Robbie Keane- what else should we expect from him

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sinkov

So now you're saying that the referee and VAR get it right every time ? The fact that they see it differently to me just makes me more sure I'm probably right.

I'm not sure why you would think Docherty was making a block, he wasn't between Wood and the goal so there was no possibilty of blocking the shot. It looks clear to me that Docherty was challenging for the ball with his head, as he is perfectly entitled to do, as the ball was arriving at head height, Wood's boot was six foot off the ground and put Docherty in danger. Six feet up in the air is header territory, if a player chooses to put his boot up there the onus is on him to ensure it's safe, not the player attempting to head the ball.

I've no idea how they work these days, or what their thinking is at any given moment, but is it possible they saw two offences, a handball and dangerous play, but could only penalise one, and chose to penalise the handball ?

---

sinkov-- you know my views on VAR! All I will say is that, had I been refereeing, I would have given the handball because Wood made no contact with anything but the ball hit Doherty on the hand and stopped its progress. In the modern interpretation, his arm was up in the air in an unnatural positon, which I also personally disagree with, however, in the modern game it is handball.

We will disagree which is fair enough, however, I considered it be an excellent spot by Mike Dean because a lot of people watching were not aware that it was handball ---until the dreaded VAR got involved. Remember that, if this incident had happened on any English League ground outside of the PL, the penalty was given by the referee spotting a handball and who did not consider that there was dangerous play. You would still disagree with the decision and I would still agree with it ---VAR does not even come into the equation --it is merely you and I that have a difference of opinion which still happens on football grounds all over the country ---when they let the fans back in!

The sky pundits have just emphatically stated that it was dangerous play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abbobrom

The sky pundits have just emphatically stated that it was dangerous play.

---

That shows without doubt that a penalty was the correct decision.

Behave Supersub6

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abbobrom

Behave Supersub6

---

I watch games on the TV with the sound turned off and listen to my vinyl collection simply because I just can't stand the piffle that 99% of the commentators and pundits spout. The problem is that, with the way the modern game is going, their piffle just gets worse!
I suppose that they all have the same amount of refereeing experience that Mike Dean has. >;)
Take care abbobrom and don't believe all you hear on any sports show!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersub6

That shows without doubt that a penalty was the correct decision.

---

Lol! >:)

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by abbobrom

The sky pundits have just emphatically stated that it was dangerous play.

---

thats nice for them - abbo....but they're just the willing slaves of Xerxes - who'll say anything to promote themselves and undermine the minority voices of Leonidas....We, decide for ourselves, dont we ?

;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supersub6

sinkov-- you know my views on VAR! All I will say is that, had I been refereeing, I would have given the handball because Wood made no contact with anything but the ball hit Doherty on the hand and stopped its progress. In the modern interpretation, his arm was up in the air in an unnatural positon, which I also personally disagree with, however, in the modern game it is handball.

We will disagree which is fair enough, however, I considered it be an excellent spot by Mike Dean because a lot of people watching were not aware that it was handball ---until the dreaded VAR got involved. Remember that, if this incident had happened on any English League ground outside of the PL, the penalty was given by the referee spotting a handball and who did not consider that there was dangerous play. You would still disagree with the decision and I would still agree with it ---VAR does not even come into the equation --it is merely you and I that have a difference of opinion which still happens on football grounds all over the country ---when they let the fans back in!

---

Sub, I have no problem with the handball decision, if I'd have been refereeing, like you and Mr Dean I would have given it, it was correct under the current interpretation of the laws, but I wouldn't be refereeing, I couldn't referee a game of football which was played under the current handball laws, they're drafted by morons who haven't a clue what they're doing, and I'd chuck my whistle and little black book onto the back of the fire before I'd ref a game with these joke laws. Honestly I don't know how they manage to look so serious at some of the decisions they have to give, I'd be 'sorry lads, it's ludicrous I know, but I have to give it' and cracking up laughing. But I feel for the players, training hard all week to be stiffed by ludicrous laws on a Saturday, it's no joke for them.

But I digress, where we differ is on dangerous play, I wouldn't have hesitated to give a free-kick against Wood, you wouldn't have given it, which is fine because 'dangerous play' is subjective, each person, ref, fan or player can, and probably will, have a different opinion on whether any given incident is dangerous or not. So we can quite safely disagree on this, neither of us can be proved right or wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sinkov

Sub, I have no problem with the handball decision, if I'd have been refereeing, like you and Mr Dean I would have given it, it was correct under the current interpretation of the laws, but I wouldn't be refereeing, I couldn't referee a game of football which was played under the current handball laws, they're drafted by morons who haven't a clue what they're doing, and I'd chuck my whistle and little black book onto the back of the fire before I'd ref a game with these joke laws. Honestly I don't know how they manage to look so serious at some of the decisions they have to give, I'd be 'sorry lads, it's ludicrous I know, but I have to give it' and cracking up laughing. But I feel for the players, training hard all week to be stiffed by ludicrous laws on a Saturday, it's no joke for them.

But I digress, where we differ is on dangerous play, I wouldn't have hesitated to give a free-kick against Wood, you wouldn't have given it, which is fine because 'dangerous play' is subjective, each person, ref, fan or player can, and probably will, have a different opinion on whether any given incident is dangerous or not. So we can quite safely disagree on this, neither of us can be proved right or wrong.

---

Enough sinkov. It was a penalty for Christ's sake, get over it!

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bedlington Terrier

It was a penalty for Christ's sake.

---

as previous - I dont think Docherty was in any danger - so dont see how he could have been protecting himself with his arm - which is why I dont consider Woods attempted overhead as dangerous.
So it was handball ?.....not Exactly , because it is possible that Docherty could have thought to protect himself from what he thought could have been a danger to him - so can choose either - but noone will be absolute - six of one, choose neither.

.


.

https://img.ifunny.co/images/542ce92...ca631987_1.gif


;D