Premier League 2019-2020 we’re off

[Deleted member 16999]

I'd say someone is defending when their team is not in possession of the ball and attacking when they are. Their location on the pitch should not matter as we know teams can break form one end to the other and score in 10 seconds.

I dont think what happened was "unfair" as for me both handballs were accidental (was it 0.5 seconds from it hitting Silvas arm to Trent's). City had plenty of time to defend the situation after the incident and it was their poor defending which caused the goal. If play had been stopped at the time and reviewed, I think a penalty to City would have been very harsh.

Good post, I would only add they only took a few seconds to review the handballs yesterday, last saturday at Goodison it took over 3 minutes and 24 replays to decide Alli’s handball above his head wasn’t a penalty as he was under pressure from an attacker, then there is the 3 1/2 minutes for the Sheff Utd offside by a big toe.
Yes some decisions are that quick to resolve, it’s the inconsistency that is frustrating everyone.

 

[Liverbirdie]

FWIW - I think we may have dodged a bullet yesterday, but there is a big thing in play that we are guessing at (mainly because the rules arent as clear these days).

Due to the different application of the rules as to when an attacker handles a ball (whether intentional or not) and the difference to when a defender does (silhouette, arm position, speed of ball, reaction time etc) allied to the passage of play - hitting Silv's hand, then TAA's, position of Aguero and Sterling if it hadnt have hit TAAs hand etc, its a minefield.

However, one thing that I think people are seeing what they want to see is hand position - TAA and Silva's were exactly the same. Reaction time was different, granted, but some pundits are talking rubbish (including Kompany) when they say that Silva's was different to Trent's.

 

[Deleted member 18121]

I think Arnold's arm was in a more 'unnatural position' and Silva's wasn't.

Just out of interest..... where should his arms/hands be for a natural position?

Look at the pohot and note where Aguero, TAA and Lovrens arms/hands are. Are any of these natural?

 

[Orikoru]

Just out of interest..... where should his arms/hands be for a natural position?

Look at the pohot and note where Aguero, TAA and Lovrens arms/hands are. Are any of these natural?

View attachment 28538

A photo doesn't do it any justice at all, I posted after watching the incident again on video. Silva's arm is down by his side and it hits the top of his wrist, kind of, while he's running. Arnold's palms are up, arm outstretched and he's moving that right arm upwards towards the ball slightly for some reason.

I will reiterate though that Silva's arms being more 'natural' is now irrelevant since the new rule says any handball in the build up to a goal chalks it off. But does that apply in the build up to a penalty? No idea.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Just out of interest..... where should his arms/hands be for a natural position?

Look at the pohot and note where Aguero, TAA and Lovrens arms/hands are. Are any of these natural?

View attachment 28538

All look fine to me
But let’s be honest, a still frame from a moving scene can be manipulated to show the outcome you want.

 

[Colonel Bogey]

Just out of interest..... where should his arms/hands be for a natural position?

Look at the pohot and note where Aguero, TAA and Lovrens arms/hands are. Are any of these natural?

View attachment 28538

Who cares? It's handball. Handball is handball. VAR is being over used.

Anyway. I won money on the game as I backed my Saturday nights drunken prediction and almost predicted the entire match to perfection.

On football I'm not often wrong and I was right again.

 

[TheDiablo]

Not sure under FIFA rules, but will be under premiership rules as it was thought that a red card and a penalty was too much punishment. It changed 2-3 years ago iirc.

Not strictly correct

Its an IFAB law, meaning there's very little from for PGMOL and/or the Prem to interpret it as they see fit.

Any handball that denies a goalscoring opportunity remains a red card offence. Its where the player attempts to play the ball that the double jeopardy has been removed.

Who knows what the hell that would've meant if ref had given a penalty against TAA! I 'think' it wouldve been

Penalty given
Reviewed by VAR, they realised that it would be going onto Sterling so upgraded to red.
However the fact it hit Silvas hand in the buildup would probably have meant a FK to Lpool. Even though in reality the TAA call was a 50/50 and Silvas was never handball, so a FK to Lpool should never have been the outcome pre VAR!

Absolute chaos. VAR and diving is all anyone talks about now, which is a real shame, especially as the whole point was to eliminate controversy.

Mistaken identity, off the ball misconduct and goal line tech. For everything else it should be binned.

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Football is a shambles at the minute. Var is turning into a joke.

In times gone by. The ref would make the decision and the linesman would assist. These days they are told not to flag.

The players these days are not playing to the whistle anymore. They are banking and crying for Var. Aguero should have attempted to smash the ball with his left foot instead of appealing for a penalty.

If ever there was a decision where the ref needed to view a screen then this was it.

TAA is a very lucky boy. I dont agree that hands need to be by the players side. I agree they can raise up naturally through movement and the need for balance. Where I believe he is very lucky is that he orientated both palms to face towards the incoming ball. I think it was an instinctive reaction to a ball quickly changing direction.


The nonsense rule of an attacker handling the ball before a goal wouldn't come into play here as it lead to a potential penalty decision, not a goal.

I was all for VAR at the begining but its being used so poorly

If a mistake can't be seen in 30 seconds it should be ignored. They don't check obvious errors but go over the top for offside

We deserved to lose at the weekend, we are in terrible form and playing poor

However all I find myself angry at is how poor VAR is, Burnley's first goal came from a corner that was a goal kick , replay of the goal would show hang on that's a goal kick.. whistle goes
. Explain to the captain's

But no they was allowed to stand

Then you get a goal disallowed for offside that was marginal , almost like the 2 decisions have leveled themseleves out.... That wasn't the point of VAR

 

[Liverbirdie]

Who cares? It's handball. Handball is handball. VAR is being over used.

Anyway. I won money on the game as I backed my Saturday nights drunken prediction and almost predicted the entire match to perfection.

On football I'm not often wrong and I was right again.

Whoosh - handball isnt just handball (generally), which is why the big discussion.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Not strictly correct

Its an IFAB law, meaning there's very little from for PGMOL and/or the Prem to interpret it as they see fit.

Any handball that denies a goalscoring opportunity remains a red card offence. Its where the player attempts to play the ball that the double jeopardy has been removed.

Who knows what the hell that would've meant if ref had given a penalty against TAA! I 'think' it wouldve been

Penalty given
Reviewed by VAR, they realised that it would be going onto Sterling so upgraded to red.
However the fact it hit Silvas hand in the buildup would probably have meant a FK to Lpool. Even though in reality the TAA call was a 50/50 and Silvas was never handball, so a FK to Lpool should never have been the outcome pre VAR!

Absolute chaos. VAR and diving is all anyone talks about now, which is a real shame, especially as the whole point was to eliminate controversy.

Mistaken identity, off the ball misconduct and goal line tech. For everything else it should be binned.

Surely it then still comes under the subjective interpretation then on the double jeopardy side of things. Do you have the rule/interpretations applicable?

 

[TheDiablo]

Surely it then still comes under the subjective interpretation then on the double jeopardy side of things. Do you have the rule/interpretations applicable?

I agree there should be some subjectivity, a red in that scenario would be ridiculous. But if they deemed Sterling to have been denied an obvious gs opp then it wouldve had to be under current laws.

Handball is handball, and excluded from the double jeopardy rule, I don't know the exact law but should be easy to find with a quick Google.

 

[Liverbirdie]

I agree there should be some subjectivity, a red in that scenario would be ridiculous. But if they deemed Sterling to have been denied an obvious gs opp then it wouldve had to be under current laws.

Handball is handball, and excluded from the double jeopardy rule, I don't know the exact law but should be easy to find with a quick Google.

Its okay, I'll ask a man City fan, they'll know by now.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Not strictly correct

Its an IFAB law, meaning there's very little from for PGMOL and/or the Prem to interpret it as they see fit.

Any handball that denies a goalscoring opportunity remains a red card offence. Its where the player attempts to play the ball that the double jeopardy has been removed.

Who knows what the hell that would've meant if ref had given a penalty against TAA! I 'think' it wouldve been

Penalty given
Reviewed by VAR, they realised that it would be going onto Sterling so upgraded to red.
However the fact it hit Silvas hand in the buildup would probably have meant a FK to Lpool. Even though in reality the TAA call was a 50/50 and Silvas was never handball, so a FK to Lpool should never have been the outcome pre VAR!

Absolute chaos. VAR and diving is all anyone talks about now, which is a real shame, especially as the whole point was to eliminate controversy.

Mistaken identity, off the ball misconduct and goal line tech. For everything else it should be binned.

The whole incident is a mess and I agree with the last two paragraphs

Clattenburg was saying that the referee got the decision right but for the wrong reasons

Silvas handball was the start of it all which for me was the reason the TAA handball happened

 

[Deleted member 16999]

The whole incident is a mess and I agree with the last two paragraphs

Clattenburg was saying that the referee got the decision right but for the wrong reasons

Silvas handball was the start of it all which for me was the reason the TAA handball happened

Sorry Phil, but Silva’s handball was accidental, the question over TAA is whether it was intentional, I get it’s frustrating but I’ve not seen anywhere or anyone question whether Silva’s handball was intentional as well.

And without making this about us, wasn’t Gomes broken leg a result of Son making no attempt to play the ball, in that case I was told accidents happen and both were unrelated.

 

[garyinderry]

Clattenburg seems to be just making up rules. He believes TAA intentionally handles the ball but because it accidentally ricocheted to him from another players hand he wouldn't award the penalty.

 

[Tashyboy]

Its okay, I'll ask a man City fan, they'll know by now.

Dont ask me ave not seen it. Had other things to do yesterday. However VAR got it wrong 👍😊🤣
That aside, more pages on the complications of VAR then the actual game itself. That in itself is wrong. Me al be saving over £1k end of the season by not re newing season tickets.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Can we just go back to the Mane sending off against City for that "dangerous tackle"?
It's all subjective, and sometimes it goes your way other times it doesn't. Unless you have computers running the system there will always be those subjective events that can be argued over ad infinitum.

 

[clubchamp98]

Looking at that video shouldn't they be taking line from the edge of the penalty area rather than the cut of the grass. When the image moves to the left you can see that the line is not parallel to the edge of the area and needs to be rotated clockwise to match the 18 yard line.

I think that’s got something to do with the curvature of the lens in the camera.
Can’t remember the term for it.
But the jist is ,straight lines start to curve as they get to the edges.
You see it a lot on TV Big Ben looks like the leaning tower of Pisa on the news sometimes.
If the camera is not right on line with the ball it can distort lines.
You can’t see it on a moving picture but can on stills.

 

[Deleted member 18121]

From Sky sports:

DERMOT'S VERDICT: I don't think it's a penalty.

DERMOT SAYS: This incident has to be an on-field decision, as Oliver has the best view.
There's an angle where the referee makes the decision, we don't need to talk about the VAR, the on-field referee makes the decision. Straight away, he says no penalty. He sees the speed of the ball and he sees it hit Alexander-Arnold on the arm. I think he's got the best view of everybody - he's an amazing athlete to keep up with play.

Remember, a ball striking an arm isn't a penalty. Oliver will have communicated with the VAR that the ball came too quickly at Alexander-Arnold - once Oliver makes that call, then VAR will never ever get involved. If you asked 100 neutral football fans about the decision, you'd have a split vote. There would not be a majority. Even if the referee had come over to the pitch-side monitor, he wouldn't have reversed his decision.

 

[clubchamp98]

From Sky sports:

DERMOT'S VERDICT: I don't think it's a penalty.

DERMOT SAYS: This incident has to be an on-field decision, as Oliver has the best view.
There's an angle where the referee makes the decision, we don't need to talk about the VAR, the on-field referee makes the decision. Straight away, he says no penalty. He sees the speed of the ball and he sees it hit Alexander-Arnold on the arm. I think he's got the best view of everybody - he's an amazing athlete to keep up with play.

Remember, a ball striking an arm isn't a penalty. Oliver will have communicated with the VAR that the ball came too quickly at Alexander-Arnold - once Oliver makes that call, then VAR will never ever get involved. If you asked 100 neutral football fans about the decision, you'd have a split vote. There would not be a majority. Even if the referee had come over to the pitch-side monitor, he wouldn't have reversed his decision.

Thats that then ,Dermot has spoken!!!