Villaphan04 Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 Another VERY questionable overturned goal this time for Everton in stoppage time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 1 minute ago, Villaphan04 said: Another VERY questionable overturned goal this time for Everton in stoppage time. I think it was the right decision. Doesn’t mean DdG would have got to it, but player was certainly interfering with play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villaphan04 Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 4 minutes ago, Genie said: I think it was the right decision. Doesn’t mean DdG would have got to it, but player was certainly interfering with play. I just don't see how he's interfering with play at all. But again I would say my biggest gripe with this is that the on field ref (chris kavanagh) didn't go to the screen and decide for himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 Zero point to it if it can't overturn clear and obvious errors that lead to incorrect corners and throw-ins too. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 Shit. Prefer to go down so never have deal with this crap system 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted March 1, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted March 1, 2020 Doesn't even require a "check". VAR just says to the ref "that's a goal kick" before anything else happens. Easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 Please for the love of God, give VAR total control. These officials are a disgrace. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 3 hours ago, Villaphan04 said: I just don't see how he's interfering with play at all. But again I would say my biggest gripe with this is that the on field ref (chris kavanagh) didn't go to the screen and decide for himself. He has to move his legs out of the way for it to go in, it looks like it's going him and going nowhere near the goal. I think they got that right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 2 hours ago, kurtsimonw said: Please for the love of God, give VAR total control. These officials are a disgrace. As bad as VAR has been this season, I think that if VAR checked absolutely everything we would have a much fairer game on average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimzk5 Posted March 1, 2020 Share Posted March 1, 2020 It's laughable Can't check corners or throw ins as it would take too much time, but spends over 2 minutes drawing lines on a screen to see if a pubic hair was offside in the build up to a goal It's not fit for purpose 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 2, 2020 Share Posted March 2, 2020 15 hours ago, Villaphan04 said: I just don't see how he's interfering with play at all. But again I would say my biggest gripe with this is that the on field ref (chris kavanagh) didn't go to the screen and decide for himself. he's in the 6 yard box, he's automatically interfering IMO its a gripe I have, take it back to the goal city scored vs us earlier in the season, if you're in there, making an attempt at the ball or not then you are interfering, you're in the GKs thought process, they should rewrite the rule 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 2, 2020 Share Posted March 2, 2020 18 hours ago, Villaphan04 said: I just don't see how he's interfering with play at all. But again I would say my biggest gripe with this is that the on field ref (chris kavanagh) didn't go to the screen and decide for himself. Obviously he's offside by the standard part of the rule. Then there is another part which states if a player isn't interfering then he can be ignored from the phase. This is design to stop goals being given offside when someone on the other side of the pitch is in an offside position but nothing to do with the action. In this case he's sat on the floor, 3 yards from the keeper, directly between the striker and the GK and has to move his feet to stop the ball hitting them. Couldn't really be more involved. Correct decision. I expect the ref/lino would have disallowed the goal if he didn't have VAR behind him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted March 2, 2020 Share Posted March 2, 2020 There's probably no doubt his view of the ball was blocked at some point by GS as well, so the decision to disallow is definitely the right call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 3, 2020 Share Posted March 3, 2020 22 hours ago, Genie said: Obviously he's offside by the standard part of the rule. But the ball went through Maguire's leg so how is it offside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 3, 2020 Share Posted March 3, 2020 58 minutes ago, villalad21 said: But the ball went through Maguire's leg so how is it offside? its not a 2nd phase or whatever bollocks they attached to it, he's offside when the shot is made, its not a rule that if it hits an opponent he's deemed to have played the ball 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted March 3, 2020 Share Posted March 3, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, villa4europe said: its not a 2nd phase or whatever bollocks they attached to it, he's offside when the shot is made, its not a rule that if it hits an opponent he's deemed to have played the ball But he isn't touching the ball. If you watch the goal again it's clear to see it would have been a goal even if Sigurdsson wasn't there. The deflection completely caught De Gea off guard and he failed to react. So if it was ruled out because he's interfering De Gea my point is it would have went in regardless. During no circumstances is De Gea saving that. Edited March 3, 2020 by villalad21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 3, 2020 Share Posted March 3, 2020 that doesn't matter according to the rules the rule is "interfere" and theres no way a player that close to goal and that close to the ball is not interfering like I said I think it should be applied more often, its another rule that needs rewriting from 1.20 onwards is the 2nd goal, ridiculous that sterling isn't considered to be interfering with play, of course he is, its impossible to be that close to a keeper and not interfering with his process as a side to that rewatching it and spotting something I didn't before - how poor is mings for the 1st goal? got done for the flick on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 3, 2020 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 3, 2020 41 minutes ago, villalad21 said: But he isn't touching the ball. If you watch the goal again it's clear to see it would have been a goal even if Sigurdsson wasn't there. The deflection completely caught De Gea off guard and he failed to react. So if it was ruled out because he's interfering De Gea my point is it would have went in regardless. During no circumstances is De Gea saving that. There's no way someone sat on their arse a foot in front of the goalkeeper as a shot is being taken isn't "interfering with play". It doesn't matter if De Gea would have saved it or not. It's offside. Just like if Ronaldo was a foot offside you could say "well the defender would have never caught him anyway because he's too fast" It doesn't matter. He's offside. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WakefieldVillan Posted March 3, 2020 Share Posted March 3, 2020 I'm anti VAR and have only just seen the Everton disallowed goal but this one was the right call for me. When I had heard about it I thought the Everton player was on the other side of the pitch or something, not sat right in De Gea's eye-line when the original shot was aimed. Harsh on Everton in the fact that De Gea wouldn't have saved it but the correct decision IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted March 3, 2020 Share Posted March 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, WakefieldVillan said: I'm anti VAR and have only just seen the Everton disallowed goal but this one was the right call for me. When I had heard about it I thought the Everton player was on the other side of the pitch or something, not sat right in De Gea's eye-line when the original shot was aimed. Harsh on Everton in the fact that De Gea wouldn't have saved it but the correct decision IMO. I think the ref would have disallowed it anyway if VAR wasn't in use. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts