Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It appears that any hand/ball contact within the box will constitute as a penalty offence. I much preferred the pre VAR days when a human being made the decision. I’m waiting for the day that a player covers his crown jewels with his hands in order to avoid injury and pain when he sees the ball coming straight for them. :gag:

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, crookesey said:

It appears that any hand/ball contact within the box will constitute as a penalty offence. I much preferred the pre VAR days when a human being made the decision. I’m waiting for the day that a player covers his crown jewels with his hands in order to avoid injury and pain when he sees the ball coming straight for them. :gag:

Neither penalty decision yesterday at Luton were correct in my opinion.

Edited by Alextopman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then that would be hand ball in more ways than one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rules now are ridiculous. How can you give a penalty when someone is facing in the opposite direction and the ball hits their arm from a yard away? Just go back to how it was before, and only give a penalty when there's a deliberate arm movement towards the ball.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Vrsaljko said:

The rules now are ridiculous. How can you give a penalty when someone is facing in the opposite direction and the ball hits their arm from a yard away? Just go back to how it was before, and only give a penalty when there's a deliberate arm movement towards the ball.

I’d go along with most of that but for me you also have to look at if the offender got a definite advantage from the hand ball. The Luton one looked harsh yesterday. Didn’t see the united one but it sounded similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ronson said:

I’d go along with most of that but for me you also have to look at if the offender got a definite advantage from the hand ball. The Luton one looked harsh yesterday. Didn’t see the united one but it sounded similar.

What a surprise he didn't see the United one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crookesey said:

It appears that any hand/ball contact within the box will constitute as a penalty offence. I much preferred the pre VAR days when a human being made the decision. I’m waiting for the day that a player covers his crown jewels with his hands in order to avoid injury and pain when he sees the ball coming straight for them. :gag:

To be honest, watched the Luton v Blades game today on MOTD & thought neither hand ball was a penalty & before VAR, neither would have been given & very few in the crowds would have noticed them. 

 

It's clear that because of VAR we need a few more new rules.  It can't be considered a penalty is the ball flies over a defender's head then an attacker mi's-heads it back on to his arm. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

To be honest, watched the Luton v Blades game today on MOTD & thought neither hand ball was a penalty & before VAR, neither would have been given & very few in the crowds would have noticed them. 

 

It's clear that because of VAR we need a few more new rules.  It can't be considered a penalty is the ball flies over a defender's head then an attacker mi's-heads it back on to his arm. 

The penalty we got was soft, the penalty they got was ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ronson said:

I’d go along with most of that but for me you also have to look at if the offender got a definite advantage from the hand ball. The Luton one looked harsh yesterday. Didn’t see the united one but it sounded similar.

The Luton player’s hand interfered with a header that was goal bound and the player was facing the ball.

With the  one given against the Blades the ball was not headed goalwards and the United player had his back to the ball when the ball hit his hand.

Hardly the same situation but both were given as penalties by VAR officials.

I think they live on a different planet!

 

echo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any reason why a referee, after looking at the monitor, can use his common sense and suggest the VAR is misguided?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hopman said:

Is there any reason why a referee, after looking at the monitor, can use his common sense and suggest the VAR is misguided?

None at all, but that involves using common sense with appears to be a rare commodity amongst soccer officials.

 

echo.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hopman said:

Is there any reason why a referee, after looking at the monitor, can use his common sense and suggest the VAR is misguided?

No, according to them on MOTD this morning.  The match ref has the final say but in the Luton v Blades game, having given one dubious penalty, maybe he thought he needed to balance things up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.