5AXRherjAAbout the 1:23 mark.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
Dangerous play. Studs into the player. Probably not intentional, but I've seen fouls given for less than that, and quite rightly
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+xDangerous play. Studs into the player. Probably not intentional, but I've seen fouls given for less than that, and quite rightly But won the ball. Caught her on the follow through. Honestly how is this different from a slide tackle where you win the ball and then bring down the player?
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
sokorny
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.2K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xDangerous play. Studs into the player. Probably not intentional, but I've seen fouls given for less than that, and quite rightly But won the ball. Caught her on the follow through. Honestly how is this different from a slide tackle where you win the ball and then bring down the player? Yeah saw that and couldn't believe the decision. As a defender I'd be running into every shot a striker has hoping they connect with me and could then cancel out a goal.
|
|
|
|
|
localstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
VAR has turned football into something that no longer quite resembles football. Players standing around for three minutes with hands on hips waiting for a var decision is not football.
Players wildly celebrating a goal only to have it cancelled out is not football, it is like an act from the theatre of cruelty.
Players being called back for a free at the other end of the ground after play has continued for a couple of minutes is not football.
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xDangerous play. Studs into the player. Probably not intentional, but I've seen fouls given for less than that, and quite rightly But won the ball. Caught her on the follow through. Honestly how is this different from a slide tackle where you win the ball and then bring down the player? Yeah saw that and couldn't believe the decision. As a defender I'd be running into every shot a striker has hoping they connect with me and could then cancel out a goal. I got done for this in under 17's. Won the ball, but got him with studs in the ankle. Yellow card and penalty
|
|
|
|
|
phutbol
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xDangerous play. Studs into the player. Probably not intentional, but I've seen fouls given for less than that, and quite rightly But won the ball. Caught her on the follow through. Honestly how is this different from a slide tackle where you win the ball and then bring down the player? Yeah saw that and couldn't believe the decision. As a defender I'd be running into every shot a striker has hoping they connect with me and could then cancel out a goal. I got done for this in under 17's. Won the ball, but got him with studs in the ankle. Yellow card and penalty Isn’t that a foul in the modern game? I didn’t think the France pen v Norway was a foul either.. the French girl arrives late and 2 footed then pulls up as the defender kicks it and cops the follow through in the leg. Penalty. Admittedly the defender only got the top of the ball but still won the ball first. Too sanitised.
|
|
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
After this morning, please rename thread, VAR IS AMAZING. -PB
|
|
|
|
|
NicCarBel
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xDangerous play. Studs into the player. Probably not intentional, but I've seen fouls given for less than that, and quite rightly But won the ball. Caught her on the follow through. Honestly how is this different from a slide tackle where you win the ball and then bring down the player? Yeah saw that and couldn't believe the decision. As a defender I'd be running into every shot a striker has hoping they connect with me and could then cancel out a goal. I got done for this in under 17's. Won the ball, but got him with studs in the ankle. Yellow card and penalty Isn’t that a foul in the modern game? I didn’t think the France pen v Norway was a foul either.. the French girl arrives late and 2 footed then pulls up as the defender kicks it and cops the follow through in the leg. Penalty. Admittedly the defender only got the top of the ball but still won the ball first. Too sanitised. Yeah, that's what I was saying, it is a foul. I have seen most referees give fouls/penalties for studs showing on a tackle, even if they do slightly nudge the ball first.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
There is a pay-walled story “A League draws the line at offside technology” ... anyone know what it’s talking about?
|
|
|
|
|
Mello-D
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 705,
Visits: 0
|
+xThere is a pay-walled story “A League draws the line at offside technology” ... anyone know what it’s talking about? Possibly the below from Daily Telegraph? A-League bosses won’t pay $200k cost of 3D Hawk-Eye system to rule on offsidesJUNE 13, 2019
A-League bosses are baulking at the $200,000-plus it would cost to have a 3D representation of an off-side call drawn instantaneously for the VAR using the Hawk-Eye technology deployed at the Women’s World Cup, to rule on tight decisions such as the one that denied Sydney striker Adam Le Fondre a goal in the grand final.
Le Fondre’s near-post finish was ruled out by a linesman’s flag against fullback Michael Zullo, a decision so tight that freeze frames from the side-on Fox Sports camera show the difference between being off- and onside to be 1/50th of a second.
Currently the A-League’s video refs do not have access to any form of line across the screen, and on the evidence of the naked eye, VAR Kris Griffiths Jones felt unable to overrule the linesman’s flag.
Fox Sports superimpose their own line manually but not quickly enough for the VAR’s window of review, and not in a way to allow for the distorting angle of the camera lens. Had Hawk-Eye technology been in place the VAR would have access to an instant 3D representation of Zullo’s position vis-a-vis the Perth defenders, using missile-tracking technology and confirming that Le Fondre’s goal was not off-side. Australia was the beneficiary of the system in the Matildas’ first match, when Italy had a first-half goal chalked off by the narrowest of margins by the VAR. Though internally FFA officials have debated whether the A-League can afford not to pay for the technology, the level of investment required is seen as disproportionate for the number of instances that would be affected. Other options being explored include implementing the Hawk-Eye technology for the finals series alone, or working with Fox Sports on making a quicker and more accurate line available to the VAR. A-League boss Greg O’Rourke is to attend a conference in London later this month with representatives from other leagues around the world and technology suppliers including Hawk-Eye, and hopes that some form of more affordable system may be possible. “At this point the cost of putting in the full Hawk-Eye system is a significant one for the A-League, though I understand that in some quarters it would be seen as essential,” O’Rourke said. “We have to weigh up the level of investment versus the number of incidents that would be clarified. But as more leagues around the world implement VAR I’m hopeful the unit cost will come down and we’ll keep having discussions with Hawk-Eye and with Fox Sports about what steps we can implement for next season.” The Chinese Super League recently became the first competition in Asia to install the Hawk-Eye technology.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Thanks Mello-D.
If thats a $200k one-off cost then it’s a pretty shabby response from O’Rourke. The pay rises awarded to senior execs at the FFA last year would have paid for it three times over indicating where the FFAs priorities are.
|
|
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xThanks Mello-D. If thats a $200k one-off cost then it’s a pretty shabby response from O’Rourke. The pay rises awarded to senior execs at the FFA last year would have paid for it three times over indicating where the FFAs priorities are. Exactly. If you're going to implement VAR, may as well do a proper job of it. Didn't McDonalds pay $500k to sponsor VAR?
|
|
|
|
|
jeggohouse
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 831,
Visits: 0
|
It's not made clear in the article, but if the overall cost to have this new technology installed at every venue that currently has VAR technology is 200k then there's no question it should be implemented at once! But if it's 200k per venue then it's a fair investment for something that is, for the most part, corrected by the VAR if the linesman gets it wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIt's not made clear in the article, but if the overall cost to have this new technology installed at every venue that currently has VAR technology is 200k then there's no question it should be implemented at once! But if it's 200k per venue then it's a fair investment for something that is, for the most part, corrected by the VAR if the linesman gets it wrong. That’s a fair point. The Hawkeye Goalline technology is too expensive because it is every stadium the article doesn’t make it clear but I’d assumed it’s a one off cost.
|
|
|
|
|
Burztur
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 9.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Should the stadium bear some of the cost? It's an installation for their facilities.
|
|
|
|
|
localstar
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xThanks Mello-D. If thats a $200k one-off cost then it’s a pretty shabby response from O’Rourke. The pay rises awarded to senior execs at the FFA last year would have paid for it three times over indicating where the FFAs priorities are. Exactly. If you're going to implement VAR, may as well do a proper job of it. Didn't McDonalds pay $500k to sponsor VAR? Never heard any more about the McDonald's sponsorship- they must have pulled out when they realised how unpopular VAR was with the general public.
|
|
|
|
|
scubaroo
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.8K,
Visits: 0
|
The cost of 2 grand finals in a row being severely altered by the mistakes of var/referees isn't enough? The pinnacle of the sport Is being compromised every year, if we have to keep this crap surely it has to be the best it can be.
|
|
|
|
|
MarkfromCroydon
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
The VAR is a joke.
How can 1 fiftieth of a second be considered a ‘clear and obvious’ error?
The way the rules of VAR are written, the Hawkeye line could show the player was offside, but the VAR can allow the goal to stand.
This system under the current rules is so clearly open to corruption
|
|
|
|
|
Boca J
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 412,
Visits: 0
|
+xVAR has turned football into something that no longer quite resembles football. Players standing around for three minutes with hands on hips waiting for a var decision is not football. Players wildly celebrating a goal only to have it cancelled out is not football, it is like an act from the theatre of cruelty. Players being called back for a free at the other end of the ground after play has continued for a couple of minutes is not football. ^^This^^ ...should have listened to Platini
|
|
|
|
|
RedKat
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4K,
Visits: 1
|
The Scotland/Argentina game.
|
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
+xThe Scotland/Argentina game. Farking oath. And you know what shits me to tears? How about pinging all the players that are encroaching. If you're going to retake pens for tiny movements off the line then players need to be pinged for encroaching. Not only that since when has it been the VAR's remit to check for the GK off the line anyway? Talk about mission creep. As predicted what started out as a plausible idea has descended into farce. Can't wait until they start that shit in the EPL next season.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
|