And again

[andyBeaker]

Players receive bonuses & sponsorship, if they keep making mistakes they are dropped so lose out on their bonus & sponsors don’t want to pay someone to sit on their arse, refs are paid whatever so no incentive for them to perform, yes I know some get relegated but this is seldom.
There is nothing subjective about a player reaching up & knocking the ball out with his hand or as in the first shout, leaning over & knocking the ball out with his arm.

Ah, but you are wrong. Players have zero incentive to perform if they don’t feel like it due to the ridiculous Bosman ruling.

All handballs are subjective around guidance given by IFAB.

You could play the identical game ten times with ten different referees and you would get ten different sets of decisions . It’s the nature of the beast.

Speaking for myself it was a very rare event when I finished a game without wondering if I I had made an incorrect decision. It’s the nature of the best.

 

[andyBeaker]

derek kelly I have just watched the two incidents for the first time .

The first one to me was more a penalty than the second BUT it was a subjective call and the speed of the incident worked against the referee. He could only give it if he was a) certain and b) of the opinion it was a deliberate movement (although it does not have to be deliberate) and the arm was in an unnatural position. I totally get why it wasn’t given on both of these aspects plus the speed of the incident.

For the second one there is no way that the referee could categorically say that the ball hit the hand. It is easy to say categorically that it did with seventeen slow motion replays from different angles (and I personally think it did) but real time from two angles (including the assistant) very difficult. Bizarrely to me a penalty might have been awarded for the shirt pulling on Bamford but most aren’t given as both sides are normally at it one way or another. The defender was playing with fire though.

Would VAR have made a difference? Yes I think for both the referee would have been recommended to have another look but both would still be subjective and the referee may or may not have changed his mind. Personally I woukd almost certainly not have given either real time but I woukd have given the first after a review. No way the second for handball but maybe for the shirt pulling.

 

[derek kelly]

It was the shirt pulling that I called “possible” the second one was obvious & the third one was blatant, O’Nien’s hand was raised above Rodon’s head, it was clear by the trajectory of the ball that it his his hand, VAR should (not saying would as the operators are as bad) tell the ref to have another look, most cases when that happens the ref reverses his decision.

 

[andyBeaker]

It was the shirt pulling that I called “possible” the second one was obvious & the third one was blatant, O’Nien’s hand was raised above Rodon’s head, it was clear by the trajectory of the ball that it his his hand, VAR should (not saying would as the operators are as bad) tell the ref to have another look, most cases when that happens the ref reverses his decision.

No it wasn’t blatant. Real time it could have hit the Leeds players head, no hand involved.

 

[Duck n Dive]

I'm not convinced he raised his hand. To me it looks more like his arm got dragged into the air by Rodon jumping.

 

[Oldandbald]

I've reviewed both incidents in detail and decided that I couldn't give a fuck. You footballists are either moaning because VAR is operative and delaying games or moaning because it isn't and split second decisions are being called incorrectly.

Stick to rugby.

 

[derek kelly]

No it wasn’t blatant. Real time it could have hit the Leeds players head, no hand involved.

Only a ref would say it’s not blatant,

 

[andyBeaker]

Only a ref would say it’s not blatant,

Yes I agree…balanced, realistic and unbiased view.

 

[Malone]

Did he put his hand up to be excused?

 

[derek kelly]

Yes I agree…balanced, realistic and unbiased view.

That post should be in the daily smile thread.

 

[andyBeaker]

As I said above if everyone knew the Laws their wouldn’t be so much total garbage spouted…

Disallowed Wolves goal was correct decision - panel

The Key Match Incidents Panel, which reviews refereeing decisions, backs the decision to disallow Wolves' equaliser against West Ham.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[derek kelly]

As I said above if everyone knew the Laws their wouldn’t be so much total garbage spouted…

Disallowed Wolves goal was correct decision - panel

The Key Match Incidents Panel, which reviews refereeing decisions, backs the decision to disallow Wolves' equaliser against West Ham.

www.bbc.co.uk

The panel only has one referee, the rest are former players or coaches. Who in your words “don’t know the rules”

 

[andyBeaker]

The panel only has one referee, the rest are former players or coaches. Who in your words “don’t know the rules”

Everyone and their dog who was saying it should not have been disallowed.

’Laws’, not ‘rules’ by the way.

 

[derek kelly]

Everyone and their dog who was saying it should not have been disallowed.

’Laws’, not ‘rules’ by the way.

Even the panel of “haven’t a clues”