The Henderson Decision

[Folkestoneclaret]

Dion Dublin reckons he should have been sent off. Would probably have ruined a good game but officials can't take that into account. I thought as he was retreating into his area he might get some credit that he thought he was far enough back. The whole issue would be resolved if GKs committing fouls outside their box results in a penalty, if they're still in their own half.

[TPClaret]

Red card all day

[Quickenthetempo]

I didn't see the game yesterday but I have seen the clip today. Staggering decision.

The sort that gets people thinking football is corrupt.

It got me thinking to the interview with the Middlesbrough ref, who told the story about being awarded a cup final and the top brass warning him not to send anybody off

[dougcollins]

You have to decide if it was the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity. That's what the ref decided.

A keeper doesn't get an automatic red for handling outside the box.

[Leisure]

You have to decide if it was the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity. That's what the ref decided.

A keeper doesn't get an automatic red for handling outside the box.

I don't understand how it could not be considered a goal scoring opportunity? It's not as though it was at the side of the pen area and it was central and it was Haaland!

[Jakubclaret]

I don't understand how it could not be considered a goal scoring opportunity? It's not as though it was at the side of the pen area and it was central and it was Haaland!

When you have covering defenders it cannot be ascertained. You can't just assume haaland would have controlled it & I think lacroix wouldn't haven't intercepted. If you have nobody within close proximity fair enough then you only have 1 assumption with haaland control.

https://www.espn.co.uk/football/story/_ ... card-dogso

[claretspice]

Even if you accept there's a covering defender it's still an obvious goalscoring opportunity for Haaland once he's toed the ball past Henderson (and it still is if he's forced slightly wide). Same logic that applies if the foul/handball is by a defender and there is still the keeper to beat.

But for all it was the wrong decision by the rules, it was the best outcome for the game. In 10 years time everyone will remember that Palace broke the glass ceiling in 2025 and noone except City fans will recall that City should have had a parade against 10 men for 80 minutes.

And this is a great example of where VAR ruins the game by making an art mathematical. Pre VAR everyone agrees that Henderson is lucky but accepts it's a tricky split second call for the ref and perhaps he's ok to give the benefit of the doubt so early in the game, and it's quickly forgotten. No longer possible now and the game is poorer for it.

[NottsClaret]

The ref didn’t see it was outside the box did he? I thought they played on. So it’s entirely on the video ref this one, his call.

Anyway, that lad got a brilliant toe end on the ball that they got a penalty for, you win some, you lose some.

[Lip]

Well done VAR,Citeh have had more than their fair share of dodgy VAR decisions. Time the underdog got some dodgy decisions for a change. Great t see Citeh on the wrong end for a change.

[warksclaret]

If the game was corrupt it would have gone City's way

[Rileybobs]

I missed the game so caught the highlights last night and I must admit it wasn’t as clear cut as I expected from hearing the outrage. Haaland was running away from goal and toeing it even further away from goal, but the opposite argument is that if Henderson isn’t trying to palm the ball away then Haaland would have been able to knock the ball towards goal.

I believe the officials have to take into account the following;

-Distance between the offence and the goal
-General direction of the play
-Likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
-Location and number of defenders

Obviously the general direction of play and location and number of defenders have been enough for the VAR to deem it wasn’t an obvious goalscoring opportunity. I think on balance it was the incorrect decision, but I don’t think it was quite the howler that many are suggesting. Of course the implications of the decision were huge so I can understand the level of coverage.

[Woodleyclaret]

As we all know Gillette is not fit to referee so why think this fool is up to working VAR

[beddie]

Have I got this right then, var looked at it and spoke to the ref and basically decided to stick with the refs decision. In that discussion why did var not inform the ref whether it’s a goal scoring opportunity or not it’s still a clear handball outside the area. I’m confused. Red card all day long imo. I think Howard Webb has yet another embarrassing situation on his hands.

[FCBurnley]

They didn’t even give a free kick !! I know what the decision would be if it was Trafford at Anfield or whereever

[Rileybobs]

Have I got this right then, var looked at it and spoke to the ref and basically decided to stick with the refs decision. In that discussion why did var not inform the ref whether it’s a goal scoring opportunity or not it’s still a clear handball outside the area. I’m confused. Red card all day long imo. I think Howard Webb has yet another embarrassing situation on his hands.

The VAR didn’t feel it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

[NottsClaret]

I’m totally against VAR and happy Palace won. But surely their only intervention here should be to tell the ref he made a clear and obvious mistake in thinking the ball was inside the box?

Then he can look at it again knowing that, and make his own decision. Otherwise what’s the point of it?

[Roosterbooster]

Haaland was running away from goal

Only once Henderson pushed the ball away from goal

It's an absolute howler of a decision

You really have to look at the decision in the context of the play. If Henderson isn't there, it's a tap in. If Henderson stays back it's a simple one on one. Henderson gambles and commits a foul. So his effect on the play shouldn't be considered. As the only reason Haaland is running away from goal, or potentially toeing it away from goal, is because Henderson commits a foul. You can't reward a player for that

[taio]

Henderson was superb and in so many ways I'm glad he wasn't sent off. But he should've been red carded - huge mistake from the officials.

[Rileybobs]

Only once Henderson pushed the ball away from goal

It's an absolute howler of a decision

You really have to look at the decision in the context of the play. If Henderson isn't there, it's a tap in. If Henderson stays back it's a simple one on one. Henderson gambles and commits a foul. So his effect on the play shouldn't be considered. As the only reason Haaland is running away from goal, or potentially toeing it away from goal, is because Henderson commits a foul. You can't reward a player for that

That's not strictly true though, Haaland was definitely running away from goal and if he had connected with the ball his touch would have taken him further away from goal still. Henderson is entitled to be where he is to make Haaland go around him and away from goal, he isn't of course entitled to handle the ball outside the area. There were also defenders who would have been covering a subsequent shot at goal. So the VAR officials had to weigh up whether Haaland's direction of travel (definitely away from goal), and covering defenders prevented this from being an obvious goalscoring opportunity. Like I said, I think they got it wrong, but I don't agree in any way that it was a howler, and we know the bar is set a little higher if the decision is going against the on-field call (although that should probably be irrelevant as the on-field ref didn't even think it was a handball).

[Jakubclaret]

Only once Henderson pushed the ball away from goal

It's an absolute howler of a decision

You really have to look at the decision in the context of the play. If Henderson isn't there, it's a tap in. If Henderson stays back it's a simple one on one. Henderson gambles and commits a foul. So his effect on the play shouldn't be considered. As the only reason Haaland is running away from goal, or potentially toeing it away from goal, is because Henderson commits a foul. You can't reward a player for that

The ball was running loose & wild even without hendersons intervention maybe he would have controlled it maybe wouldn't have done we'll never know for sure. Couple that with covering defenders narrowing the angle it's not a forgone conclusion haaland would have scored.

[taio]

The ball was running loose & wild even without hendersons intervention maybe he would have controlled it maybe wouldn't have done we'll never know for sure. Couple that with covering defenders narrowing the angle it's not a forgone conclusion haaland would have scored.

It doesn't need to be a foregone conclusion to meet the threshold for a red card. It just needs to be a goal scoring opportunity that was denied.

[Jakubclaret]

It doesn't need to be a foregone conclusion to meet the threshold for a red card. It just needs to be a goal scoring opportunity that was denied.

It's only an instant red if it's a goal scoring opportunity which it wasn't deemed to be by VAR due to the factors I've mentioned. Henderson shouldn't have handled in my view it should have been a yellow card & a free kick to city.

[taio]

It's only an instant red if it's a goal scoring opportunity which it wasn't deemed to be by VAR due to the factors I've mentioned. Henderson shouldn't have handled in my view it should have been a yellow card & a free kick to city.

Yes, that's what I said - denying a goal scoring opportunity. I was saying it doesn't need to be a foregone conclusion, which is what you said. Of course, the officials thought a goal scoring opportunity wasn't denied, but many people think they were wrong - questioning their decision is the purpose of the thread.

[Rileybobs]

Yes, that's what I said - denying a goal scoring opportunity. I was saying it doesn't need to be a foregone conclusion, which is what you said. Of course, the officials thought a goal scoring opportunity wasn't denied, but many people think they were wrong - questioning their decision is the purpose of the thread.

The terminology is ‘obvious goalscoring opportunity’, but rather unhelpful, to my knowledge, this term isn’t defined in the laws of the game.

[taio]

The terminology is ‘obvious goalscoring opportunity’, but rather unhelpful, to my knowledge, this term isn’t defined in the laws of the game.

You're right - 'obvious' is part of the laws of the game and is key. It's subjective as you allude to but many people thought it was met.

[Jakubclaret]

Yes, that's what I said - denying a goal scoring opportunity. I was saying it doesn't need to be a foregone conclusion, which is what you said. Of course, the officials thought a goal scoring opportunity wasn't denied, but many people think they were wrong - questioning their decision is the purpose of the thread.

The fundamental problem is a lack of coordinated synergy between the referees & VAR in some scenarios if the ref initially misses something there's only so much VAR can do afterwards.

[fidelcastro]

Yet people tell us that there's a big club bias, apparently!

Maybe Man. City were never that big?

[taio]

The fundamental problem is a lack of coordinated synergy between the referees & VAR in some scenarios if the ref initially misses something there's only so much VAR can do afterwards.

I agree, but that doesn't mean it was the correct decision

[Jakubclaret]

I agree, but that doesn't mean it was the correct decision

Not in your opinion no but some people don't agree & think it was the correct decision. There is no right & wrong when people view & interpret things differently.

[taio]

Not in your opinion no but some people don't agree & think it was the correct decision. There is no right & wrong when people view & interpret things differently.

Yes, that's why it is being discussed

[Jakubclaret]

Yes, that's why it is being discussed

Of course.

[JimmyRobbo]

Red card.
Henderson doesn't touch it and Haaland is going to go through with a shot at goal.
At the time, I was glad they didn't send him off as it would have made it heavily in City's favour.

Still a red and I'd be fuming if it happened against us.

[NottsClaret]

A video ref wasn’t introduced to re-referee the game, just to help point out an obvious error. So in this case, that’s believing Henderson handled inside rather than outside the box. Just tell the ref that, then let him referee the game from there and make the decision.

A red card seems to be the general consensus but it’s still slightly subjective so it’s up to the on field ref make the call once he has the facts. I think he’d probably have changed his mind but it’s not totally black any white. A video ref will never achieve certainty, but if you are going to use one, then it’s for factual issues like it actually being handball in the first place, and not about whether it’s a clear goal scoring opportunity.

[FCBurnley]

Does anybody disagree that it was clearly handball outside the area ? If you think that then the decision was correct. If not then it was a free kick outside the box
If that was the decision then we move on to a yellow or red card

[taio]

Does anybody disagree that it was clearly handball outside the area ? If you think that then the decision was correct. If not then it was a free kick outside the box
If that was the decision then we move on to a yellow or red card

Nobody is suggesting it was inside the box. That's why people are discussing whether or not it should've been a red card.

[Owdsyker]

You have to decide if it was the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity. That's what the ref decided.

A keeper doesn't get an automatic red for handling outside the box.

The ref didn't decide anything, he waved play on. It was VAR made the decision.

[ALP]

This is what is wrecking our game, the inconsistent standards of the officials; he should have walked.

[beddie]

The VAR didn’t feel it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Okay so It was clearly handball which var could see, why not a yellow then?

[dougcollins]

The ref didn't decide anything, he waved play on. It was VAR made the decision.

This is the kind of decision that was always given by the linesman, they're so used to keeping their flag down now I'm not sure they even know what to do in this circumstance.

If the handball had been flagged, the ref has a straightforward DOGSO decision.

[taio]

Okay so It was clearly handball which var could see, why not a yellow then?

Presumably the ref thought it was inside the box and VAR can't award a yellow card.

[FCBurnley]

Nobody is suggesting it was inside the box. That's why people are discussing whether or not it should've been a red card.

I am not saying they are. But if the ref and VAR gave nothing then they must have agreed that it was handball by the keeper inside the box. Therefore play on . No free kick

[taio]

I am not saying they are. But if the ref and VAR gave nothing then they must have agreed that it was handball by the keeper inside the box. Therefore play on . No free kick

I'm sure the ref thought it was inside the box

VAR knew it was outside the box but didn't think Henderson denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity so their intervention stops at that point

[FCBurnley]

I'm sure the ref thought it was inside the box

VAR knew it was outside the box but didn't think Henderson denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity so their intervention stops at that point

If you are correct then the scope of VAR needs to be widened to cover any major errors by the referee. It should act as an extra pair of eyes to ensure correct decisions are made

[taio]

If you are correct then the scope of VAR needs to be widened to cover any major errors by the referee. It should act as an extra pair of eyes to ensure correct decisions are made

VAR considered if a major error had occurred and concluded it hadn't. I think VAR was wrong.

[beddie]

I'm sure the ref thought it was inside the box

VAR knew it was outside the box but didn't think Henderson denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity so their intervention stops at that point

So if VAR knew it was outside the box surely within that conversation after they’ve (var) decided Henderson didn't deny and obvious goal scoring opportunity the ref is told it’s still a hand ball outside the box though hence a yellow and free kick.

[dougcollins]

So if VAR knew it was outside the box surely within that conversation after they’ve (var) decided Henderson didn't deny and obvious goal scoring opportunity the ref is told it’s still a hand ball outside the box though hence a yellow and free kick.

I believe VAR could only intervene on a red.

[Jakubclaret]

VAR considered if a major error had occurred and concluded it hadn't. I think VAR was wrong.

By that same token some people think VAR were correct. We can discuss it & offer reasoning for our stances but we are just going circular with it all. It's got to the stage now some people are that opposed to VAR are picking up on every miniscule mistake although the magnitude of this was different. Next season will be bags of fun with VAR taking centre stage.

[taio]

So if VAR knew it was outside the box surely within that conversation after they’ve (var) decided Henderson didn't deny and obvious goal scoring opportunity the ref is told it’s still a hand ball outside the box though hence a yellow and free kick.

No, VAR just decides if the ref has made a clear and obvious error and whether to ask him to undertake a video review for a sending off or not. VAR would not advise the ref to award a free kick or give a yellow card.

[taio]

By that same token some people think VAR were correct. We can discuss it & offer reasoning for our stances but we are just going circular with it all. It's got to the stage now some people are that opposed to VAR are picking up on every miniscule mistake although the magnitude of this was different. Next season will be bags of fun with VAR taking centre stage.

I accept that some people don't think it should've been a red card. I happen to think it wasn't a minuscule VAR error.

[Jakubclaret]

I accept that some people don't think it should've been a red card. I happen to think it wasn't a minuscule VAR error.

Sometimes you don't need to be so militant enforcing the rules just apply common sense for the greater good.