The Footie Thread

[Billysboots]

No we've not.

Ah right so now you've benifted from such a poor decision, you defend it as a marginal decison. I think the refs main man call it as "subjective".

It's pathetic to defend what we've watched tonight. Is it really football with these decisions?

I ask again, which decision are you referring to?

I’ve been fairly clear in my views on both. I would not have been disappointed had United not been awarded that penalty. It was soft. I’ve said so. But once given, it’s the sort of decision VAR are never going to interfere with, in much the same way as if it hadn’t been given by the on field referee.

If the Bournemouth penalty claim, it’s not a penalty. The offence is outside the area. How can you argue for a penalty for an offence which occurred outside the area?

 

[samthom99]

Is this the 1st game you've ever seen?

What makes you think this?

 

[Hobbit]

Guys, play the post not the poster. We like to let the footie thread run with a minimum of editing. By its very nature it can be a little more feisty but please don’t spoil it.

 

[samthom99]

Guys, play the post not the poster. We like to let the footie thread run with a minimum of editing. By its very nature it can be a little more feisty but please don’t spoil it.

Can i pm you a question?

 

[AmandaJR]

The pundit kept referring to "did it continue into the box". Is that the rule? If so then it clearly did as the attacker actually got through the first part of the foul (outside the box) and then was rugby tackled in the box.

 

[clubchamp98]

It was a soft penalty for sure. But once given, it was never going to be overturned. It was one of those, if not given, VAR would not have intervened to award it. Seen it loads of times this season.

Unfortunately you’re right.
But imo that’s an error and what VAR was put in place for.

 

[Swango1980]

The pundit kept referring to "did it continue into the box". Is that the rule? If so then it clearly did as the attacker actually got through the first part of the foul (outside the box) and then was rugby tackled in the box.

The continue into the box element is to account for an incident where a player is pulled back, manages to stay up but continues to be pulled as he goes into the box.

This was a foul made in a point of time, which was outside the box. Just because the attacker may fall into the defender as he moves into box doesn't mean he is still being tackled

 

[Swango1980]

Unfortunately you’re right.
But imo that’s an error and what VAR was put in place for.

How can you agree it is a soft penalty, and then say VAR should have got involved, when it should only be used for clear and obvious mistakes?

 

[Billysboots]

Unfortunately you’re right.
But imo that’s an error and what VAR was put in place for.

VAR is there for clear and obvious errors. And that probably wasn’t in that category which is why they didn’t intervene - we saw several examples of it in the Champion’s League during the week.

I actually think that’s the way most fans would prefer it. We’ve become so used to each and every incident, however minor, being reviewed in excruciating slow time by the VAR. I don’t think too many will argue it’s ruining the game in this country.

Get back to letting the on field referee officiate and only become involved when he has made a clear and obvious error.

 

[Slime]

Is this the best you've got? You come accross very aggressive.

Not at all, apologies if it came over that way, it's just that you didn't seem too au fait with the rules.
No aggression meant or intended, I'm a lover not a fighter.

 

[clubchamp98]

How can you agree it is a soft penalty, and then say VAR should have got involved, when it should only be used for clear and obvious mistakes?

It says in my post !
I think that’s a clear error.

 

[samthom99]

The pundit kept referring to "did it continue into the box". Is that the rule? If so then it clearly did as the attacker actually got through the first part of the foul (outside the box) and then was rugby tackled in the box.

Yes that is the rule. We often see fouls/pens given for this, unless its against Man u

 

[clubchamp98]

VAR is there for clear and obvious errors. And that probably wasn’t in that category which is why they didn’t intervene - we saw several examples of it in the Champion’s League during the week.

I actually think that’s the way most fans would prefer it. We’ve become so used to each and every incident, however minor, being reviewed in excruciating slow time by the VAR. I don’t think too many will argue it’s ruining the game in this country.

Get back to letting the on field referee officiate and only become involved when he has made a clear and obvious error.

Yes but I think that’s a clear error.
It’s deflected at close range and hits his upper arm by his side.

Most fans imo would not want penalty’s given for that.

 

[Billysboots]

Yes but I think that’s a clear error.
It’s deflected at close range and hits his upper arm by his side.

Most fans imo would not want penalty’s given for that.

I think the issue is perhaps more a problem with the handball rule, and the interpretation of it, rather than VAR.

I no longer know what the rule is, it seems to change that often.

 

[clubchamp98]

I think the issue is perhaps more a problem with the handball rule, and the interpretation of it, rather than VAR.

I no longer know what the rule is, it seems to change that often.

I think on this we can agree.

It’s a minefield the refs don’t even know imo.

 

[samthom99]

I think the issue is perhaps more a problem with the handball rule, and the interpretation of it, rather than VAR.

I no longer know what the rule is, it seems to change that often.

Ab. So.Bloody.Lutely

 

[PaulMdj]

VAR proved its worth tonight, B’Mouth’s defenders arm went in an upward motion Ref gave a penalty agreed by VAR.

Foul around the box, Ref thought it was inside and gave a penalty, VAR proved initial contact was outside the box and overturned the decision.

I don’t care who you support or who gets favouritism, VAR was brought in for exactly these decisions.

 

[samthom99]

So, free kicks and hand balls can't be given for a reaction? Is that a new rule introduced this weekend?

Have you ever played any sort of football?

 

[Fade and Die]

Yes that is the rule. We often see fouls/pens given for this, unless its against Man u

Yup but it’s the curse of the small club, you often play against 12 men (15 if you include the clowns in the VAR van)

 

[PJ87]

Have you ever played any sort of football?

Considering everyone refering to the "laws" as rules it sound like nobody gets the game!!!