Forum | VAR being VAR by SitfcB

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread

VAR being VAR 22:12 - Aug 14 with 3451 views

Blimey.

Should Wolves have had a penalty late on against Man Utd?!💥👀pic.twitter.com/YpvwxMgQZk
— Sky Sports (@SkySports) August 14, 2023

	COYB
Poll:	What will today’s 10 pager be
Blog:	[Blog] One Year On

VAR being VAR on 22:14 - Aug 14 with 3049 views

Radlett_blue

So, is a goalkeeper allowed to take out an attacker after completely missing the ball?
Obviously yes, if it's Man U defending a 1 goal lead in stoppage time at Old Trafford.

Poll:

Should horse racing be banned in the UK?

VAR being VAR on 22:15 - Aug 14 with 3032 views

MattinLondon

Unbelievable- no where near the ball.

VAR being VAR on 22:17 - Aug 14 with 3002 views

JDB23

It's a goalkeeper making a foul so unless he actually decapitates him it will never be given. Same with the Everton goal being disallowed, far too much leeway for gk's.

VAR being VAR on 22:20 - Aug 14 with 2971 views

WicklowBlue

Watching it live I wasn't sure about this peno shout. Keeper went out was no where near the ball, cleaned out the player who didn't touch the ball. The ball was then headed back out to the top of the box. I didn't think it was a penalty tbh.

On the other hand, ManU were terrible and I thought they'd beat Wolves easily. No idea what formation or tactics Ten Haag was attempting. Wolves could have scored 3 easily.

One game but Wolves looked great bar scoring. Rashford seems to have a lost a bit of pace...

-5

VAR being VAR on 22:20 - Aug 14 with 2963 views

LankHenners

Ferguson's not been manager for several years now but still has a death grip over the referees. If Jose Sa had done that to Rashford it'd be a pen, a red card, and the goalkeeper would be locked up in HMP Wakefield until Christmas.

	Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand.
Poll:	What is Celina's problem?

VAR being VAR on 22:25 - Aug 14 with 2907 views

iamatractorboy

VAR being VAR on 22:20 - Aug 14 by WicklowBlue

Don't suppose you happen to work at Stockley Park, do you?!

VAR being VAR on 22:25 - Aug 14 with 2908 views

PioneerBlue

I can’t see how or for what reason that wasn’t given on VAR watch back. If any defender does the same it’s a pen. No idea why the difference is for a GK, I can see it in their favour if it’s the body colliding but the hands no. He was nowhere near and wiped the wolves player out clean!

Blog:

Ipswich Ramblings

VAR being VAR on 22:29 - Aug 14 with 2864 views

strikalite

VAR being VAR on 22:14 - Aug 14 by Radlett_blue
So, is a goalkeeper allowed to take out an attacker after completely missing the ball? Obviously yes, if it's Man U defending a 1 goal lead in stoppage time at Old Trafford.

Straight red card too imo, endangering an opponent, but yes of course silly me it's at OT so in that case it isn't even a foul..

VAR being VAR on 22:32 - Aug 14 with 2823 views

WicklowBlue

VAR being VAR on 22:25 - Aug 14 by iamatractorboy
Don't suppose you happen to work at Stockley Park, do you?!

Hahaha! I hear you and I wanted Wolves to at least equalise. They had so many breaks and chances but just couldn't get the goal. Wolves were by far the better team.

Back to that incident, I thought the Ref was going over to look at it...but then booked Gary O'Neil.

Just saying how I saw it... did the keeper foul a player on the ball or impede a follow up goal scoring chance? I'd have loved it to be given but can see why it wasn't.

Wolves had much better chances than that one incident. Its the 3 v 2s they will rue...

VAR being VAR on 22:38 - Aug 14 with 2741 views

berkstractorboy

VAR being VAR on 22:32 - Aug 14 by WicklowBlue

You said in real time you saw it as no pen. But when you saw it back slowly like the VAR officials had multiple chances to do, at that point did you think pen or no pen?

Genuinely interested in what you thought after seeing the VAR replay.

VAR being VAR on 22:47 - Aug 14 with 2649 views

Ftnfwest

I think if he’d just gone up for the ball with the player and bumped into:him after the balls gone then no pen, but it’s such a reckless and dangerous challenge that it’s definitely a pen. Just throws himself at the bloke.

VAR being VAR on 23:01 - Aug 14 with 2565 views

LankHenners

Gary O'Neil says PGMOL's Jon Moss spoke to him after the game and has admitted @Wolves should have had a penalty and it was a clear and obvious error.
— Simon Stone (@sistoney67) August 14, 2023

	Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand.
Poll:	What is Celina's problem?

VAR being VAR on 23:04 - Aug 14 with 2517 views

JDB23

VAR being VAR on 23:01 - Aug 14 by LankHenners
Gary O'Neil says PGMOL's Jon Moss spoke to him after the game and has admitted @Wolves should have had a penalty and it was a clear and obvious error. — Simon Stone (@sistoney67) August 14, 2023

Everyone could see that coming a mile off. I'm sure the letter of apology from Howard Webb will be of great condolence if Wolves get relegated by a point.

VAR being VAR on 23:07 - Aug 14 with 2492 views

WicklowBlue

VAR being VAR on 22:38 - Aug 14 by berkstractorboy
You said in real time you saw it as no pen. But when you saw it back slowly like the VAR officials had multiple chances to do, at that point did you think pen or no pen? Genuinely interested in what you thought after seeing the VAR replay.

Now what I said in my post above was:

" I wasn't sure about this peno shout"

To respond to your direct question, I'm still not sure about it but there again I am neither an EFL Ref nor up to speed on IFAB rule changes. I saw the Sky replay live and am still unsure.

If others believe it's a pen no problem, I just said I wasn't sure and didn't think it was a penalty based on my thoughts.

Did it stop a goal scoring chance, no imho the player headed the ball unimpeded.

Did the player challenged have a chance to play the ball, no as the header went back out to the edge of the box.

Was it a rash challenge that took a player out which would have been a foul elsewhere on the pitch? Yes hence pen.

Was the keeper making an effort to challenge the ball and clattered an opposition player?

Should VAR have asked the Ref to view it, I thought they did. But they obviously didn't.

Was the peno shout against the Wolves player in the first half a peno even though his arms were against his side?

I'm sharing my opinion and happy to be corrected. I'm not going to die on this hill, Wolves could have scored easily 3 goals and ManU looked at sea. That Pen shout didn't lose them 3 points...

Have a good night.

Edit: 3 points not 2.

[Post edited 14 Aug 2023 23:17]

VAR being VAR on 23:32 - Aug 14 with 2358 views

berkstractorboy

VAR being VAR on 23:07 - Aug 14 by WicklowBlue

Edit: 3 points not 2.

[Post edited 14 Aug 2023 23:17]

Thats fair enough and opinion is ok and wondered if you had changed your mind based on watching the VAR replays. This is the bit I wanted to check , not to say you are right or wrong (so chill out). I just wonder how many people's view changed on watching the replays hence I was checking if yours had.

My opinion did change as in real-time it looked wreckless but wasn't sure how much the keeper impeded the Wolves player. Turns out on replay he impeded 2 players and got nowhere near the ball. My issue with this is I think it was a clear and obvious error and VAR should have intervened to recommend an on-field review.

I don't agree with what you say but have no issue with your interpretation, mine would be different as the keeper impeded the attacker by knocking them to the ground with excessive force making them unable to challenge for the next ball. As others have said any where else on the pitch and a foul immediately given, even by the ref in real-time I suspect.

[Post edited 15 Aug 2023 1:03]

VAR being VAR on 00:05 - Aug 15 with 2267 views

redrickstuhaart

VAR being VAR on 22:20 - Aug 14 by WicklowBlue

How on earth can it be anything but a pen and a yellow?

If you make a late challenge and take out a player, it is a foul.

VAR being VAR on 06:50 - Aug 15 with 1957 views

jayessess

VAR being VAR on 00:05 - Aug 15 by redrickstuhaart
How on earth can it be anything but a pen and a yellow? If you make a late challenge and take out a player, it is a foul.

But there's always been this weird unwritten rule that fouls in the penalty area don't count if the player gets hit shot off. You see a striker get taken out after shooting almost every game.

Blog:

What Now? Taking a Look at Life in League One

VAR being VAR on 07:07 - Aug 15 with 1909 views

NthQldITFC

I'll preface this by saying I don't know the letter of the law, so I don't know whether it should have been a penalty or not as far as the rules of the game go.

But for me, the keeper comes out totally focussed on the ball intending and expecting to get to the flight of the cross - his eyes don't leave the ball until the last second. When his right hand is about 2 feet from the ball (hundredths of a second before impact), he realises that he's not going to reach it and that right hand comes back (away from the contact) into a blocking position (which is what he's already doing with his left hand).

So for me, there's absolutely no intention there other than to make a committed challenge for the ball. You could certainly call it reckless, but I think you do have to allow goalkeepers some slack in that regard due to the unique nature of their role. Look at Hladky taking out Donacien at Sunderland. Had that been an opposition player would we have said it was good brave goalkeeping.

As I say, I don't know the letter of the law these days, so if reckless = penalty then maybe so, but I think not.

	# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Poll:	It's driving me nuts

VAR being VAR on 07:11 - Aug 15 with 1871 views

NthQldITFC

VAR being VAR on 07:07 - Aug 15 by NthQldITFC

What's also clear is that the impact is from the keeper's face! He's not protecting himself at all, so it's very much not a question of deliberate intention, just whether or not a goalkeeper is allowed to be a bit more reckless than an outfield player?

	# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Poll:	It's driving me nuts

VAR being VAR on 08:05 - Aug 15 with 1675 views

iamatractorboy

VAR being VAR on 07:11 - Aug 15 by NthQldITFC
What's also clear is that the impact is from the keeper's face! He's not protecting himself at all, so it's very much not a question of deliberate intention, just whether or not a goalkeeper is allowed to be a bit more reckless than an outfield player?

Intention doesn't come into it. Many tackles are honest attempts to get the ball, they're still called (rightly) as fouls if they impede the opponent without getting the ball.

VAR being VAR on 08:11 - Aug 15 with 1633 views

redrickstuhaart

VAR being VAR on 08:05 - Aug 15 by iamatractorboy
Intention doesn't come into it. Many tackles are honest attempts to get the ball, they're still called (rightly) as fouls if they impede the opponent without getting the ball.

Indeed. Nothing to do with intent or recklessness. Same as Morsy flying in, in the centre of the pitch, and getting their late by mistiming.

[Post edited 15 Aug 2023 8:11]

VAR being VAR on 08:14 - Aug 15 with 1612 views

NthQldITFC

VAR being VAR on 08:05 - Aug 15 by iamatractorboy
Intention doesn't come into it. Many tackles are honest attempts to get the ball, they're still called (rightly) as fouls if they impede the opponent without getting the ball.

Yes, I guess so. But I still think that a keeper has (or should have) a bit more leeway to put himself in blocking positions in the act of trying to stop a goal, even if those blocking positions result in a collision after the ball has gone.

I concede that I might be a little corrupted in my football thinking by watching rugby league and the interpretations around tackling in that sport.

	# WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE #
Poll:	It's driving me nuts

VAR being VAR on 08:14 - Aug 15 with 1615 views

Herbivore

A few people are really overcomplicating this. There doesn't need to have been intent. He doesn't need to have prevented a goalscoring opportunity. He comes for the ball, gets nowhere near it, and clatters two opponents. That makes it a foul, it is a foul committed in the penalty area, so it's a penalty. It was a clear and obvious error not to give it so VAR has had a shocker, but we often see VAR favouring the big clubs much as we see with refs. Ultimately, VAR decisions still depend on a referee and it's just as prone to bias and human error as the on field referee. They may as well bin it off to be honest.

Poll:	Should someone on benefits earn more than David Cameron?
Blog:	Where Did It All Go Wrong for Paul Hurst?

VAR being VAR on 08:15 - Aug 15 with 1610 views

Swansea_Blue

Lol. And just to rub salt into the wound Gary O'Neil gets a yellow for a pretty tame reaction all things considered. Yet again, VAR isn’t the issue. It’s the rubbish standard of our officials and the constant tinkering with the rules.

Poll:

Do you think Pert is key to all of this?

VAR being VAR on 08:20 - Aug 15 with 1593 views

iamatractorboy

VAR being VAR on 08:15 - Aug 15 by Swansea_Blue
Lol. And just to rub salt into the wound Gary O'Neil gets a yellow for a pretty tame reaction all things considered. Yet again, VAR isn’t the issue. It’s the rubbish standard of our officials and the constant tinkering with the rules.

Yeh I thought O'Neil was unlucky there, but perhaps a victim of the clamping down on dissent that refs have been instructed to make. Which I agree with in principle, the abuse they get is terrible, but in this case he wasn't in anyone's face especially or shouting directly at the fourth official, more expressing his frustration which is different.

Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread