Your verdict on VAR

[swaledale]

[QUOTE=MadAmster;39407057]

It is, indeed the new Law/interpretation, that, rightly, according to that Law/interpretation, saw the goal disallowed. The chances are the ref didnt see the handball and VAR put that right.

Change the Law back so it's down to the ref to decide if any handball was intentional or not. The most ludicrous element of the current situation is that there are 2 different handball Laws in effect. One for defenders and one for attackers. There should be ONE Law and that should apply to everybody.

I'm at a loss as to how one would coach todays kids re handball! What is it about rule makers that they have to make a fairly simple game more complicated?

[MadAmster]

Simple one that Swale, it has to be seen to be intentional UNLESS your team is in possession, the ball hits the arm of a team mate and a goal is scored, then each and every ball/hand contact becomes an offence. You coach them to play the way they always do and taht accidents WILL happen and what we all think are perfectly good goals will be ruled out. I wouldn't spend (waste?) any time coaching players re this ludicrous new handball Law. It's impossible to factor in accidents in a coaching strategy. I also think the Law might be changed for next season. Hopefully in time for the Euros this summer.

West Ham will be upset about their disallowed late equaliser yesterday ar Bramall Lane. Following the letter of the Law the goal was rightly denied. Rice got an advantage from the hand/arm contact but it was totally accidental. Last season the goal would have stood, even with VAR.

[ramAnag]

Simple one that Swale, it has to be seen to be intentional UNLESS your team is in possession, the ball hits the arm of a team mate and a goal is scored, then each and every ball/hand contact becomes an offence. You coach them to play the way they always do and taht accidents WILL happen and what we all think are perfectly good goals will be ruled out. I wouldn't spend (waste?) any time coaching players re this ludicrous new handball Law. It's impossible to factor in accidents in a coaching strategy. I also think the Law might be changed for next season. Hopefully in time for the Euros this summer.

West Ham will be upset about their disallowed late equaliser yesterday ar Bramall Lane. Following the letter of the Law the goal was rightly denied. Rice got an advantage from the hand/arm contact but it was totally accidental. Last season the goal would have stood, even with VAR.

Would it have stood last season? Can understand West Ham being upset but to me the key phrase is ‘got an advantage from the hand/arm’. Rice undeniably benefited from the ball touching his arm. I know it was accidental but the goal wouldn’t have been scored without the ball being briefly controlled by the arm...so seems harsh but an ‘advantage’ was gained by the ball hitting the arm. If it was intentional, which it wasn’t, the player should have been booked. Otherwise couldn’t one argue that exactly the right decision was reached?

[Rob_the_Ram]

It should be handball if the on field ref gives handball. If he doesn’t, then it’s not.
Maybe if a clear and obvious error, maybe should intervene.
But EVERYTHING slowed down and replayed multiple times becomes clear and obvious in the eyes of the VARs.

I’d rather stay in the Championship and watch proper football than the pantomime that VAR in the Prem.

Cheering VAR decisions 5 minutes AFTER the “incident” ain’t my idea of football!

[swaledale]

Would it have stood last season? Can understand West Ham being upset but to me the key phrase is ‘got an advantage from the hand/arm’. Rice undeniably benefited from the ball touching his arm. I know it was accidental but the goal wouldn’t have been scored without the ball being briefly controlled by the arm...so seems harsh but an ‘advantage’ was gained by the ball hitting the arm. If it was intentional, which it wasn’t, the player should have been booked. Otherwise couldn’t one argue that exactly the right decision was reached?

Under the current rules yes the correct decision was reached. Back when I coached youngsters handball (admittedly at least 3 decades ago)was defined as a player deliberately using his hand or arm to control or influence the ball.

So if a ball hits you and you don't move the hand or arm it wasn't handball. There was then a change which meant that if a players hand or arm was in an "unnatural position" i.e. stuck out away from the body or above ones head that was handball, so players didn't just hold their arms out etc. to block shots.

This rule that has been introduced basically requires an examination of every incident where a ball hits an arm or hand to determine whether there was any advantage gained irrespective of whether it was intentional or accidental. In a fast moving game like football, the dynamics are such that we will see countless goals disallowed due to this and what next? Do we then move onto reviewing every tackle to see whether it was fair?

The whole thing is making football a joke and if it continues not only will it not be a spectacle not worth watching on TV, nobody other than die hard fans will want to go.

[MadAmster]

Would it have stood last season? Can understand West Ham being upset but to me the key phrase is ‘got an advantage from the hand/arm’. Rice undeniably benefited from the ball touching his arm. I know it was accidental but the goal wouldn’t have been scored without the ball being briefly controlled by the arm...so seems harsh but an ‘advantage’ was gained by the ball hitting the arm. If it was intentional, which it wasn’t, the player should have been booked. Otherwise couldn’t one argue that exactly the right decision was reached?

Until this ludicrous change, Rice's handball would not have been an offence. In fact, to show how ludicrous this new Law is, part of the new rules out handball by naming the following exceptions....

It is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

As you can see, what happened around the halfway line is actually ruled OUT as handball UNLESS a goal results from it.........

How ludicrous is that?

[ramAnag]

Until this ludicrous change, Rice's handball would not have been an offence. In fact, to show how ludicrous this new Law is, part of the new rules out handball by naming the following exceptions....

It is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

As you can see, what happened around the halfway line is actually ruled OUT as handball UNLESS a goal results from it.........

How ludicrous is that?

It’s difficult and I completely accept Rob and Swales’ points about VAR spoiling the game because supporters now celebrate those decisions more than the spontaneity of the original ‘goal’ eg...Leicester v Southampton on Saturday.

On the other hand and returning to the disallowed West Ham goal...had the referee actually spotted the accidental but beneficial hand ball - and imo it is totally understandable that he didn’t - would it have been hailed as a brilliant ‘spot’ or a piece of harsh and unnecessary interference?

Ultimately, if we’re going to use technology in football as it is in other sports, then all that matters is that the right decision is reached.
In this case the goal was only scored because Rice’s arm inadvertently gave him an advantage over the defender. Blades’ fans were of course delighted...West Ham’s distraught, but wouldn’t that have been the case in reverse had VAR not been used and isn’t that the price of having each and every incident scrutinised and almost forensically examined by TV ‘experts’?

If the goal had ‘stood’ the same argument would be taking place, albeit in reverse. Can’t have it both ways.

[MadAmster]

It’s difficult and I completely accept Rob and Swales’ points about VAR spoiling the game because supporters now celebrate those decisions more than the spontaneity of the original ‘goal’ eg...Leicester v Southampton on Saturday.

On the other hand and returning to the disallowed West Ham goal...had the referee actually spotted the accidental but beneficial hand ball - and imo it is totally understandable that he didn’t - would it have been hailed as a brilliant ‘spot’ or a piece of harsh and unnecessary interference?

Ultimately, if we’re going to use technology in football as it is in other sports, then all that matters is that the right decision is reached.
In this case the goal was only scored because Rice’s arm inadvertently gave him an advantage over the defender. Blades’ fans were of course delighted...West Ham’s distraught, but wouldn’t that have been the case in reverse had VAR not been used and isn’t that the price of having each and every incident scrutinised and almost forensically examined by TV ‘experts’?

If the goal had ‘stood’ the same argument would be taking place, albeit in reverse. Can’t have it both ways.

As I explained, or tried to in any case, is that the incident itself ISN'T handball itself so it is irrelevant whether the ref saw it or not. There was, initially, no offence committed................ until the ball went in the net. As with all goals, VAR looked at it and saw the arm/ball contact which ruled out the goal.

All that happened, happened under the remit of VAR. IMO it's not VAR that is at fault, it's the stupidity of having a Law stating that handball directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot) or directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close IS NOT handball unless a goal occurs in that move.......... IMO it's handball or it's not..... none of this double standards guff.

There's not a lot wrong with VAR as it is used elsewhere in the world. The issue is how the FA has decided to implement it. FIFA needs to change the handball Law again and the FA has to start using VAR i the same way everybody else does and that includes the ridiculous use of the technology that allows offside decisions of 1mm to be reached. Other countries don't have that technology as they can't afford it and that leaves the game very close to what it was pre VAR.

[Geoff Parkstone]

There is something of a baby and bathwater characteristic to our version of VAR. If you want the positives of elimination of fundamental error, the you open yourself up to the nit picking of marginal offsides, questionable handball, minor fouls etc.

For years we have been moaning about blind refs missing things: now it's overly picky cameras spotting too many minor transgressions.

Which do we want? Refs missing things or tech finding things that no ref can see? The mindset of fans perhaps needs to change - never celebrate till VAR confirms. Thus we lose all spontaneity in the game.

Personally, I'd sooner accept the odd refereeing blunder if this incarnation of VAR is the future.

[MadAmster]

Personally, I'd sooner accept the odd refereeing blunder if this incarnation of VAR is the future.

Oh, if only it was only the "odd refereeing blunder". We have had so many utter garbage refs this season it makes me want VAR now not when we get promoted.