Interesting slant on that ‘handball’

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

EmleyMoorBlade

EmleyMoorBlade

Very Appeh Disciple of The Lord Wilder of Nazareth
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
201
Reaction score
769
Had to smile reading this in the Times this morning that the hand ball rule that VAR correctly ruled on last night was amended by Ifab after a Tottenham goal in the Champions League 😂 It appears at least a little justice was served yesterday 👍🏻 36DB9C58-2C27-4615-B489-A2E87C02CF9D.jpeg
 

Brian Deane said:
It goes to say that now a big club is on the wrong end of a decision ( in there eyes) every fecker is chirping on about it. Where were these so called pundits hiding during and after the Villa debacle ?
Click to expand...

There was no debate over the missed goal at Villa, it was exactly that, a missed decision by the ref/VAR.......
It was not disallowed because of a 'rule' of the game.
I didn't read or hear anyone having the opinion that the goal at Villa was correct to not be allowed.
Nobody talks about it anymore because there is no 'debate'.

There is a debate here around a changed law of the game, which has been talked about over and over again this season.
The goal was correctly ruled out last night, but it is another example of where the debate over the new handball rule carries on.

Last nights decision doesn't even have anything to do with VAR really.
It's all about the handball rule.
 
CentralQuay said:
There was no debate over the missed goal at Villa, it was exactly that, a missed decision by the ref/VAR.......
It was not disallowed because of a 'rule' of the game.
I didn't read or hear anyone having the opinion that the goal at Villa was correct to not be allowed.
Nobody talks about it anymore because there is no 'debate'.

There is a debate here around a changed law of the game, which has been talked about over and over again this season.
The goal was correctly ruled out last night, but it is another example of where the debate over the new handball rule carries on.

Last nights decision doesn't even have anything to do with VAR really.
It's all about the handball rule.
Click to expand...

The debate wasn't meant to be about whether the Villa goal should've stood or not. The discussion people like me are calling for is an actual clarification of the specific failures and a clarification on how the ref and VAR team are supposed to handle such an incident. That discussion hasn't been had.
 
PokerBlade said:
The debate wasn't meant to be about whether the Villa goal should've stood or not. The discussion people like me are calling for is an actual clarification of the specific failures and a clarification on how the ref and VAR team are supposed to handle such an incident. That discussion hasn't been had.
Click to expand...

I can clear that up for you.

The referee/linesman didn't see the ball cross the line, as happened many times before technology was put in place.
The technology failed, as has been explained.
Tierney should have got involved, but didn't, and looked completely perplexed by it all.
 
I can't see why anybody is even bothered about this, ball hit arm which gave them an advantage ie ball went to Kane. Not like Egan's where he forced the ball into the net, ball was going in anyway did it touch his arm? Yep it did, wank rule let's crack on.
 
wadblade said:
Lucus was NOT fouled, he dived when he lost control of the ball, and then his cheating led to his arm hitting the ball and the goal being disallowed [Ha ha ha] Thats why the game restarted with a goal kick
Click to expand...
According to Redknapp, he was fouled by THREE players when actually he was simply crowded out. One “touched” him on the shoulder and the other two made zero contact. Yet again we saw a players legs give way without any leg contact being made. It’s the same everytime an opposition player is outmuscled. Yet more often than not the ref gives the cheap free kick
 
CentralQuay said:
There was no debate over the missed goal at Villa, it was exactly that, a missed decision by the ref/VAR.......
It was not disallowed because of a 'rule' of the game.
I didn't read or hear anyone having the opinion that the goal at Villa was correct to not be allowed.
Nobody talks about it anymore because there is no 'debate'.

There is a debate here around a changed law of the game, which has been talked about over and over again this season.
The goal was correctly ruled out last night, but it is another example of where the debate over the new handball rule carries on.

Last nights decision doesn't even have anything to do with VAR really.
It's all about the handball rule.
Click to expand...
How do you miss a whole ball going over the line when you have tens of cameras at several different angles watching it, as well as the ability to rewind and fast forward, going frame by frame? VAR didn't fancy overturning it, simple. Or didn't have the bollocks.
There should've been a lot more made of it than there actually was. But because it was little old us, there wasn't.
 
CentralQuay said:
I can clear that up for you.

The referee/linesman didn't see the ball cross the line, as happened many times before technology was put in place.
The technology failed, as has been explained.
Tierney should have got involved, but didn't, and looked completely perplexed by it all.
Click to expand...

Well we haven't had a clear explanation of how the Hawkeye failed (as in, released angles and such) unless I've missed it, but the part about Tierney is exactly the discussion I'm asking for. All we've had is "it was a unique situation". You repeating what we know isn't exactly exposition.
 
PokerBlade said:
All we've had is "it was a unique situation".
Click to expand...

That is correct - and VAR/Hawkeye will hopefully be better informed next time it happens. The VAR people admitted at the beginning of the season that VAR decisions will take a couple of seasons to develop fully.

Hawkeye got it wrong - for whatever reason - VAR should have stepped in but didn't, so VAR also got it wrong. VAR decisions at Stockley Park will be reviewed as it goes forward, meanwhile Sheff Utd miss out on 2 points.

We just have to add it to the list including Lunny's big toe !

UTB
 
CentralQuay said:
Last nights decision doesn't even have anything to do with VAR really.
It's all about the handball rule.
Click to expand...

Indeed - and it was a rule created by IFAB - International Football Association Board - nothing to do with FA/PL/VAR/PGMOL etc in the UK.

Thiery Henry handball way back when which kept Ireland out of the 2010 World Cup probably kicked it all off about handball goals having impacts.

UTB
 
To be honest, I do quite like the completely black and white nature of this rule, despite it obviously being cobblers in a footballing sense.

I can see why they've done it, because it's infuriating when goals like Llorente's against Citeh are allowed to stand, and to be honest, I can't see them reversing it, they could add context to it, but then it makes it subjective and would lead to even more bellyaching.
 

Fulwood Blade said:
That is correct - and VAR/Hawkeye will hopefully be better informed next time it happens. The VAR people admitted at the beginning of the season that VAR decisions will take a couple of seasons to develop fully.

Hawkeye got it wrong - for whatever reason - VAR should have stepped in but didn't, so VAR also got it wrong. VAR decisions at Stockley Park will be reviewed as it goes forward, meanwhile Sheff Utd miss out on 2 points.

We just have to add it to the list including Lunny's big toe !

UTB
Click to expand...

Lunny being a toe offside is not comparable to the decision at Villa.
One was the correct decision, one was not.

The Villa Park incident is the only one which Sheffield United can truly feel hard done by......
Every other type of decision/overturning of decisions has also impacted other clubs in the league this season.
 
PokerBlade said:
Well we haven't had a clear explanation of how the Hawkeye failed (as in, released angles and such) unless I've missed it, but the part about Tierney is exactly the discussion I'm asking for. All we've had is "it was a unique situation". You repeating what we know isn't exactly exposition.
Click to expand...
Apparently it's Hawkeye that notifies the referee whether the ball has fully entered the goal or not, not the referee or his assistant and not the VAR referee.
If any of them intervened it would be more than their jobs worth!
 
CentralQuay said:
Lunny being a toe offside is not comparable to the decision at Villa.
One was the correct decision, one was not.

The Villa Park incident is the only one which Sheffield United can truly feel hard done by......
Every other type of decision/overturning of decisions has also impacted other clubs in the league this season.
Click to expand...

The McGoldrick "goal" at Spurs was the wrong decision, even if I accept that Lundstram was offside - which I don't anyway

That's because it didn't even meet their own criteria, being in a completely different phase of play from the one in which McGoldrick scored

In the category of Redknapps-Worst-Decisions-I've-Ever-Seen, last night's would struggle to make the top 100
 
gordoncharles said:
The McGoldrick "goal" at Spurs was the wrong decision, even if I accept that Lundstram was offside - which I don't anyway

That's because it didn't even meet their own criteria, being in a completely different phase of play from the one in which McGoldrick scored

In the category of Redknapps-Worst-Decisions-I've-Ever-Seen, last night's would struggle to make the top 100
Click to expand...

Well I can't help you if you fail to differentiate between bias and facts.

Kane's goal was from a handball, McGoldrick's goal was from an offside.
 
Harrisblade said:
Apparently it's Hawkeye that notifies the referee whether the ball has fully entered the goal or not, not the referee or his assistant and not the VAR referee.
If any of them intervened it would be more than their jobs worth!
Click to expand...

Yeah, which has been my argument on that non-goal. All I think most fans want to know is how the system works, why it failed, and what's being done to prevent it in the future. We've had a good explanation of how Hawkeye works yet nothing specific as to why this was the goal it failed on. We've been told that VAR and the ref could have intervened but no explanation beyond "it was a unique situation" to indicate why they didn't.

I'm not one to call for blood over a mistake, especially one as rare as Hawkeye failing. I'd just like to know why it happened and how they'll try to prevent it in the future.
 
CentralQuay said:
Lunny being a toe offside is not comparable to the decision at Villa.
One was the correct decision, one was not.

The Villa Park incident is the only one which Sheffield United can truly feel hard done by......
Every other type of decision/overturning of decisions has also impacted other clubs in the league this season.
Click to expand...
It's not impacted on other clubs as much as us, we are well ahead in that league.
 
I thought the Hawkeye failing had been put to bed. They have 7 cameras at each end viewing the goals. They need 2 to see the ball clearly to fix its position. At Villa only 1 camera had a clear sight and so the system couldn’t give the goal. Unfortunately Hawkeye does not have the ability to say ‘haven’t got a clear view so can’t be certain’ so as there is no goal message it’s assumed by the ref that it’s no goal. Hawkeye failing that needs to be fixed or at least noted by VAR authorities so that can take it into account.
 
Bladesthorpe said:
It's not impacted on other clubs as much of us, we are well ahead in that league.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't label 1 decision (Villa Park) as being 'well ahead'.

But for that incorrect decision, Blades 'could possibly' be 2 points better off, that is true.
 
Greystones Blade said:
I thought the Hawkeye failing had been put to bed. They have 7 cameras at each end viewing the goals. They need 2 to see the ball clearly to fix its position. At Villa only 1 camera had a clear sight and so the system couldn’t give the goal. Unfortunately Hawkeye does not have the ability to say ‘haven’t got a clear view so can’t be certain’ so as there is no goal message it’s assumed by the ref that it’s no goal. Hawkeye failing that needs to be fixed or at least noted by VAR authorities so that can take it into account.
Click to expand...

There was no VAR protocol to intervene/have anything to do with Hawkeye.
Like you say, there was no expectation for this issue to arise.
 
CentralQuay said:
I wouldn't label 1 decision (Villa Park) as being 'well ahead'.

But for that incorrect decision, Blades 'could possibly' be 2 points better off, that is true.
Click to expand...
Look at all the other VAR decisions that have gone against us not just Villa, why not concentrate on your own team and bore them with your endless shit .
 
Bladesthorpe said:
Look at all the other VAR decisions that have gone against us not just Villa, why not concentrate on your own team and bore them with your endless shit .
Click to expand...

How many times?

They did not go 'against' you.
They were correctly overruled because they should not have been allowed in the first place.
 
wadblade said:
Lucus was NOT fouled, he dived when he lost control of the ball, and then his cheating led to his arm hitting the ball and the goal being disallowed [Ha ha ha] Thats why the game restarted with a goal kick
Click to expand...

I'm not actually sure he dived. I think it was just a normal collision that sometimes happens when two men are chasing down a bouncy thing
 

BornOnShorehamStreet said:
Not "against us" then.

"You" being us

Us being the Blades

Oink
Click to expand...

Leicester, not Wednesday.
I don't suffer from the delusional bias that United/Wednesday fans have on either side of the debate about your club.

Hence I give huge amounts of credit to Wilder and the team......
But refuse to add credit to the argument that VAR's purpose this season has been to put Blades outside the top 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom