This ain't football any more

[mellowmiller]

A question about the rules of the game regarding handball, accidental or not, with regards to a goal being disallowed or a penalty being given?.
We have seen goals disallowed this season on review from VAR when the ball has been accidentally handled ,either by a goalscorer or in the build up to the goal, and it gets automatically ruled out, like the West Ham goal at Bramall Lane the other week.
Am I correct in saying that if a defender handles in the same way, it isn't a penalty unless his arm is in an unnatural position?

Yes you are correct. There have been a few VAR reviews where a defender has handled the ball in the area but a penalty has not been given because it was deemed to be accidental. On the other hand (pun intended) "goals" are always disallowed if the ball hits someone's hand in the build up whether accidental or not. How can you have one rule for defenders and another for attackers? It's nonsensical!

[Ronners]

Not only is that right that different positions are playing different rules. Shrewsbury scored a goal that was disallowed at Anfield that would've stood at their home ground.

How do you mean scum?

[Scum-Triumphant]

How do you mean scum?

VAR was not used/available in the 2-2 at New Meadow. It was in the replay at Anfield. Same game, same teams, same competition, different sets of rules.

[mellowmiller]

How do you mean scum?

I think he means because there would have been no VAR at Shrewsbury's ground.
It surely can't be right that VAR is applied only at Premier League grounds in the FA Cup, another example of dual standards and possibly proof that it is actually the Premier League that runs football and not the FA.

[mellowmiller]

Sorry Scum, you beat me to it 🙂

[Ronners]

Yes you are correct. There have been a few VAR reviews where a defender has handled the ball in the area but a penalty has not been given because it was deemed to be accidental. On the other hand (pun intended) "goals" are always disallowed if the ball hits someone's hand in the build up whether accidental or not. How can you have one rule for defenders and another for attackers? It's nonsensical!

Thought so mellow thanks, so basically we have 2 different interpretations of handball that are both weighted to stop goals being scored.

[Ronners]

I think he means because there would have been no VAR at Shrewsbury's ground.
It surely can't be right that VAR is applied only at Premier League grounds in the FA Cup, another example of dual standards and possibly proof that it is actually the Premier League that runs football and not the FA.

Ah ok I see, thanks.

[caytonmiller]

The only time VAR should be called on is if there is a "clear and obvious error" otherwise the referees verdict should stand. .

Who decides This? I'm presuming you want the var team to watch the game and only contact the ref when he makes a clear mistake. Again it's down to interpretation so why would it be any different to how it is now? You would still get fans/managers/players ect moaning about why var didn't give this or that ect and you would also get
"Why has var stopped the game for that, was it really clear and obvious"?

[Ronners]

VAR was not used/available in the 2-2 at New Meadow. It was in the replay at Anfield. Same game, same teams, same competition, different sets of rules.

I suppose it could have worked in shrewsburys favour also, but its certainly not fair that some grounds have it and others don't.

[caytonmiller]

Our ground has the technology in place so it may not be long before we get to see it first hand.