# VAR



## Crazyface (Jan 18, 2018)

Thoughts so far? I'm a massive fan. Should have been introduced years ago. Hell, England would have beaten Germany, Portugal. But last night, I've only watched this once this morning, the VAR was brought in to decide on a penalty at Chelsea. 
It was NEVER a penalty in my eyes. The Norwich player never touched him. VAR fully vindicated. These cheating foreign players
are finally gonna get their comeuppance. Brilliant!


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 18, 2018)

They didn't use VAR in the incident you're taking about. The player was touched and many people are saying it was a penalty.

You are a crazyface.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 18, 2018)

It was a clear penalty and not a dive 

The fault in the system was clear last night - Mike Jones the worst referee in premiership history was watching it , Willian was clearly caught and went down because of that touch 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42727331

VAR is supposed to stop that stuff happening itâ€™s failed - just like it has in the other countries that have used it , there have been big issue with every country that has implemented 

Morata last night highlighted my big worry with him running up to the ref demanding that VAR be used and he will be the first of many

My stance on VAR was softening - think the incidents so far and time taken etc are showing that itâ€™s not good for football


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

Some people thought it was a clear penalty, other's thought that Willian had already started to go down and the contact was as he was already falling - which I think is what the ref thought as well. VAR is never going to be able to resolve every decision when they are opinion based. Decisions based on fact such as was it offside are quite easy to resolve. Others such as handball, a foul or red/yellow card are still going to lead to debates such as last night because the person making the decision might hold a different opinion to others.


----------



## Piece (Jan 18, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It was a clear penalty and not a dive 

The fault in the system was clear last night - Mike Jones the worst referee in premiership history was watching it , Willian was clearly caught and went down because of that touch 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42727331

VAR is supposed to stop that stuff happening itâ€™s failed - just like it has in the other countries that have used it , there have been big issue with every country that has implemented 

Morata last night highlighted my big worry with him running up to the ref demanding that VAR be used and he will be the first of many

My stance on VAR was softening - think the incidents so far and time taken etc are showing that itâ€™s not good for football
		
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think the Willian one, IMHO, wasn't clear cut as I think he looked for it a bit. For me, it was ref's decision/opinion and VAR backed it up by saying there wasn't a CLEAR and OBVIOUS mistake. The other two, Pedro and Morata, they got what they deserved. I think the ref was spot on. All we hear now is Conte bleating because his side didn't get what they wanted. I think the Naaarwich manager would say the opposite.


----------



## pokerjoke (Jan 18, 2018)

Well it was far from a clear penalty because the wrong decision was made.

VAR never failed,it just wasn't used right at the appropriate time.

Its obviously going to have teething problems but in the long run i'm sure it will work.

The Leicester goal the other night showed it works perfectly,last nights decision did not.

As saying VAR is not good for football,well there are a hundred more things worse for football.

I remember goal line technology being questioned,but that has worked perfectly since coming in.


----------



## Piece (Jan 18, 2018)

I'd be interested in if this VAR scenario has taken place or what the process is, if it did. One team, say Arsenal on the attack and the soon-to-be-gone Sanchez is hacked down in the area for a nailed on pen, but the ref doesn't give it. Spurs clear the ball up field and Kane latches on to it and scores a legitimate goal before the VAR has time to tell the on field ref you've made a wrong-un. Do Arsenal have to suck it up or does the ref cancel Spurs's goal and give a pen to Arsenal?


----------



## Piece (Jan 18, 2018)

pokerjoke said:



			Well it was far from a clear penalty because the wrong decision was made.

VAR never failed,it just wasn't used right at the appropriate time.

Its obviously going to have teething problems but in the long run i'm sure it will work.

The Leicester goal the other night showed it works perfectly,*last nights decision did not.*

As saying VAR is not good for football,well there are a hundred more things worse for football.

I remember goal line technology being questioned,but that has worked perfectly since coming in.
		
Click to expand...

Why do you say it didn't work? VAR said of that incident that no clear and obvious mistake was made so decision stays with the on field ref? Have I missed something?


----------



## pokerjoke (Jan 18, 2018)

Piece said:



			Why do you say it didn't work? VAR said of that incident that no clear and obvious mistake was made so decision stays with the on field ref? Have I missed something?
		
Click to expand...

All about opinions mate i thought it was a pen.

As i understood it the ref never gave the pen,the VAR ref looked at it and decided it was not a pen,however all the experts in the studio said it was a pen and in their words
"how can he get that wrong".

Maybe not a clear and obvious mistake but imo a mistake non the less.


----------



## Crazyface (Jan 18, 2018)

I couldn't see that willan was touched at all. He pushed the ball past the defender and then jumped over the defenders leg, realised he couldn't get to the ball, dived. 
How can people not see this?


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

I only saw the two incidents this morning but they were both penalties. On Willian, his leg was clipped which is a foul. On Morata, the guy has his hand holding down Morata's shoulder which is also a foul. For them both to get booked for diving is harsh, and if they'd have used VAR on the incidents then it wouldn't have happened. He may not have given them as pens (the hand on the shoulder would have been quite soft), but he certainly wouldn't have booked either of them for diving.


----------



## Crazyface (Jan 18, 2018)

Watched it loads now. Realised the ball was now at next defenders feet and dived. Shearer is a clown.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Crazyface said:



			I couldn't see that willan was touched at all. He pushed the ball past the defender and then jumped over the defenders leg, realised he couldn't get to the ball, dived. 
How can people not see this?
		
Click to expand...

Watch it again, you can clearly see that as he tries to hurdle the defender's leg, his left foot catches the Norwich defender's leg which sends him over. Awful tackle from the lad anyway since he lunges across and doesn't get the ball. It's a clear penalty that one.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Here you go, this shows the foul plain as day.
https://twitter.com/By433/status/953749396289617920

Keep your eye on Willian's left foot the whole time and you can see the contact.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I only saw the two incidents this morning but they were both penalties. On Willian, his leg was clipped which is a foul. On Morata, the guy has his hand holding down Morata's shoulder which is also a foul. For them both to get booked for diving is harsh, and if they'd have used VAR on the incidents then it wouldn't have happened. He may not have given them as pens (the hand on the shoulder would have been quite soft), but he certainly wouldn't have booked either of them for diving.
		
Click to expand...

But Morata did dive. Regardless or not of whether it should have been a penalty - even if a soft one - Morata dived. Someone putting their hand on your shoulder doesn't cause your legs to go out backwards and for you to fall full length forwards.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			But Morata did dive. Regardless or not of whether it should have been a penalty - even if a soft one - Morata dived. Someone putting their hand on your shoulder doesn't cause your legs to go out backwards and for you to fall full length forwards.
		
Click to expand...

I don't consider it a dive if you are being fouled at the time. I believe you're entitled to go down if you're being fouled. A dive is when there's zero contact and you try and make it look as if there was.


----------



## Beezerk (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I don't consider it a dive if you are being fouled at the time. I believe you're entitled to go down if you're being fouled. A dive is when there's zero contact and you try and make it look as if there was.
		
Click to expand...

In midfield or outside the box itâ€™s a soft foul probably as he didnâ€™t really appear to be pulling him back, Morata tried to construct a pen from it though which essentially is cheating.


----------



## IanM (Jan 18, 2018)

Works in Rugby (both codes) works in cricket and plenty of other sports....

Lots of ancillary waffle in Football.  Why?  Football is a sport where cheating and overreaction is seen as ok by many.   Listen to Jason Cundy on his radio show every night.. "part of the game" he calls it.  In rugby the ref is mic'd up so you know what is going on  - can't do that in footy cos the language used to the ref is too blue!!  Therein lies the problem


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I don't consider it a dive if you are being fouled at the time. I believe you're entitled to go down if you're being fouled. A dive is when there's zero contact and you try and make it look as if there was.
		
Click to expand...

Therein lies the problem. No one is entitled to do anything, you fall or are knocked down when you physically canâ€™t stop the fall, not when you â€œthink youâ€™re entitled â€œ to a penalty.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Beezerk said:



			In midfield or outside the box itâ€™s a soft foul probably as he didnâ€™t really appear to be pulling him back, Morata tried to construct a pen from it though which essentially is cheating.
		
Click to expand...

A foul is a foul - you can't put your hand on someone's shoulder in that way. He's obviously doing that to drag him back. I'm not saying it was a penalty because the ref could have had the view that it wasn't done with enough force to drag him down. But I think it's harsh to book him for diving when he's being fouled at the time. Perhaps the right decision would have just been to give the goal kick, with no booking.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Therein lies the problem. No one is entitled to do anything, you fall or are knocked down when you physically canâ€™t stop the fall, not when you â€œthink youâ€™re entitled â€œ to a penalty.
		
Click to expand...

It's the modern game. The pace of the game is double that what it was 20 or 30 years ago. If you're running at full pelt then someone grabs hold of your shirt for example, that can slow you down enough that a goalscoring chance disappears, and potentially the ref doesn't see that. Chance is gone and you get nothing for it. So managers will obviously instruct their attackers to make it clearer that contact has been made by going down.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It was a clear penalty and not a dive 

The fault in the system was clear last night - Mike Jones the worst referee in premiership history was watching it , Willian was clearly caught and went down because of that touch
		
Click to expand...




pokerjoke said:



			Well it was far from a clear penalty because the wrong decision was made.
		
Click to expand...




Orikoru said:



			Watch it again, you can clearly see that as he tries to hurdle the defender's leg, his left foot catches the Norwich defender's leg which sends him over. Awful tackle from the lad anyway since he lunges across and doesn't get the ball. It's a clear penalty that one.
		
Click to expand...

Willian got his just reward, he dived plain and simple, he could've stepped over the defender, but he anticipated the tackle and left his left leg behind so it hit the defender. He was trying to buy a penalty, he even jumps a little prior to the tackle which is why he has both feet off the ground. The ref and he VAR people got it spot on.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			A foul is a foul - you can't put your hand on someone's shoulder in that way. He's obviously doing that* to drag him back.* I'm not saying it was a penalty because the ref could have had the view that it wasn't done with enough force* to drag him down*. But I think it's harsh to book him for diving when he's being fouled at the time. Perhaps the right decision would have just been to give the goal kick, with no booking.
		
Click to expand...

If he's being dragged back or down why does he go down full length forwards with his legs out behind him. In my book that makes it a dive.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			So managers will obviously instruct their attackers to make it clearer that contact has been made by *DIVING*.
		
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you. :thup:


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Willian got his just reward, he dived plain and simple, he could've stepped over the defender, but he anticipated the tackle and left his left leg behind so it hit the defender. He was trying to buy a penalty, he even jumps a little prior to the tackle which is why he has both feet off the ground. The ref and he VAR people got it spot on.
		
Click to expand...

I have no idea how you can watch it and come to that conclusion without a huge amount of bias. He's jumped to try and hurdle the Norwich player's leg, which he has lunged aimlessly across the front of him. As he does this his left foot catches said leg which sends him down. It's a bloody stonewall penalty and if you can't see that you must be blind.


----------



## Beezerk (Jan 18, 2018)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Therein lies the problem. No one is entitled to do anything, you fall or are knocked down when you physically canâ€™t stop the fall, not when you â€œthink youâ€™re entitled â€œ to a penalty.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly, it's a disease in the game which goes off at all levels unfortunately.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I don't consider it a dive if you are being fouled at the time. I believe you're entitled to go down if you're being fouled. A dive is when there's zero contact and you try and make it look as if there was.
		
Click to expand...

If someone during a game puts a hand on your shoulder and you go down like you've been shot, then you are a cheater, you are trying to con the ref. Sadly it has become part of the game which hopefully VAR will start to rule out as players will start to realise they can't get away with it anymore.

Some of the so called stars of the game who like to dive should take a look a George Best dribbling the ball when he was at his playing prime, the opposition often tried to kick lumps out of him but he kept going. 

[video=youtube;uJWWA-h_-5g]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJWWA-h_-5g[/video]


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			It's the modern game. The pace of the game is double that what it was 20 or 30 years ago. If you're running at full pelt then someone grabs hold of your shirt for example, that can slow you down enough that a goalscoring chance disappears, and potentially the ref doesn't see that. Chance is gone and you get nothing for it. So managers will obviously instruct their attackers to make it clearer that contact has been made by going down.
		
Click to expand...

You really think that someone touching you on the shoulder is going to mean your legs fly out behind you?
Either you want players to cheat, or you donâ€™t. What you canâ€™t do is excuse some things.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I have no idea how you can watch it and come to that conclusion without a huge amount of bias. He's jumped to try and hurdle the Norwich player's leg, which he has lunged aimlessly across the front of him. As he does this his left foot catches said leg which sends him down. It's a bloody stonewall penalty and if you can't see that you must be blind.
		
Click to expand...

Not blind at all, even watching at full speed before the replays last night, I called a dive. As I wrote, Willian ANTICPATED the tackle and played for the penalty, he dived simple. IF you cannot see that he purposely left his left leg behind so that it would catch the defender, then you sir are blind.


----------



## Crazyface (Jan 18, 2018)

IF he made contact, then it was in the act of jumping over the outstretched leg. The defender did not make contact with his lunge. No penalty.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Bunkermagnet said:



			You really think that someone touching you on the shoulder is going to mean your legs fly out behind you?
Either you want players to cheat, or you donâ€™t. What you canâ€™t do is excuse some things.
		
Click to expand...

The stupid things is, players will drop at the slightest touch, but if they just tried a little harder to play the game like men and stop acting like little girls, then they might actually get into a position to cross the ball for a team mate to score, they might actually get in a position for themselves to score.

There are not many players who will try to stay on their feet rather than dive, hats off to those who play without the need to cheat.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

I think it's just a generational thing. The game has moved on and defenders kicking lumps out of attackers isn't acceptable anymore. You're quick to brand someone going down under contact a cheat, but a defender grabbing a handful of a striker's shirt and getting away with it is also cheating by the same measure. Appealing for a goal kick when you know full well you got the last touch and it should be corner is also cheating. 

Diving is cheating and should be punished accordingly, but I just don't consider it diving if you are actually fouled at the time. If you get held back by your arm, stay on your feet but the ball runs out of play because you can't get there, and nothing is given, where is the merit in that? The defender has cheated and got away with it in that scenario. I don't see how that is better than the attacking player showing that he's being held back and getting the penalty or free kick that he is entitled to for the foul.


----------



## Reemul (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I don't consider it a dive if you are being fouled at the time. I believe you're entitled to go down if you're being fouled. A dive is when there's zero contact and you try and make it look as if there was.
		
Click to expand...

This is rubbish, absolute rubbish. The only reason he went down was because he was in the box, if everyone fell down every time there was any sort of contact they would be flopping all over the midfield.

A touch is a touch not a foul. Contact does not mean a foul and certainly does not mean diving like a Olympic gold medallist. 

You see if a touch like that is a foul why is it not given all the time, all around the pitch, that's right it's not because it's not a foul it's just contact and football is still a contact sport isn't it.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Not blind at all, even watching at full speed before the replays last night, I called a dive. As I wrote, Willian ANTICPATED the tackle and played for the penalty, he dived simple. IF you cannot see that he purposely left his left leg behind so that it would catch the defender, then you sir are blind.
		
Click to expand...

If you're not blind, you're just mental. I've watched it about ten times now this morning and every time I see Willian beat the defender, the defender puts in a shocking tackle that misses the ball by a country mile and Willian trips over it. It's a stonewall 100% bona fide penalty. It's great play by Willian, not manufacturing a penalty, but simply being too good for the defender that all he can do is lunge wildly and foul him.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Reemul said:



			This is rubbish, absolute rubbish. The only reason he went down was because he was in the box, if everyone fell down every time there was any sort of contact they would be flopping all over the midfield.

A touch is a touch not a foul. Contact does not mean a foul and certainly does not mean diving like a Olympic gold medallist. 

You see if a touch like that is a foul why is it not given all the time, all around the pitch, that's right it's not because it's not a foul it's just contact and football is still a contact sport isn't it.
		
Click to expand...

Some contact is allowed some isn't. You are allowed to put your shoulder on a player's shoulder for example. But contact with your hand on someone's shoulder or arm to slow them down is a foul. As I've said, it was probably too soft for a penalty but to book him is harsh also because he is being fouled. To book someone for diving I think it has to be clear cut - like Pedro's one in the same game. THAT is what I call a dive and 100% a booking.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Football is full of ambiguities, stand in front of someone in the midfield stopping them getting to the ball and it's obstruction and a foul, yet a defender does this when close to the byline and he's shepherding he ball out of play, why is that not obstruction?

And as written above players are grabbing shirts, clawing at each other all over the pitch trying to get the ball, get past the opposition and they stay upright and fight like hell, yet as soon as they get close to the box or in it they look for the foul, it's quite pathetic.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Football is full of ambiguities, stand in front of someone in the midfield stopping them getting to the ball and it's obstruction and a foul, yet a defender does this when close to the byline and he's shepherding he ball out of play, why is that not obstruction?

And as written above players are grabbing shirts, clawing at each other all over the pitch trying to get the ball, get past the opposition and they stay upright and fight like hell, yet as soon as they get close to the box or in it they look for the foul, it's quite pathetic.
		
Click to expand...

Agree 100% on the first one - I actually said that to someone in the office earlier! Obstruction is always gotten away with when the ball's going out, it's mad.

Often players are looking for it in the box, you're not wrong. But the flipside (or devil's advocate if you like) is that having your shirt tugged on the halfway line doesn't prevent a clear goalscoring chance, whereas in the box it often does.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I think it's just a generational thing. The game has moved on and defenders kicking lumps out of attackers isn't acceptable anymore. You're quick to brand someone going down under contact a cheat, but a defender grabbing a handful of a striker's shirt and getting away with it is also cheating by the same measure. Appealing for a goal kick when you know full well you got the last touch and it should be corner is also cheating. 

Diving is cheating and should be punished accordingly, but I just don't consider it diving if you are actually fouled at the time. If you get held back by your arm, stay on your feet but the ball runs out of play because you can't get there, and nothing is given, where is the merit in that? The defender has cheated and got away with it in that scenario. I don't see how that is better than the attacking player showing that he's being held back and getting the penalty or free kick that he is entitled to for the foul.
		
Click to expand...

Either youâ€™re cheating or youâ€™re not. You canâ€™t excuse one player cheating because someone else was.
To apply it to our game, you go to tap in a putt thatâ€™s 2 inches and miss it, thatâ€™s ok to not count that shot? 
Either you accept ALL cheating or none at all, and it has nothing to do with age or generations.... itâ€™s integrity and honesty and nothing to do with how old you are.


----------



## MegaSteve (Jan 18, 2018)

Never been in favour and nothing I've seen so far is having me change my mind...

Doesn't work in rugby [either code] and you'll find plenty of others saying the same... Not just me...

OK for cricket as it's not a fast moving game with time for reviews etc between each ball if necessary...

As for being good for footie... No Way!

VAR ain't arriving at the marshes anytime soon...


It's good for Sky/BT and that's it as far as I am concerned..


----------



## IanM (Jan 18, 2018)

"Sport" is full of ambiguities..... it's just managed better in other sports.  

The major change in football in the past 35 years is that back then, players would get up to show the opposition that they were not hard enough to hurt them.  Now, we see players rolling around on the floor if their "Alice band" is displaced!


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Either youâ€™re cheating or youâ€™re not. You canâ€™t excuse one player cheating because someone else was.
*To apply it to our game, you go to tap in a putt thatâ€™s 2 inches and miss it, thatâ€™s ok to not count that shot? *
Either you accept ALL cheating or none at all, and it has nothing to do with age or generations.... itâ€™s integrity and honesty and nothing to do with how old you are.
		
Click to expand...

lol, I'm not seeing that analogy at all. You've just described blatant cheating, which is more comparable with Pedro's blatant dive which he was rightly booked for. You can't compare golf to football anyway, they're not even remotely similar.

Anyway, we're going round in circles here, but to bring it back to your original point, why on earth has the ref not consulted the VAR now that it's available? If he had he would have had a chance of getting 3/3 correct (as below), rather than 1 and a half out of 3 which is the best you can say he did in reality.

Correct decisions in my view would have been:
Pedro - blatant dive, rightly booked.
Willian - penalty.
Morata - no penalty, but no booking either. Restart with goal kick.

And I think he would have seen them that way with the benefit of VAR.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Agree 100% on the first one - I actually said that to someone in the office earlier! Obstruction is always gotten away with when the ball's going out, it's mad.
		
Click to expand...

Itâ€™s not Obstruction, you are allowed to shield the ball so long as it is within playing distance.
Itâ€™s in the laws of the game.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Itâ€™s not Obstruction, you are allowed to shield the ball so long as it is within playing distance.
Itâ€™s in the laws of the game.
		
Click to expand...

When the ball is going out though, it's a different story. They back off the ball by a yard or more and basically hold the attacker away from it. We've all seen it. They are given as fouls elsewhere.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			When the ball is going out though, it's a different story. They back off the ball by a yard or more and basically hold the attacker away from it. We've all seen it. They are given as fouls elsewhere.
		
Click to expand...

Nope, still wrong, any player anywhere on the pitch can shield the ball so long as itâ€™s under his control within playing distance.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Often players are looking for it in the box, you're not wrong. But the flipside (or devil's advocate if you like) is that having your shirt tugged on the halfway line doesn't prevent a clear goalscoring chance, whereas in the box it often does.
		
Click to expand...

But the daft thing is if the player tried to stay upright, then on a lot of occasions, as I wrote above, they could cross the ball, or have a shot.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			But the daft thing is if the player tried to stay upright, then on a lot of occasions, as I wrote above, they could cross the ball, or have a shot.
		
Click to expand...

Willian completely beat the Norwich defender for skill and pace, the next thing he was going to do was have a clear shot on goal 10yds out, why would he dive? The defending was late and a lunge.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Itâ€™s not Obstruction, you are allowed to shield the ball so long as it is within playing distance.
Itâ€™s in the laws of the game.
		
Click to expand...




Orikoru said:



			When the ball is going out though, it's a different story. They back off the ball by a yard or more and basically hold the attacker away from it. We've all seen it. They are given as fouls elsewhere.
		
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on your interpretation of Law 12, I had written and agreed with Paul (as per Paul's replay in post #49 below), but upon posting and reading again, I would tend to disagree and stick to, that it is obstruction when the ball is going out over the byline. The part that made change my mind is that last part of the paragraph below, "if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or *body*", how many times do you see the defender blocking an attacker using his body?

Either all the refs have it right, or it's the most ignored rule in football.

"All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent"


----------



## Beezerk (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Nope, still wrong, any player anywhere on the pitch can shield the ball so long as itâ€™s under his control within playing distance.
		
Click to expand...

This is correct, the ball has to be within "playing" distance, you'll get pulled for a foul if the ball is a few yards away.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			I sit corrected, as Paul writes, Law 12 allows a player to shield the ball within playing distance:-

"All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent"
		
Click to expand...

I always knew that Class 3 Referee qual from 30yrs ago would come in handy one day


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			I sit corrected, as Paul writes, Law 12 allows a player to shield the ball within playing distance:-

"All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent"
		
Click to expand...

It's "within playing distance" that I have issue with. If the ball is over a yard away from him as he holds the player off it, it's not in playing distance. They do it all the time.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Nope, still wrong, any player anywhere on the pitch can shield the ball so long as itâ€™s under his control within playing distance.
		
Click to expand...

If the defender hasn't touched the ball can he claim that he has it under his control?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			It's "within playing distance" that I have issue with. If the ball is over a yard away from him as he holds the player off it, it's not in playing distance. They do it all the time.
		
Click to expand...

Just accept you were wrong in your interpretation, you said yard or more now itâ€™s over a yard, if the referee decides heâ€™s not in control and not within playing distance then itâ€™s obstruction.

Be like Khamelion :thup: everyday is a school day


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Jan 18, 2018)

I think it is fantastic VAR has been introduced and I don't even watch football.   We will see all the players and managers screaming for replays when it suits them, multiple interpretations and 1000s of words written about it.

We had the same thing in the NFL when instant replay was introduced and three years ago when it came to baseball.  Those are black and white situations, in bounds or not, out or not.    The same with offside in football.    Neither of those sports look at subjective decisions such as pass interference in the NFL, the same as a penalty decision in football.

The one thing VAR does need is an announcement over each decision.  "Confirmed", "Reversed" or "Stands" - the latter for when there is no conclusive proof to over-turn the on-field decision.

In ice hockey, as soon as there is an issue over goal/no-goal at one end, play is blown dead for it to be checked.  This stopped the situation that happened early on when one team broke away and scored at the other end.   You just have to accept a drop-ball at perhaps midfield or somewhere in the current half is the way play continues.

But long may VAR be developed.   Don't forget that certain TV pundits and tabloid sports writers have an agenda to push and are often being controversial and negative just for the hell of it.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			If the defender hasn't touched the ball can he claim that he has it under his control?
		
Click to expand...

Yes mate, ie sherperding it out for a goal kick


----------



## Beezerk (Jan 18, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			If the defender hasn't touched the ball can he claim that he has it under his control?
		
Click to expand...

Of course.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I don't consider it a dive if you are being fouled at the time. I believe you're entitled to go down if you're being fouled. A dive is when there's zero contact and you try and make it look as if there was.
		
Click to expand...

But its a contact sport.

I have sympathy for the Willian one, but not the Morata one.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Just accept you were wrong in your interpretation, *you said yard or more now itâ€™s over a yard*, if the referee decides heâ€™s not in control and not within playing distance then itâ€™s obstruction.

Be like Khamelion :thup; everyday is a school day 

Click to expand...

Errr what?? :rofl:


----------



## Liverbirdie (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			It's the modern game. The pace of the game is double that what it was 20 or 30 years ago. If you're running at full pelt then someone grabs hold of your shirt for example, that can slow you down enough that a goalscoring chance disappears, and potentially the ref doesn't see that. Chance is gone and you get nothing for it. So managers will obviously instruct their attackers to make it clearer that contact has been made by going down.
		
Click to expand...

Unless they are on a booking, which may get them sent off. If you want any contact by arms on another player in the box to result in penalties, I'm doing both teams to score in 4-5 part accumulators. 

One of the biggest problems in English football is diving IMO, and I'm all for various ways to stop it. Some may work, some may not, but it needs addressing.

VAR is going through problems, and Im sure I'll moan about it at many stages, but we have to give in at least a season, if not more.

Whats the alternative, go back to terrible decisions from refs every week?


----------



## Imurg (Jan 18, 2018)

Just seen the Morata one....
Dear God, that's farcical...I'd be embarrassed to show my face after that..
He should get an extended ban for such blatant cheating and a better fine from the club.....neither of which will happen.
So much in football is a disgrace these days...
The amount of money thrown around, the cheating..it's not a game I tend to enjoy watching any more


----------



## SaintHacker (Jan 18, 2018)

Piece said:



			I'd be interested in if this VAR scenario has taken place or what the process is, if it did. One team, say Arsenal on the attack and the soon-to-be-gone Sanchez is hacked down in the area for a nailed on pen, but the ref doesn't give it. Spurs clear the ball up field and Kane latches on to it and scores a legitimate goal before the VAR has time to tell the on field ref you've made a wrong-un. Do Arsenal have to suck it up or does the ref cancel Spurs's goal and give a pen to Arsenal?
		
Click to expand...

You wouldn't have got a point on saturday thats for sure!


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 18, 2018)

Willian's is a penalty - no doubt. The defender is nowhere near the ball and Willian has to evade the tackle. No contact needs to be made for a foul.

I'm 50/50 on the Morata one - the defender is stupid to do what he does but I think Morata could be stronger? Is Morata being impeded though? Yes, he is, even if only fractionally.

Pedro though - his own shame on his face told the story. God that was awful.


----------



## SaintHacker (Jan 18, 2018)

Imurg said:



			Just seen the Morata one....
Dear God, that's farcical...I'd be embarrassed to show my face after that..
He should get an extended ban for such blatant cheating and a better fine from the club.....neither of which will happen.
So much in football is a disgrace these days...
The amount of money thrown around, the cheating..it's not a game I tend to enjoy watching any more
		
Click to expand...

The thing that really annoyed me about that was the commentator saying he had a right to go down. No he didn't, no one has a right to go down. Either you are brought down or you stay on your feet. Anything else is plain cheating. 
I thought the ref handled it well, especially when he pulled the red.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Yes mate, ie sherperding it out for a goal kick
		
Click to expand...

Does it use the word "Shepherding" in the FA rule book.....or just in the Yorkshire one?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Errr what?? :rofl:
		
Click to expand...

First you said â€œa yard OR moreâ€ then over a yard, which is it? An exact yard or a yard plus 1 inch or yard plus 6 inchâ€™s etc. 

Try and remember â€œwithin playing distanceâ€ and not everyone is built the same :thup:


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Liverbirdie said:



			Does it use the word "Shepherding" in the FA rule book.....or just in the Yorkshire one? 

Click to expand...

Yorkshire and Northumberland


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			First you said â€œa yard OR moreâ€ then over a yard, which is it? An exact yard or a yard plus 1 inch or yard plus 6 inchâ€™s etc. 

Try and remember â€œwithin playing distanceâ€ and not everyone is built the same :thup:
		
Click to expand...

That is pedantic in the extreme pal. Most people will consider 'a yard or more' and 'over a yard' to be much the same thing. I didn't realise we were measuring to the exact inch.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			That is pedantic in the extreme pal. Most people will consider 'a yard or more' and 'over a yard' to be much the same thing. I didn't realise we were measuring to the exact inch. 

Click to expand...

Whatâ€™s pedantic is you not accepting the laws of the game and then trying to justify you not knowing the law in the first place :thup:


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Whatâ€™s pedantic is you not accepting the laws of the game and then trying to justify you not knowing the law in the first place :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Countless times they 'shield' the ball out of play when miles away from it and it would be a foul anywhere else on the pitch. If you've never seen it happen I can only suppose you don't watch football.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Countless times they 'shield' the ball out of play when miles away from it and it would be a foul anywhere else on the pitch. If you've never seen it happen I can only suppose you don't watch football.
		
Click to expand...

Quality :rofl: You introduce a distance because you donâ€™t actually know what your talking about, others, including me, come on to explain the laws of the game to you and instead of accepting and understanding them (no matter how frustrating) like khamelion did, you get insulting. Iâ€™m out, thereâ€™s no helping some people.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Quality :rofl: You introduce a distance because you donâ€™t actually know what your talking about, others, including me, come on to explain the laws of the game to you and instead of accepting and understanding them (no matter how frustrating) like khamelion did, you get insulting. Iâ€™m out, thereâ€™s no helping some people.
		
Click to expand...

You're getting mighty upset about this aren't you? You told me the defined law, and I tell you I've seen multiple occasions where defenders break that law and get away with it. You can't tell me what I have and haven't seen. Are you saying you have never ever seen defenders break this law by illegally holding off a player when the ball is going out of play? Mental.


----------



## adam6177 (Jan 18, 2018)

I dont know how many times it has to be said, but here we go again....... football is a contact sport.  Not all contact is a free kick or penalty.  In my opinion Willian was looking to go down and it was 100% right to book him for diving.


----------



## Imurg (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Quality :rofl: You introduce a distance because you donâ€™t actually know what your talking about, others, including me, come on to explain the laws of the game to you and instead of accepting and understanding them (no matter how frustrating) like khamelion did, you get insulting. Iâ€™m out, thereâ€™s no helping some people.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, I've seen defenders shepherd the ball out when it's within  yard or so of the feet and that's no problem. Obviously in control of the ball
But equally I've seen it done when the ball's well out of reach, making the " in control of the ball" a bit tenuous and you never see a foul given..


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			I dont know how many times it has to be said, but here we go again....... football is a contact sport.  Not all contact is a free kick or penalty.  In my opinion Willian was looking to go down and it was 100% right to book him for diving.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:
There is legal and illegal contact. "Not all contact is a foul" - you're right - but legal contact includes shoulder to shoulder, or winning the ball and making contact on your follow through. Tripping over a player without winning the ball is a foul. (That should be obvious really.)


----------



## MegaSteve (Jan 18, 2018)

MegaSteve said:



			......


It's good for Sky/BT and that's it as far as I am concerned..
		
Click to expand...

As a post script I'll add...

It's 'good' for discussions boards and forums...


----------



## G.U.R (Jan 18, 2018)

Whether or not you think he dived or was caught, even this thread can't decide, the ref reacted too quickly by booking Willian straight away. This left VAR in a no win situation because if they decided it was a penalty can you unbook a player?? and I'm not sure other officials have the stomach to go against the on field decision. As for the Morata one, if he's outside the area he gets a foul.


----------



## adam6177 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			:rofl:
There is legal and illegal contact. "Not all contact is a foul" - you're right - but legal contact includes shoulder to shoulder, or winning the ball and making contact on your follow through. Tripping over a player without winning the ball is a foul. (That should be obvious really.)
		
Click to expand...

I think this is the essence of the problem, every situation is subjective and unfortunately dependent on the team and people involved a certain about of bias always come into it (ie Howard Webb making a decision on the Lukaku assault of the Watford player).

Still, in my opinion I'm glad Willian was booked. It was a dive.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			I think this is the essence of the problem, every situation is subjective and unfortunately dependent on the team and people involved a certain about of bias always come into it (ie Howard Webb making a decision on the Lukaku assault of the Watford player).

Still, in my opinion I'm glad Willian was booked. It was a dive.
		
Click to expand...

No it wasn't!! How can you not see the Norwich player lunge in and trip him?? It's an awful challenge and a penalty all day long! You must be saying that just because you don't like Willian??


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Agree 100% on the first one - I actually said that to someone in the office earlier! Obstruction is always gotten away with when the ball's going out, it's mad.
		
Click to expand...




Imurg said:



			To be fair, I've seen defenders shepherd the ball out when it's within  yard or so of the feet and that's no problem. Obviously in control of the ball
But equally I've seen it done when the ball's well out of reach, making the " in control of the ball" a bit tenuous and you never see a foul given..
		
Click to expand...

Above is his first reply, as you can see he was completely wrong as he didnâ€™t know the rule, nobody is saying refereeâ€™s get every decision right, simply trying to educate him on his lack of understanding so if he seeâ€™s a defender doing it next time he watches a match he wonâ€™t automatically ask for an indirect free kick for obstruction.


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 18, 2018)

Even if Willian isn't tripped, he had to avoid the trip - which is still a foul!


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Above is his first reply, as you can see he was completely wrong as he didnâ€™t know the rule, nobody is saying refereeâ€™s get every decision right, simply trying to educate him on his lack of understanding so if he seeâ€™s a defender doing it next time he watches a match he wonâ€™t automatically ask for an indirect free kick for obstruction.
		
Click to expand...

I know what the bloody rule is you Mod Edit . I said they break it and get away with it often. It's not difficult to understand. Jog on.


----------



## adam6177 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			No it wasn't!! How can you not see the Norwich player lunge in and trip him?? It's an awful challenge and a penalty all day long! You must be saying that just because you don't like Willian??
		
Click to expand...

He didn't lunge, it wasn't an "awful" challenge and wasn't a penalty in my opinion.   I have nothing against Willian, in fact I wish we'd signed him.

You're allowed a different opinion you know, chill man.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			He didn't lunge, it wasn't an "awful" challenge and wasn't a penalty in my opinion.   I have nothing against Willian, in fact I wish we'd signed him.

You're allowed a different opinion you know, chill man.
		
Click to expand...

Haha, of course we can have different opinions, it's just I thought it was such a stonewall pen that someone saying it wasn't is like telling me white is black! Ah football eh?


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Jan 18, 2018)

I'm just off to the concession stand to get some more popcorn.  Anyone else want any whilst I'm there?


----------



## adam6177 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Haha, of course we can have different opinions, it's just I thought it was such a stonewall pen that someone saying it wasn't is like telling me white is black! Ah football eh? 

Click to expand...

This is partly the reason I think VAR COULD be a bad thing.....part of the excitement and drama of football is the bad decisions and "luck" that goes for and against you.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			This is partly the reason I think VAR COULD be a bad thing.....part of the excitement and drama of football is the bad decisions and "luck" that goes for and against you.
		
Click to expand...

I suppose so. But we've all seen many video replays and still don't agree. So I think you would still have the same level of debate whether it was used or not. 

Personally I believe it should only be used for goal defining situations, otherwise you get bogged down in it and it will kill the game. So use it for: 
- borderline potential offsides where a goal has been scored, can be ruled out if simply if it turns out he was offside.
- potential red card / penalty challenges as these totally change the game in one team's favour. Reviewing these will also show if a dive has occurred.
- potential handballs that have prevented a shot going in the net.

Other than that it can be left to the referee's discretion.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jan 18, 2018)

Well Timm Klose thought it was a penalty. &#128580;


----------



## Piece (Jan 18, 2018)

SaintHacker said:



			You wouldn't have got a point on saturday thats for sure!

Click to expand...

On that incident, I'll agree . On the two blatant shirt pulls Saints did (not shown on MoTD but clear at the ground and on extended highlights) we may have won!!!


----------



## Piece (Jan 18, 2018)

Well this thread escalated quickly! What it shows is though:

1. Pedro one, we are all in agreement. Ref gets it right then. VAR not needed and/or confirms the decision.
2. Willian one is splitting opinion. VAR says no obvious clear mistake (remembering that this thread can't even agree!), thus left down to on-field ref's decision.
3. Morata one, again splitting opinion. As above.

For me then, the ref is 100% spot on and so is the VAR.

And some contributors need to get out and watch a bit more live football and brush up on their law knowledge...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 18, 2018)

The Willian incident for me is a clear penalty , clearly caught him and it was that touch that took him down - and it appears the red panel agrees that it should have been a penalty. Mike Jones is the worst ref I have ever seen and it just shows his incompetence that he saw that and said there was no error in the booking for the dive and no penalty


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Piece said:



			Well this thread escalated quickly! What it shows is though:

1. Pedro one, we are all in agreement. Ref gets it right then. VAR not needed and/or confirms the decision.
2. Willian one is splitting opinion. VAR says no obvious clear mistake (remembering that this thread can't even agree!), thus left down to on-field ref's decision.
3. Morata one, again splitting opinion. As above.

For me then, the ref is 100% spot on and so is the VAR.

And some contributors need to get out and watch a bit more live football and brush up on their law knowledge...  

Click to expand...

I thought the issue was that the ref didn't even use the VAR. He just booked Willian and Morata immediately without calling upon it. When it would have showed him to be incorrect on the Willian one, since that was a clear penalty. The Morata one was very debateable though, sure, VAR probably wouldn't have even cleared that up 100%.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The Willian incident for me is a clear penalty , clearly caught him and it was that touch that took him down - and it appears the red panel agrees that it should have been a penalty. Mike Jones is the worst ref I have ever seen and it just shows his incompetence that he saw that and said there was no error in the booking for the dive and no penalty
		
Click to expand...

Still say that Willian played for the penalty, he anticipated the tackle, left his left leg behind and went down to get a penalty, had he brought his left leg over and made an attempt to stay on his feet, then there was every chance he may got a penalty, in hat he would have been looking to play honestly rather than cheating.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Still say that Willian played for the penalty, he anticipated the tackle, left his left leg behind and went down to get a penalty, had he brought his left leg over and made an attempt to stay on his feet, then there was every chance he may got a penalty, in hat he would have been looking to play honestly rather than cheating.
		
Click to expand...

Why though, he would of been 10yds from the centre of the goal with keeper to beat?

If it had been down the side or on the edge of the box with 3-4 defenders between him and the goal Iâ€™d agree.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Still say that Willian played for the penalty, he anticipated the tackle, left his left leg behind and went down to get a penalty, had he brought his left leg over and made an attempt to stay on his feet, then there was every chance he may got a penalty, in hat he would have been looking to play honestly rather than cheating.
		
Click to expand...

To call that cheating is ridiculous. He's running into the box, beats the defender who leaves his leg hanging out across the front of him, and he would have to have done bloody well to avoid it by leapfrogging over him in that situation. It's the defender's fault for making a poorly timed challenge, and it was a penalty, whether Willian 'played for it' or 'anticipated' it or what.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I thought the issue was that the ref didn't even use the VAR. He just booked Willian and Morata immediately without calling upon it. When it would have showed him to be incorrect on the Willian one, since that was a clear penalty. The Morata one was very debateable though, sure, VAR probably wouldn't have even cleared that up 100%.
		
Click to expand...

The ref doesn't have to use VAR. It is continuously monitored by the ref in the studio and he can inform the ref if he thinks he's made a mistake. The ref in the studio can contact the ref and the on field ref then has the option to either change his decision or go and view a replay on a pitch side monitor and then either stick to his original decision or change it. The ref in the studio didn't think that in the case of the Willian incident the on field ref had made a clear and obvious error so there was no need to inform him or change the decision.


----------



## Papas1982 (Jan 18, 2018)

Imo in todayâ€™s game, it was a penalty. As he â€œwonâ€ it.

but I agree with those that say he left his leg in. If VAR is to be used, theyâ€™re the type that should vanish. Hopefully in time players wou9d feel less need to convince a ref to give one as they know that Var will award one.

to start with, id like to see any penalty thatâ€™s â€œwonâ€ in such a manner end up with a player booked for diving as well as one giving. May calm the current issue of theatrics somewhat.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jan 18, 2018)

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/sp...timm-klose-admits-willian-deserved-a-penalty/

End of debate on that one.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

I honestly don't know what some of you expect of these players. Willian is running into the box, gets tripped over and you think he should have gone out of his way to leapfrog over it?? Nobody is ever going to do that. Next you'll be saying if the referee incorrectly gives a corner they should hold their hands up and admit it was a goal kick or else they are cheating. 

Slate Morata all you want, because although there was a slight foul he did go to ground easily. But Willian beats the defender and was tripped, I really don't see how, or more importantly _why_, he would go out of his way to avoid it??


----------



## Papas1982 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I honestly don't know what some of you expect of these players. Willian is running into the box, gets tripped over and you think he should have gone out of his way to leapfrog over it?? Nobody is ever going to do that. Next you'll be saying if the referee incorrectly gives a corner they should hold their hands up and admit it was a goal kick or else they are cheating. 

Slate Morata all you want, because although there was a slight foul he did go to ground easily. But Willian beats the defender and was tripped, I really don't see how, or more importantly _why_, he would go out of his way to avoid it??
		
Click to expand...

I think a lot of us donâ€™t think he was tripped.

for me, he hurdles the tackle and leaves he leg trailing. He plays to be caught. 

He isnâ€™t clattered and giving no choice. He could have avoided contact and had an effort and then complained and let the ref decide if he was impeded, which imo is exactly what var should be used for.


----------



## Piece (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I thought the issue was that the ref didn't even use the VAR. *He just booked Willian and Morata immediately without calling upon it.* When it would have showed him to be incorrect on the Willian one, since that was a clear penalty. The Morata one was very debateable though, sure, VAR probably wouldn't have even cleared that up 100%.
		
Click to expand...

That's not how VAR works in football. Explainer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42604127


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I honestly don't know what some of you expect of these players. Willian is running into the box, gets tripped over and you think he should have gone out of his way to leapfrog over it?? Nobody is ever going to do that. Next you'll be saying if the referee incorrectly gives a corner they should hold their hands up and admit it was a goal kick or else they are cheating. 

Slate Morata all you want, because although there was a slight foul he did go to ground easily. But Willian beats the defender and was tripped, I really don't see how, or more importantly _why_, he would go out of his way to avoid it??
		
Click to expand...

If I were a Chelsea supporter , like you, I would be more worried how it took 180 mins, ET and penalties to beat Norwich. That is what you should be worrying about.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Papas1982 said:



			I think a lot of us donâ€™t think he was tripped.

for me, he hurdles the tackle and leaves he leg trailing. He plays to be caught. 

He isnâ€™t clattered and giving no choice. He could have avoided contact and had an effort and then complained and let the ref decide if he was impeded, which imo is exactly what var should be used for.
		
Click to expand...

I really don't think he could have avoided it as easily as you say. It looked to me like he did try and hurdle the leg as he was trying to score, and he was just caught. Remember it's easy to say what you're saying when watching the slow motion replay, but Willian is a pacey player, and in reality that is all happening very quickly.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 18, 2018)

Piece said:



			That's not how VAR works in football. Explainer: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42604127

Click to expand...

Yeah, someone else explained it earlier. So in actual fact it was more the fault of the guy who was watching the VAR.



Bunkermagnet said:



			If I were a Chelsea supporter , like you, I would be more worried how it took 180 mins, ET and penalties to beat Norwich. That is what you should be worrying about.

Click to expand...

Good guess but I'm actually a Spurs fan. I hate Chelsea with a blind passion so would have no reason to defend Willian, other than the fact he was obviously tripped for a blatant penalty.


----------



## Imurg (Jan 18, 2018)

The problem a lot of refs have is that many of these players have "form"
Willian's been booked a couple of times for diving as have many, many others.
Next time they go to ground, whether we like it or not, whether it's right or not, the ref is going to be influenced by the player's "previous".
Someone getting a reputation as a diver isn't helping himself when you get a situation like Willian's


----------



## Papas1982 (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			I really don't think he could have avoided it as easily as you say. It looked to me like he did try and hurdle the leg as he was trying to score, and he was just caught. Remember it's easy to say what you're saying when watching the slow motion replay, but Willian is a pacey player, and in reality that is all happening very quickly.
		
Click to expand...

What a hurdler run 110 and see how long their leg pauses as it goes over the hurdle. Then watch the noticeable pause where Willianâ€™s doesnâ€™t follow.

Ot was still a pen imo, itâ€™s just that hopefully in time they wonâ€™t need to be won in such ways.


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 18, 2018)

So many people still donâ€™t get it. 

If a defender leaves a leg in that needs to be hurdled IT IS A FOUL. No contact needs to be made. 

Even if Willian successful jumps over the leg, itâ€™s STILL a foul. 

God.


----------



## Papas1982 (Jan 18, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			So many people still donâ€™t get it. 

If a defender leaves a leg in that needs to be hurdled IT IS A FOUL. No contact needs to be made. 

Even if Willian successful jumps over the leg, itâ€™s STILL a foul. 

God.
		
Click to expand...

Thatâ€™s exactky what Iâ€™ve said, itâ€™s a foul BUT it should be for the ref to decide (or var). Willian should play on and then appeal.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			I always knew that Class 3 Referee qual from 30yrs ago would come in handy one day 

Click to expand...

Seen a few this season where the attacker has just ran into a defender who has not moved his position.
The ref always gives a foul canâ€™t understand this if you are standing still


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			God.
		
Click to expand...

Don't bring him into it, as he'll just say Willian got a deserved booking.


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

Blue in Munich said:



https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/sp...timm-klose-admits-willian-deserved-a-penalty/

End of debate on that one.
		
Click to expand...

Willian tried to buy a penalty and got caught out. It's very easy for the Norwich player to be magnanimous and gracious in defeat he has nothing to lose, Chelsea won and he takes the moral high ground. I very much doubt it would be the same story had Norwich won. Very fickle are footballers.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Still say that Willian played for the penalty, he anticipated the tackle, left his left leg behind and went down to get a penalty, had he brought his left leg over and made an attempt to stay on his feet, then there was every chance he may got a penalty, in hat he would have been looking to play honestly rather than cheating.
		
Click to expand...

The replay at real time doesnâ€™t support your theory - he caught his left leg , it wasnâ€™t â€œleft behindâ€ and he didnâ€™t drag it into the defenders leg , he stumbled after the contact then when down


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Willian tried to buy a penalty and got caught out. It's very easy for the Norwich player to be magnanimous and gracious in defeat he has nothing to lose, Chelsea won and he takes the moral high ground. I very much doubt it would be the same story had Norwich won. Very fickle are footballers.
		
Click to expand...

Last time  Why is Willian trying to buy a penalty when through on goal?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Seen a few this season where the attacker has just ran into a defender who has not moved his position.
The ref always gives a foul canâ€™t understand this if you are standing still
		
Click to expand...

Because the defender doesnâ€™t have to move, heâ€™s in control of the ball, itâ€™s upto the attacker to go round him, not through him


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Last time  Why is Willian trying to buy a penalty when through on goal?
		
Click to expand...

Thought it looked a penalty in real time. The replays didn't do anything to change that view and it was badly handled by the ref who had a shocker from start to finish


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 18, 2018)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Thought it looked a penalty in real time. The replays didn't do anything to change that view and it was badly handled by the ref who had a shocker from start to finish
		
Click to expand...

Really Homer, a shocker from start to finish? 

He got the Pedro dive correct, and his second yellow card and also in my opinion got the Morata decision right. I especially liked the second yellow card and subsequent red that he gave Morata for whatever it was Morata said to him. I wish more refs would have the balls to to just start booking players when they do that sort of thing.

The only really contentious decision was the Willian one and opinion on here seems pretty much split 50/50 between those that thought it was a penalty and those that thought Willian bought himself the foul, initiated the contact or was already on the way down when he hit the defender's leg. Seems a bit harsh to claim he had a shocker from start to finish when it was only really that one decision that some are questioning.

What else, apart from the Willian one, did he get wrong in your opinion?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			Really Homer, a shocker from start to finish? 

He got the Pedro dive correct, and his second yellow card and also in my opinion got the Morata decision right. I especially liked the second yellow card and subsequent red that he gave Morata for whatever it was Morata said to him. I wish more refs would have the balls to to just start booking players when they do that sort of thing.

The only really contentious decision was the Willian one and opinion on here seems pretty much split 50/50 between those that thought it was a penalty and those that thought Willian bought himself the foul, initiated the contact or was already on the way down when he hit the defender's leg. Seems a bit harsh to claim he had a shocker from start to finish when it was only really that one decision that some are questioning.

What else, apart from the Willian one, did he get wrong in your opinion?
		
Click to expand...

Agreed :thup:


----------



## Bazzatron (Jan 18, 2018)

Thought the ref had a great game, it's about time refs stood up to players cheating and started booking them for diving, as they're supposed to do.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Jan 18, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			Really Homer, a shocker from start to finish? 

He got the Pedro dive correct, and his second yellow card and also in my opinion got the Morata decision right. I especially liked the second yellow card and subsequent red that he gave Morata for whatever it was Morata said to him. I wish more refs would have the balls to to just start booking players when they do that sort of thing.

The only really contentious decision was the Willian one and opinion on here seems pretty much split 50/50 between those that thought it was a penalty and those that thought Willian bought himself the foul, initiated the contact or was already on the way down when he hit the defender's leg. Seems a bit harsh to claim he had a shocker from start to finish when it was only really that one decision that some are questioning.

What else, apart from the Willian one, did he get wrong in your opinion?
		
Click to expand...

Summed up well 

The ref for me was let down by the incompetent idiot in front of the replay screen


----------



## Foxholer (Jan 18, 2018)

Orikoru said:



			Here you go, this shows the foul plain as day.
[FONT=&]https://twitter.com/By433/status/953749396289617920[/FONT]

Keep your eye on Willian's left foot the whole time and you can see the contact.
		
Click to expand...

Well, having thought, in real time, that Willan did get touched by the defender but the ref deemed it a dive (that wasn't overruled as a 'clear mistake' by VAR), I see daylight between the 2 platers legs throughout the entire incident! I'd request you show the  actual 'time' of contact, but the clock isn't fine enough to actually identify the point of contact!



Kellfire said:



			So many people still donâ€™t get it. 

If a defender leaves a leg in that needs to be hurdled IT IS A FOUL. No contact needs to be made. 

Even if Willian successful jumps over the leg, itâ€™s STILL a foul. 

God.
		
Click to expand...

Ah! That changes things a bit (lot)! Got a reference to a Rule/ruling? (I'm too lazy to hunt atm!).


----------



## Khamelion (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Last time  Why is Willian trying to buy a penalty when through on goal?
		
Click to expand...

Because footballers are stupid, their mentality is a penalty is sure goal, guaranteed one on one and a goal lets say 75% - 85% of the time. If he tries to stay on his feet and score in normal play, there is a high probability he'll miss or the shot will be saved.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Khamelion said:



			Because footballers are stupid, their mentality is a penalty is sure goal, guaranteed one on one and a goal lets say 75% - 85% of the time. If he tries to stay on his feet and score in normal play, there is a high probability he'll miss or the shot will be saved.
		
Click to expand...

:rofl: Iâ€™ll agree to disagree :thup:


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

Foxholer said:



			Well, having thought, in real time, that Willan did get touched by the defender but the ref deemed it a dive (that wasn't overruled as a 'clear mistake' by VAR), I see daylight between the 2 platers legs throughout the entire incident! I'd request you show the  actual 'time' of contact, but the clock isn't fine enough to actually identify the point of contact!



Ah! That changes things a bit (lot)! Got a reference to a Rule/ruling? (I'm too lazy to hunt atm!).
		
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/42727331

Much better video showing contact.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Jan 18, 2018)

I have no doubt that VAR will earn it's place in the game, but  if no firm common ground can be found here after 24hrs with umpteen people looking at it time after time, how the heck would VAR make any difference in the seconds the VAR operative has to make a call?

What we have proved is that footballers cheating has got to stop, and if a few innocents are punished in mistake so be it. Until they all stop diving and feinging injury there will be a need to investigate some events, but sadly I  doubt that day will ever pass. Making excuses for them wont change things though, whether they are right or wrong.


----------



## ScienceBoy (Jan 18, 2018)

Itâ€™s fantastic, just going to take time for it to be used properly. 

Great for all sports to have this somehow, even just for the odd call here and there.

IMO it should be only used for game changing moments and the benefit of the doubt always goes to the attacking team.


----------



## Fish (Jan 18, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			What else, apart from the Willian one, did he get wrong in your opinion?
		
Click to expand...

He should have booked Pinto, possibly more than once, players were getting booked for single incidents, Pinto was a prolific fouler and received squat!!


----------



## Liverbirdie (Jan 18, 2018)

Willian one is a penno all day long for me. Morata not so, but if I was in row 2 would have been appealing as I did for the Lallana one against the blues. Pedro .


----------



## clubchamp98 (Jan 18, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Because the defender doesnâ€™t have to move, heâ€™s in control of the ball, itâ€™s upto the attacker to go round him, not through him
		
Click to expand...

The ones Iâ€™ve seen the ref has blown for a foul for the forward even though the defender has just stood his ground..
Think you misunderstood my post not talking about defender shielding the ball.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Jan 18, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			The ones Iâ€™ve seen the ref has blown for a foul for the forward even though the defender has just stood his ground..
Think you misunderstood my post not talking about defender shielding the ball.
		
Click to expand...

If the ref determines the ball is no longer  under control and within playing distance for the defender then itâ€™s obstruction.
Thatâ€™s all I can think of.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 19, 2018)

Foxholer said:



			Well, having thought, in real time, that Willan did get touched by the defender but the ref deemed it a dive (that wasn't overruled as a 'clear mistake' by VAR), I see daylight between the 2 platers legs throughout the entire incident! I'd request you show the  actual 'time' of contact, but the clock isn't fine enough to actually identify the point of contact!
		
Click to expand...

Eh? Just watch his left foot the whole time and you can plainly see when the contact happens.


----------



## Crazyface (Jan 19, 2018)

Right I've watched this a million times now. I will concede there is contact BUT, I would say there is contact as Willam moves forward to hurdle the outstretched leg ie Willan fell over the leg that was there....the clumsy so and so. LOL !!!


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 19, 2018)

...and still people are hung up on contact.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 19, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			...and still people are hung up on contact.
		
Click to expand...

If there's no contact is it obstruction and an indirect freekick rather than a direct freekick/penalty?


----------



## Kellfire (Jan 19, 2018)

The laws of the game generally include the words "attempt to" which covers any action where contact is made or not.


----------



## Beezerk (Jan 19, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			If there's no contact is it obstruction and an indirect freekick rather than a direct freekick/penalty?
		
Click to expand...

I thought it was a pen in fairness, stupid lunge by the defender and to me Will-I-An tried his best to get over the leg. I think previous dives by other players have tainted the refs decision making, like he expects them to dive all the time these days.


----------



## Orikoru (Jan 19, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			...and still people are hung up on contact.
		
Click to expand...

I agree with what you've said, but in this case I think it's a moot point since there definitely was contact. As you say, whichever you look at it his progress was impeded.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Jan 19, 2018)

Beezerk said:



			I thought it was a pen in fairness, stupid lunge by the defender and to me Will-I-An tried his best to get over the leg. I think previous dives by other players have tainted the refs decision making, like he expects them to dive all the time these days.
		
Click to expand...

I agree. When the ref blew the whistle I immediately said penalty. Can only assume that the ref and VAR ref thought that Willian was already on his way down and that was why it wasn't given.


----------

