Reffing shockers at CCM games (yeah I know)

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

Gee we really need the season to start up again, it’s a weird feeling of being the off season but it’s not and look at the depth of analysis in this thread. If there were games on this discussion would have died out ages ago ?

I know - we don't even have genuine f**kups to argue about anymore. Now we're into the hypotheticals - LOTG theory!!!

 

[Huddo]

I know - we don't even have genuine f**kups to argue about anymore. Now we're into the hypotheticals - LOTG theory!!!

Storm

 

[scottmac]

Storm

He doesn't need a ref to f**k things up for us........

 

[Huddo]

The third goal was a pearler of a f**k up.

 

[Corsair]

The third goal was a pearler of a f**k up.

Let's not forget which cnut was on VAR..as fkin usual.

 

[Huddo]

Supposedly they are saying you can't rule on handballs that lead to goals, but aren't a direct result to a goal. But in defence if your arm is away from your body it's a pen in VAR...

That being said I was 50 metres from the incident and I saw it pretty f**ken easy in real time.

What's the point of VAR, if the blatant shit is still happening? I'm just over IFAB, wish they'd just f**k off.

 

[shipwreck]

Have to admit I enjoyed the FFA cup alot more.

Being able to instantly celebrate a goal outweighs the chance of having a goal scored against you maybe being overturned.

 

[Ancient Mariner]

I still do not think VAR improves the game overall. I much prefer the FFA cup games where if the ref makes a mistake, tough luck, get on with it.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

Supposedly they are saying you can't rule on handballs that lead to goals, but aren't a direct result to a goal. But in defence if your arm is away from your body it's a pen in VAR...

That being said I was 50 metres from the incident and I saw it pretty f**ken easy in real time.

What's the point of VAR, if the blatant shit is still happening? I'm just over IFAB, wish they'd just f**k off.

To clarify:

Last season any handling, accidental or not, by the attacking team in the leadup to a goal was an automatic foul.

This season, they've changed that so it's only accidental handling by the goalscorer, immediately before they score, that is an automatic foul. So, if he had scored it himself, it's no goal.

So, handling that is then passed to a teammate to score, is no longer an automatic foul. That is the change.

VAR is still fully empowered to look at that and determine if it meets the other criteria for a handball foul - and if the error is 'clear and obvious'. So last night, because he passed it first, it moves it from an objective 'did it touch the arm' decision to a subjective foul decision (like judging a handling foul by a defender). Basically, just like it was before they started tinkering with it.

I think it's one of those ones where you could put it to a room full of referees and they'd be split - so probably not Clear and Obvious. But one thing I hate about VAR is that decisions like this are an absolute coin toss. Another match (or another team) and VAR goes to on-field review.

The question is about whether the arm is making the body unnaturally bigger - ie when the arm movement isn't justifiable by the player's movements for their action. I think this is a 'could go either way' call and I'm okay with it - but I know we've been screwed by handball decisions that have not been consistent with decisions in other games in the past. If we had had a fairer go in the past, I daresay people wouldn't be as upset by this one.

I still do not think VAR improves the game overall. I much prefer the FFA cup games where if the ref makes a mistake, tough luck, get on with it.

Absolutely.

I still don't think VAR even improves decision making accuracy - for everything VAR gets right, they get another one wrong. And for the ones they get right - almost every time (except for really tight offside decisions) it's 'yeah, but how the f*** did the ref miss it?'.

The question I have is - did the ref last night avoid a decision there, knowing they have VAR to fall back on - but then we have the problem that VAR might look at it and say 'look, I probably would have called it if I was reffing, but I reckon half the refs out there wouldn't, so I can't say it's Clear and Obvious'. Only one person knows - but I strongly suspect that VAR affected the decision making here. We all know it's happened before.

So, even when VAR does correctly overturn a decision - you always wonder if the ref would have made a different decision without VAR. And then, as you said, you can't celebrate shit with VAR - especially as the decision making is a coin toss.

Imagine if that goal was ours and it was a tiebreaker - even if it's given, by the time VAR clears it, the excitement is gone.

Not to mention - the number of absolutely inexplicable VAR errors has raised more questions of bias and a rigged comp than I've ever seen before.

It doesn't improve decision making and takes a lot away from the game.

 

[Tevor]

It’s clear that IFAB have changed the rules and confused the issue again. During that game Nabbout headed the ball into his arm and it was called hand ball. This is no different in my opinion so this whole goal being scored BS means there can be two different justifiable decisions for the same type of hand ball but one was in the middle of the field the other involved a goal scoring attempt. They should be adjudicated the same. IFAB ruining the game.

 

[turbo]

did the ref last night avoid a decision there, knowing they have VAR to fall back on

I think a lot of the issues would be avoided, and sorted out much faster, if FIFA allowed regions to set their own protocol around VAR. That would allow experimentation and the findings could then be aggregated and pushed out as updated guidelines in future seasons.

At one stage the A league wanted to have a more transparent system with crowd hearing comms but it got shot down. You could even trial a system a bit closer to the footy in having a ref communicate 'on field decision is a goal, but would like you to check the possible handball and position of the arm at the time of contact'
VAR: 'There is a possible handball, recommend on field review for you to determine impact on the play'

Put the comms on speaker so all know whats going on. Makes the VAR a bit more accountable too instead of these mystery decisions where noone knows the logic. Might even give us more faith in the officials if it talks us around to what they've seen instead of thinking how is KGJ still employed? Actually that might be a step too far.

 

[Tevor]

I think a lot of the issues would be avoided, and sorted out much faster, if FIFA allowed regions to set their own protocol around VAR. That would allow experimentation and the findings could then be aggregated and pushed out as updated guidelines in future seasons.

At one stage the A league wanted to have a more transparent system with crowd hearing comms but it got shot down. You could even trial a system a bit closer to the footy in having a ref communicate 'on field decision is a goal, but would like you to check the possible handball and position of the arm at the time of contact'
VAR: 'There is a possible handball, recommend on field review for you to determine impact on the play'

Put the comms on speaker so all know whats going on. Makes the VAR a bit more accountable too instead of these mystery decisions where noone knows the logic. Might even give us more faith in the officials if it talks us around to what they've seen instead of thinking how is KGJ still employed? Actually that might be a step too far.

Yes the cricket is very successful with the referral system as all hear and see what is going on. Who knows what these guys say and sceptic in me wants to hear their conversations.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

Agree that transparency and communication is a critical issue for VAR that needs to be addressed. How often do we see the problem where a decision is given that makes no sense because the commentary box doesn't even have access to the footage until 10 minutes later?

I love the way rugby league does it. So, they'll go to video ref to rule on a try. Video ref will work through each part of the play, then when it's resolved, they'll play it to the stadium/broadcast, with video ref talking through every part of it: "Play the ball is clean, players 10 and 5 are onside at the kick, ball is caught cleanly, pass goes backwards, number 12 stays in and the ball is cleanly grounded". You know exactly what they've looked at.

sure, it's a little different because our code has more subjective decisions, but a brief explanation would help - although here it would be, I imagine, 'arm is in a natural position' or some such....still controversial.

The other challenge we would have with communication is that in, say, NRL, video ref makes a decision when the ref hasn't made one. In ours, the video ref is looking to whether the original decision is 'clearly and obviously' wrong (cricket is kinda the same, but that's more objective). So video ref could disagree with the decision but think it's arguable - how to communicate that?

Here's the problem with lack of communication - we know that each potential penalty or goal is looked at, right? That's supposed to happen - let's assume it does. But what if there are several parts to an incident to look at? For instance, a few seasons ago, we had somebody sent off for DOGSO. Video ref reviewed it, all good. No issue with the decision...except there's a potential offside earlier in the play. Now, maybe it was onside - but with zero communication, we don't even know if VAR thought to look at it.

It’s clear that IFAB have changed the rules and confused the issue again. During that game Nabbout headed the ball into his arm and it was called hand ball. This is no different in my opinion so this whole goal being scored BS means there can be two different justifiable decisions for the same type of hand ball but one was in the middle of the field the other involved a goal scoring attempt. They should be adjudicated the same. IFAB ruining the game.

Well, actually the way the law stands is that the same law and considerations should apply to both.

Basically, given that it wasn't the goalscorer, it's the same as any other foul. The goal becomes irrelevant - I'm not sure why people are over-complicating it. I missed most of the match so can't comment on Nabbout's

 

[Kilsin]

So, handling that is then passed to a teammate to score, is no longer an automatic foul. That is the change.

That's what bugs me though, the word "handling" implies a handball, you handled it and no matter where you are on the field or what happens next if it was intentional or to make yourself bigger (an unnatural position which in this case it was unnatural) it should be a handball in my mind.

As an example, if the ball hadn't hit the inside of his arm and changed its trajectory, would they still have scored? It put our players off and in my opinion, had an effect on the play which resulted in a loose ball being kicked into the back of our net.

Regardless, we lost 2-1 but I just get so frustrated seeing calls like this. Why can't we either have VAR like the Rugby League where they talk through the whole process, explain each action and the reason for the decision then continue with play and a fair result either that or get rid of VAR altogether and go back to relying on the ref's call in the moment and put more effort into training our refs to a high standard... I could live with the odd mistake over what we currently have.

Maybe it's just me?

 

[FFC Mariner]

Watching NFL playoffs - Ref clearly and publicly explains what the decision is and why.

You may not agree but at least you know

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

That's what bugs me though, the word "handling" implies a handball, you handled it and no matter where you are on the field or what happens next if it was intentional or to make yourself bigger (an unnatural position which in this case it was unnatural) it should be a handball in my mind.

No it doesn't - handling can be accidental, no-foul.

You're conflating the two anyway. Did handling immediately lead to that same player scoring? If yes doesn't matter how accidental or unavoidable it was, it's a foul. If not, then we look at it just like any other potential handling and the goal isn't a consideration in whether or not it's a foul.

As an example, if the ball hadn't hit the inside of his arm and changed its trajectory, would they still have scored? It put our players off and in my opinion, had an effect on the play which resulted in a loose ball being kicked into the back of our net.

'it affected play' isn't a consideration and never has been though. If it's accidental or unavoidable handling, it doesn't become a foul because play was affected.

So, here it's a question of whether the arm was in a natural position given his movement and that the handling was largely unavoidable. I think it's subjective enough that if the foul was given, VAR wouldn't have intervened either - but I have my suspicions that the ref may have avoided the decision and left it for VAR (funny how we never see the referee initiate the VAR request themselves, isn't it?). No evidence for that though.

Regardless, we lost 2-1 but I just get so frustrated seeing calls like this. Why can't we either have VAR like the Rugby League where they talk through the whole process, explain each action and the reason for the decision then continue with play and a fair result either that or get rid of VAR altogether and go back to relying on the ref's call in the moment and put more effort into training our refs to a high standard... I could live with the odd mistake over what we currently have.

Maybe it's just me?

Agree completely - I made the same argument about NRL in my post.

 

[Kilsin]

No it doesn't - handling can be accidental, no-foul.

You're conflating the two anyway. Did handling immediately lead to that same player scoring? If yes doesn't matter how accidental or unavoidable it was, it's a foul. If not, then we look at it just like any other potential handling and the goal isn't a consideration in whether or not it's a foul.

Yeah, I agree which is why I said "intentional" or "making yourself bigger/unnatural".

'it affected play' isn't a consideration and never has been though. If it's accidental or unavoidable handling, it doesn't become a foul because play was affected.

So, here it's a question of whether the arm was in a natural position given his movement and that the handling was largely unavoidable. I think it's subjective enough that if the foul was given, VAR wouldn't have intervened either - but I have my suspicions that the ref may have avoided the decision and left it for VAR (funny how we never see the referee initiate the VAR request themselves, isn't it?). No evidence for that though.

That is what I am annoyed at though, it leads to a goal, just not by the guy who handballed it, so I understand the rules say that's fine but I take issue with the rules saying it's fine and believe it should include someone assisting in the goal with a handball at any part of the leadup to that goal as it is game-changing.

An accidental boot to the hand or lower arm in any kind of play is not a foul in my opinion but when people are battling for the ball and it hits a forearm and is guided back to the ground, throwing our defenders off balance due to the trajectory change to then fall at the offending players' teams feet allowing them to score seems like the rules need looking at by more competent people.

Not arguing with you by any means mate, I appreciate the explanation and have read a few of your posts in similar situations, I'm just arguing the rules as no matter how many changes they make, it is still confusing and causing discussions and frustrations like this every time it happens.

I doubt anyone (including City) would be having this discussion if the goal was disallowed, the handball had been given and play moved forward.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

An accidental boot to the hand or lower arm in any kind of play is not a foul in my opinion but when people are battling for the ball and it hits a forearm and is guided back to the ground, throwing our defenders off balance due to the trajectory change to then fall at the offending players' teams feet allowing them to score seems like the rules need looking at by more competent people.

Haha yep, and last season that was a foul, a few seasons prior it was like this season and not an automatic foul.

They absolutely butchered the handball law - I can see it always had problems and always needed clarification, but I think they created more problems than they solved. I think they've actually corrected most of the problems they created - and we're actually pretty close to the old law now, except for the 'goalscorer handles it' clause.

And I agree with you that I don't see the logic in this not being an automatic foul. I get that they want to eliminate the situation of accidental handling 5 passes ago in the leadup, but here.....yeah, don't see the logic in excluding this from the automatic foul. If it's a foul if the goalscorer accidentally handles it, why not if somebody else 3 yards away accidentally handles it and passes it immediately to the goalscorer?

A whole lot of f**karound to achieve almost nothing. I do agree that frequent law changes are bad - especially when they've gone in one direction, then back in another - doesn't help that commentators often compound misinformation as well. It's easy for me - I don't ref anymore but I'm still interested in the laws and I know how to read and interpret them. The average fan gets their information from articles, commentators or the next bloke on the sidelines - and we all know how unreliable the grapevine is.

Oh well - let's see how they manage to f**k it up again next season

 

[Huddo]

To clarify:

Last season any handling, accidental or not, by the attacking team in the leadup to a goal was an automatic foul.

This season, they've changed that so it's only accidental handling by the goalscorer, immediately before they score, that is an automatic foul. So, if he had scored it himself, it's no goal.

So, handling that is then passed to a teammate to score, is no longer an automatic foul. That is the change.

VAR is still fully empowered to look at that and determine if it meets the other criteria for a handball foul - and if the error is 'clear and obvious'. So last night, because he passed it first, it moves it from an objective 'did it touch the arm' decision to a subjective foul decision (like judging a handling foul by a defender). Basically, just like it was before they started tinkering with it.

I think it's one of those ones where you could put it to a room full of referees and they'd be split - so probably not Clear and Obvious. But one thing I hate about VAR is that decisions like this are an absolute coin toss. Another match (or another team) and VAR goes to on-field review.

The question is about whether the arm is making the body unnaturally bigger - ie when the arm movement isn't justifiable by the player's movements for their action. I think this is a 'could go either way' call and I'm okay with it - but I know we've been screwed by handball decisions that have not been consistent with decisions in other games in the past. If we had had a fairer go in the past, I daresay people wouldn't be as upset by this one.

I don't understand why it's a coin toss, it is a clear and obvious foul that led to the deviation of the ball, if this had happened in any other part of the field, true VAR is non existent, but it's a penalty, why is it different in the most important part of the field.

If an offside pass leads to a goal the players position is questioned, how is it not the case with this?

If anything the rules now seem to be weighted to benifit the richer clubs that play the possession based football, noting only loose arms are penalised by VAR in defence, this in turn will shit on counter attacking football club that rely on sitting back and absorbing.

All that aside, I still did see that handball from 50 Mtrs, VAR shouldn't have even been required, so where were the other officials. 4 Refs and nothing!!!

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

All that aside, I still did see that handball from 50 Mtrs, VAR shouldn't have even been required, so where were the other officials. 4 Refs and nothing!!!

The question isn't whether it hit the hand. The question is whether it's a foul - and in this case, it's whether the arm was in a natural position for the player's movement.

VAR of course knows it hit the hand - I'd imagine the ref could probably have spotted that as well.

It's not enough to have simply hit the hand and deviated.