sne Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, S-Platt said: I know my friend but that rule you mention does not exist yet. This is from the FA Rules forgive me if UEFA is different: HANDLING THE BALL Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. The following must be considered: the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an offence hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an offence The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. Inside their penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any related sanction but can be guilty of handling offences that incur an indirect free kick. Does that include when it's "used" to score a goal? Or is that a separate rule still? Edited April 18, 2019 by sne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaAlex Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 Brilliant performance from VAR. Imagine being in the quarter finals of the Champions League possibly your greatest opportunity ever to get through to a semi and you go out to a last minute offside goal. Maybe thats what football has always been about, but in this sort of competition where the rewards are so high, its proven exactly why VAR should exist and be used. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 So the rule has been changed but possibly not enforced yet? Quote Handball definition changed for goal-scoring situations MANCHESTER, England (Reuters) - Handballs from attackers in goal-scoring situations will no longer have to be deliberate following a decision of world football's rule-making body, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) said on Saturday. IFAB's annual general meeting in Aberdeen ruled that intent would no longer be a factor in situations involving goals or goal-scoring opportunities from next season. The law change should stop situations where a goal is scored off a player's arm or hand. "A goal scored directly from the hand/arm (even if accidental) and a player scoring or creating a goal-scoring opportunity after having gained possession/control of the ball from their hand/arm (even if accidental) will no longer be allowed," IFAB said in a statement. IFAB said the decision would "provide a more precise and detailed definition for what constitutes handball, in particular with regard to the occasions when a non-deliberate/accidental handball will be penalised." The body - made up of the four British home nations and representatives from FIFA also approved law changes to stop players from interfering with defensive walls at free kicks. Under the new rule players from the attacking team will have to be at least one metre away from the wall when a free kick is being taken. The aim is to cut out the jostling and pushing in walls which frequently causes delays and incidents needing the referee's attention. The body also approved changes that will force players being substituted to leave the field of play at the nearest touchline rather than walk across to the team's bench or the tunnel, in a bid to reduce time-wasting tactics. A change to the goal-kick rule will also mean the ball does not have to leave the penalty area at goal kicks. In situations where the ball hits the referee a "drop ball" will be awarded and there is also a change in the laws governing goalkeeper movements at spot-kicks with the keeper only being required to have one foot on the line at a penalty. Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/sport/football/2019/03/02/handball-definition-changed-for-goalscoring-situations/#zvE0CIRgs3kaLbqG.99 https://www.thestar.com.my/sport/football/2019/03/02/handball-definition-changed-for-goalscoring-situations/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 40 minutes ago, sne said: So the rule has been changed but possibly not enforced yet? https://www.thestar.com.my/sport/football/2019/03/02/handball-definition-changed-for-goalscoring-situations/ I'm not convinced it's handball even going by this rule. He clearly didn't score the goal directly with his hand/arm as it came of his hip. Did he "gain possession/control of the ball" with his arm? This one is more debatable but I'd argue that had the ball not hit his arm it would have hit his hip and gone in anyway. In short I'm not convinced that the ball brushing past his arm had any real impact on the fact that the ball went in. Given that the evidence should be clear and obvious in order to overturn an on field decision, I wouldn't really like to see a goal like this chalked off under either the current or these new rules. Additionally, we are debating a marginal decision which without VAR would still have resulted in a goal anyway. I'm not convinced this is a good argument against VAR in a game where the winning goal would have been an offside goal without VAR being in use. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, tom_avfc said: I'm not convinced it's handball even going by this rule. He clearly didn't score the goal directly with his hand/arm as it came of his hip. Did he "gain possession/control of the ball" with his arm? This one is more debatable but I'd argue that had the ball not hit his arm it would have hit his hip and gone in anyway. In short I'm not convinced that the ball brushing past his arm had any real impact on the fact that the ball went in. Given that the evidence should be clear and obvious in order to overturn an on field decision, I wouldn't really like to see a goal like this chalked off under either the current or these new rules. Additionally, we are debating a marginal decision which without VAR would still have resulted in a goal anyway. I'm not convinced this is a good argument against VAR in a game where the winning goal would have been an offside goal without VAR being in use. Yeah no doubt the offside was correct. No idea how the linesman didn't call it as he was perfectly positioned. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 2 hours ago, PieFacE said: Most fouls, throw ins and corners won't require the referee to stop the game and go look at a screen unless it's something serious like an off the ball punch. The officials watching the game on screens can easily communicate to the ref the right decisions throughout the game in the moment. It's probably happening already. I still can't see a single argument against VAR. This "kills the game" nonsense is just nonsense. I thought last night was brilliant, and you can argue with the change of emotions as in the ground it as the goal got overturned added something extra to the game, rather than took something away. Llorente didn't even hand ball it, it hit his thigh. Your telling me it doesn't take the emotion off the goal? Of course it does. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Zatman said: I think VAR does take away the emotion of the goal. Not that was anything wrong with the goal but look at Jack celebration in the derby or the Aguero title goal. If VAR was in play then you wont get enotional celebrations like that anymore as players will have to wait for decisions Great point. Imagine the one at the sty had to go var and then we wiatibg. It won't be the same passion. That sucks big time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 26 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Great point. Imagine the one at the sty had to go var and then we wiatibg. It won't be the same passion. That sucks big time. The Grealish goal was so clearly a valid goal that the celebrations would still happen and no VAR check would have happened (i.e. nothing would have changed with VAR there). I'm not sure I really get this argument. Of course celebrations will still happen instinctively when goals are scored. I don't see everybody not celebrating goals on the off chance that it may get disallowed. The reaction to offside goals shows this to me. Even when the linesman has had his flag up for a good 30 seconds before the ball goes in there are still people jumping around celebrating the goal. If a few people have a bit of egg on their face in the way that Pep and the City fans did after their celebrations, I don't see that as an issue when the alternative is to have goals awarded incorrectly and matches decided by clearly wrong decisions. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chappy Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 Not every goal is checked. Celebrations won’t be curtailed on the off chance a goal is going to be checked - the reaction is too natural to do so (look at Sterling last night). At the Benfica game on Sunday a goal was checked by VAR, the players had all celebrated as they would a normal goal - they didn’t wait for the VAR check. You don’t see bowlers not celebrating when the finger goes up for LBW on the off chance the batter is going to review it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 The fans in the stands are inconsequential now anyway. It's about the people watching on telly in the US and Asia, that's where the money is. They can follow VAR the same as the ref, and even go get a drink while they review it. Won't be long before the introduce coach challenges and commercial breaks while they review situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Albrighton Posted April 18, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted April 18, 2019 Yeah, last night wasn’t the first time a goal was scored, players and fans celebrated and then it was disallowed, VAR or otherwise. It also won’t be the last time. Supporters are still going to assume the goal will stand and go crazy. If people having egg on their face for celebrating is the price to pay for having the correct decision being made, then I’m ok with it. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 21 minutes ago, tom_avfc said: The Grealish goal was so clearly a valid goal that the celebrations would still happen and no VAR check would have happened (i.e. nothing would have changed with VAR there). I'm not sure I really get this argument. Of course celebrations will still happen instinctively when goals are scored. I don't see everybody not celebrating goals on the off chance that it may get disallowed. The reaction to offside goals shows this to me. Even when the linesman has had his flag up for a good 30 seconds before the ball goes in there are still people jumping around celebrating the goal. If a few people have a bit of egg on their face in the way that Pep and the City fans did after their celebrations, I don't see that as an issue when the alternative is to have goals awarded incorrectly and matches decided by clearly wrong decisions. But let's say it wasn't clear and they wanted to check it never would ahve been like that with var. It ruins the experience for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted April 18, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted April 18, 2019 53 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Your telling me it doesn't take the emotion off the goal? Of course it does. I can assure you watching in a Manchester pub that no emotion was taken off when the offside goal was scored. I don’t imagine people thinking “I’ll celebrate a bit but no go nuts until the goal is confirmed”. That just doesn’t happen, as offside goals ruled out by linesmen already shows. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 correct call > wrong ones every time. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 To me its all about getting important decisions right and if that was VAR does then I'm all for it. Yes its not fair on fans but its the same in cricket and to a lesser extent tennis. Supporters will eventually get used to it and hold back a bit until a goal is decided. Even before VAR you could cheer a goal only to find out the linesman has put up his flag. Its just a longer wait between exhaultation and disappointment that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 I can't understand why people are Luddites about this. It shod have been introduced as soon as cameras could film and replay the match instantly (the 70's?) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said: I can't understand why people are Luddites about this. It shod have been introduced as soon as cameras could film and replay the match instantly (the 70's?) Well I imagine the cost aspect played a large part in this, don't you think? It's not like every game was/is even televised and the extra technology, staff and other things is monumental. The big money in football didn't even appear until the mid 90's, and even now it's very unevenly spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 2 hours ago, VillaJ100 said: I can't understand why people are Luddites about this. It shod have been introduced as soon as cameras could film and replay the match instantly (the 70's?) Ha, calls people luddites whilst simultaneously suggesting that technology should have advanced by 30 years in the 70's. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaJ100 Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said: Ha, calls people luddites whilst simultaneously suggesting that technology should have advanced by 30 years in the 70's. Cheers. Surely they had replays available in the 70's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted April 18, 2019 Share Posted April 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, VillaJ100 said: Surely they had replays available in the 70's? People still had black and white TV's in the 70's, I think it's fair to assume that the technology to effectively determine offsides etc would not have been available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts