Man United and Liverpool in Europe

[martin_p]

Why did the defender turn his back? So that the ball might hit his "naturally positioned" arm perhaps. It's a pen.

So the ball hit him on the back rather than his stomach.

[dsr]

So the ball hit him on the back rather than his stomach.

Wimp. Serve him right.

[Tricky Trevor]

No more stoppages? You must have missed the goal!

I get your point about the celebration but when have you ever known a ref add time for that?

[HiroshimaClaret]

Really happy United got through - MUST be the Solskjaer effect. His effervescence really rubs off. It must be such a breath of fresh air for the players (as culpable as some of them where for the abject performances under Mourinho).

My twopenneth on the VAR handball shout - not a handball. My opinion changed completely though in the space of 5 minutes after giving it thought and reenacting the defender`s movement whislt having a shower. I think the problem is in how VAR is used in various situations. This may sound a bit David Batty but I think for such calls as those last night against PSG (handball/penalties) VAR should NOT use slow-motion. 15 different angles OK, but it must be shown at real speed. That way the defender`s reaction is much more fairly judged, in my opinion. Slow-mo makes even the most accidental of handballs (possibly challenges in the box too) look nailed-on. For offsides of course, slow-mo plays an inportant part and is necessary.

[Imploding Turtle]

Disagree IT,the ball hit his arm as it was travelling at speed.No way did the player make any movement deliberately to handle it.. The shot was going well over the bar anyway..

And you don't want to change the rule that says it's a hand ball, you want to remove the view the ref had of it. That's short-sighted because it wouldn't actually solve the problem, it would just mean that on this one occasion the problem would have been accidentally corrected. The rule would still exist. It's like trying to fix global warming by equipping buildings with air conditioners.

[Dyched]

They just need to change the rule so whenever it his an arm it’s a freekick/penalty.

Is football the only sport that actually debates wether something is deliberate or not?

[dsr]

They just need to change the rule so whenever it his an arm it’s a freekick/penalty.

Is football the only sport that actually debates wether something is deliberate or not?

No. Snooker has the "miss", where the ref decides whether a foul is deliberate or not.

Cricket has the umpire deciding whether handling the ball, obstructing the field, hitting the ball twice, and kicking the ball over the boundary, are deliberate.

Rugby League has different penalties for accidental high tackle and deliberate high tackle, and rugby union has a penalty for a deliberate knock-on but a scrum for an accidental one.

Ice hockey has a sin bin for deliberately hitting it over the fence but not for accidentally doing it.

Baseball counts a bunt differently depending whether you were trying to do it or not.

In croquet, if you hit the ball on a practice swing, the shot doesn't count and you move the balls back to where they were.

That's just off the top of my head.

If they change the rule so that every touch with the hand is a foul, how are they going to enforce it? Even with VAR, a ball that deflects off the hip or chest and goes close to the man's hand will be very difficult to judge.

[Imploding Turtle]

No. Snooker has the "miss", where the ref decides whether a foul is deliberate or not.

Not exactly. The referee decides whether or not the player could make a better attempt at hitting the object ball. A miss is almost always called though because usually the player trying to escape is doing so in a way that is trying to leave the balls in a safe position and therefore deliberately compromising his own ability to strike the object ball.

[Falcon]

It isn't VAR that is the problem per se, its the handball rule not being applied correctly. It's a reffing problem. VAR has just made it more obvious that there is an issue.

[edison]

I actually thought the ball hit the defender's arse - even after watching umpteen replays. With VAR, I think if it is not immediately obvious after looking at it again, then, like baseball, the ruling on the field stands. I don't think that was immediately obvious, although it was hilarious just for Neymar's face.

[claretspice]

They just need to change the rule so whenever it his an arm it’s a freekick/penalty.

Is football the only sport that actually debates wether something is deliberate or not?

Would lead to an absolutely ludicrous situation whereby it would be advantageous for a player on the edge of the box to try and smash the ball against someone's arm from close range, rather than beat the defender and cross it. No-one can seriously suggest that that is a good idea.

Handballs happen in real time. If it looks like a deliberate attempt to make yourself bigger in real time, it's a handball. If it looks like self defence with the side effect that the arm might be slightly raised, it's not handball. If you can't tell so have to slow it down - and slow-mos make everything look more deliberate because the whole point is to distort reaction time - it's definitely not clear cut either way.

Last night it looked to me like the defender simply didn't have time to complete his jump before the ball hit him, and so the position of his arm wasn't where he intended it to be when the ball hit him. He was undone by the power of the shot. But the minute we're into these ludicrous levels of interpretation, we're well beyond the point of an obvious error. We're into the realms of the refs interpretation, and the fact that football decisions are a matter of subjective opinion rather than objective, scientific fact.

Which is precisely why the whole notion of VAR, and ensuring we get decisions "right", is completely flawed.

[edison]

"Would lead to an absolutely ludicrous situation whereby it would be advantageous for a player on the edge of the box to try and smash the ball against someone's arm from close range"

Don't they allow similar in hockey - you can hit it into someone's legs? That being said, hockey is just awful

[Ashingtonclaret46]

You think there'd be no argument? No arguiment about whether or not the ball brushed the player's fingertip? No argument about whether the ball, controlled on the man's chest, also touched the inside of the arm? No argument about whether the ball flicking the sleeve counts as handball if the sleeve is flapping slightly away from the body? No argument when two players go for a header in a crowded area and the ball gets trapped between the two of them, whose hand it touched first on the way down?

There would be lots of arguments. Just different ones.

When I and Lancaster said "no argument" we were both referring to the Law being changed and saying that any handball will be penalised --anywhere on the pitch. There will always be argument, however, players, managers and fans will just have to accept the decision made by the official or changed by VAR.

Modern football is getting worse by the week, however, the modern fan wants everything correct and black and white which will never happen, however. it will spoil the game the longer the quest continues.

[edison]

If folk are still debating after countless replays, then the quest for everything correct and black and white will never happen, as you rightly point out

[Lancasterclaret]

There will always be arguments.

You know as well as I do that if exactly the same thing happens to Man United in the next round so they get knocked out, every single United fan will go berserk.

Rio Ferdinand was good on it last night, he's chuffed to bits that United have gone through (as I think we all are) but he can see the problems giving a penalty for that.

[NottsClaret]

Bizarre this cult of VAR. 'VAR got it right'.. 'VAR got it wrong'.. We need VAR / it's the worst thing ever.

We can't get away from talking about it like it's some sort of super computer, scientifically churning out decisions. It's just a telly. The ref will maybe pick up the odd absolute whopper but I reckon 95% of this stuff is down to opinion and interpretation anyway.

Those who want the new pitchside telly and three minute debate breaks will always say the ref got his opinion right, those against it will always mock the use of VAR. There's going to be a huge amount of pens next season, I know that much. Everything looks deliberate in slow motion.

[edison]

The Real-Ajax one the night before when they went back to look at whether the ball went out or not - that review took place a before the play actually stopped. Say Ajax had knocked the ball around for 3 mins before scoring - do they still go back?

[Lancasterclaret]

There's going to be a huge amount of pens next season, I know that much. Everything looks deliberate in slow motion.

This. This. This.

FIFA and the FA have to realise this surely?

[Spijed]

Is a player still allowed to use his hands to stop the ball from hitting him in the face?

[edison]

Is a player still allowed to use his hands to stop the ball from hitting him in the face?

Only if they are a complete fanny

[dsr]

This. This. This.

FIFA and the FA have to realise this surely?

It took rugby league two or three years to realise that you can't judge obstruction in slow motion. I doubt that the FA will be any quicker.

[Lancasterclaret]

True

One thing you can guarantee is that the FA won't listen to anyone who has experience with VAR.

[KateR]

I think it was a penalty, he turned his back, his elbow has a clear V to it and making himself bigger so if it hits his arm it's a penalty.

I remember a couple of our CD's saying that SD made them face the ball regardless and take the hit, make sure you know your in the way and yes it's going to hurt. Should never have turned his back, simples Ohh and just to confirm for some, I have never played the game at a high level but my eyesight is good and am not biased either way, not a Man U fan at all but will always cheer British clubs on against none British clubs, mmmm re-reading maybe I am biased lol.

[Hibsclaret]

Interesting that the PSG manager mentions the shot is not going in. This was also mentioned by Dermot on sky sports today.

It’s no wonder the rule becomes confused when the PSG manager doesn’t understand it. Whether a shot is on target has no relevance to a handball decision as far as I know....

I give Dermot a pass on this as he clarified that shot not being on target is irrelevant.

[Dark Cloud]

No way can the rule be amended so that EVERY time a ball strikes the hand it's hand ball or it will become common for players to constantly and deliberately leather balls at defenders from less than a yard away knowing full well that it will be blocked and when it strikes the defenders hand or arm a penalty will immediately be given. Surely that can't be right. I know there is some of that goes on even now, but ref's have the leeway (in theory) to say that's ball striking hand and no way could it be avoided. If you take that away, then it will become daft imo. (Just like the PSG one actually. That's clearly ball to hand and no way intentional and should never be awarded)

[Ashingtonclaret46]

No way can the rule be amended so that EVERY time a ball strikes the hand it's hand ball or it will become common for players to constantly and deliberately leather balls at defenders from less than a yard away knowing full well that it will be blocked and when it strikes the defenders hand or arm a penalty will immediately be given. Surely that can't be right. I know there is some of that goes on even now, but ref's have the leeway (in theory) to say that's ball striking hand and no way could it be avoided. If you take that away, then it will become daft imo. (Just like the PSG one actually. That's clearly ball to hand and no way intentional and should never be awarded)

It will happen ---along with every contact being penalised one way or another because it was dangerous to an opponent or some other excuse that they have yet to manufacture.

[Conroy92]

"Why did the defender turn his back? So that the ball might hit his "naturally positioned" arm perhaps. It's a pen"

This. Knew what he was doing, spread himself wider while turning. I wouldnt say deliberate, but more than accidental.
You'd be screaming at VAR if it wasn't given for us.

[Pstotto]

God knows what Arsenal ate on the plane but they must have had bad indigestion to take 3 Rennes.

[HiroshimaClaret]

God knows what Arsenal ate on the plane but they must have had bad indigestion to take 3 Rennes.

Struggling to digest how bad this pun/joke truly is!

[Pstotto]

Ok, Gav.

[JTClaret]

Never a pen for me. And VAR has done what VAR was brought in to stop happening - controversial decisions.
Which ever way is goes, the ref should only have 30secs viewing of the incident. If there are a couple of incidents, 30secs for each.
If a decision cannot be made after 30secs, the ref's initial decision stays.

Can't see how doing this wouldn't be fool-proof. Some decisions will be wrong, but only in some peoples view.
The ref in the PSG game took far longer than just viewing it, he watched it a few times in order to make a decision and not to see if he was right or wrong.