TeaCider
Well-known member
The ball sailed over them both because Mount was barged to the floor.
Definite goal scoring opportunity.
Sorry another VAR thread
- Thread starter Ste43
- Start date
The ball sailed over them both because Mount was barged to the floor.
Definite goal scoring opportunity.
SmallTown
Well-known member
It went through a rocky period. Where refs were too scared to make decisisons so they refered everything to the TMO but things have settled down now. It seems so much better. It's really fluid now and you soon get used to the reviews.
The only bad point, is that now fans are trying to influence decisisons. If someone has doen a high tackl,e, for example, the opposing fans will over react with oooos and boos to try and make it look worse.
The law states Clear Goal Scoring Opportunity. It was never that. It was 3 ft over their heads and moving at pace. Neither of them would have got anywhere near it even if the other wasn't there.
Andy_W
Well-known member
It wasn't the same situation, that was on the sideline, near the halfway line, not denying a clear goalscoring opportunity.
The double jeopardy covers the goalscoring opportunity law, where players won't be red-carded for a bad tackle/ foul, but only if they're going for the ball, which he clearly wasn't as he wasn't even looking at it when he fouled him.
It was the same situation. You are mixing up 2 rules. It wasn't a Clear Goal Scoring Opportunity otherwise that would have been a red. Double jeopardy rule is only for attempts to play the ball. It was a yellow for the same reason Chiellini's was or the same had it been anywhere else on the pitch.
TeaCider
Well-known member
It wasn't treated as a clear goal scoring opportunity, but it should have been, as it definitely was one.
It should have been a red.
The ref didn't even deem it a foul until his hand was forced, so I'm not surprised he got yet another thing wrong in the match.
Andy_W
Well-known member
One was in the box, in the middle of the goal, the other was 50 yards away.
Sure, you can say that he wouldn't have got the ball, which you don't know of course, but Mount wasn't even running at full speed, as he knew he could get it. If Mount could have got anything on that, without being fouled then it's a goalscoring opportunity. The ball was looped in on a fairly high angle, and wasn't exactly going quickly either.
I just think the ref blew it, he was concentrating too much on whether it was a foul, and that he would need to change his decision, not considering the full circumstances.
Once you discount the DGSO then it is the same situation wherever they are on the pitch.
As the images show. The ball travels from the point of impact, 6ft above their heads on the 16 yard line to bouncing at around the 8/9 yard mark in about 0.25 of a second. Mount is not Usain Bolt with rocket boosters. He had no chance of getting the ball. It was in no way a clear opportunity. They got this decision spot on.
VAR did its job perfectly. The referee missed it, VAR picked it up and awarded the correct punishments (penalty and yellow card).
changingman
Well-known member
Not sure I'm in favour challenges - surely a winning team could game it by chucking spurious challenges in to disrupt the play? I know I would.
Greater transparency would be welcomed however, they don't even justify the decisions retrospectively as far as I can see (when any balls up could be "explained away").
I must admit in real time I thought Mount had dived, presumably the ref did too. Clear as day on VAR though so the system works. Never a red for the reasons above. It really was an unbelievably stupid challenge by Hernandez, given Mount was nowhere near it.
Greater transparency would be welcomed however, they don't even justify the decisions retrospectively as far as I can see (when any balls up could be "explained away").
I must admit in real time I thought Mount had dived, presumably the ref did too. Clear as day on VAR though so the system works. Never a red for the reasons above. It really was an unbelievably stupid challenge by Hernandez, given Mount was nowhere near it.
TeaCider
Well-known member
The ball is right in front of him when he's on the ground after being shoved sideways, if he's still running at full speed, he definitely had a clear chance of getting that ball.
So a red card.
VAR did half a job, after a number of errors in the first half too.
It's not right in front, it's about 3 yards.
FabioPorkpie
Well-known member
The simple solution is to get rid of VAR and crack on with the beautiful game as it was for more than a century, when it established itself as the most popular sport in the world.
Moan about refs down the pub after the game and get worked up about them in the spirit of the pantomime during the game, but let the game be played and let the spontaneous joy of football continue.
All the meddling on the pitch and the whole sorry VAR situation simply isn’t necessary.
Football isn’t perfect on the pitch, but it’s not broken.
It’s off the pitch where the real problems are and that’s where the energy to fix things should be focussed.
Last edited:
ska66
Well-known member
In rugby the ref makes a decision and then goes to the TV Ref if he has something he wants checking.
In football it seems the other way round, the TV ref goes and tells the on field ref what to do. The on field officials dont seem in control anymore.
used to be a goal goes in, you have a quick look at the ref, quick look at linesman celebrate. Now its a goal goes in look at ref, wait ten minutes see if the linesman puts his delayed flag up, then wait for another bunch of refs in front of a tv to nit pick and try and find a reason to disallow it. then get round to celebrating. Its sucking the spontaneous enjoyment out of the game.
In football it seems the other way round, the TV ref goes and tells the on field ref what to do. The on field officials dont seem in control anymore.
used to be a goal goes in, you have a quick look at the ref, quick look at linesman celebrate. Now its a goal goes in look at ref, wait ten minutes see if the linesman puts his delayed flag up, then wait for another bunch of refs in front of a tv to nit pick and try and find a reason to disallow it. then get round to celebrating. Its sucking the spontaneous enjoyment out of the game.
Fearless Fish
Active member
I didn't celebrate our goal against Man Utd last season as I was utterly convinced VAR would rule it out for Watmore's handball.
Scrote
Well-known member
Nano - from your own images the ball is clearly within heading distance for Mount even if he might have been stretching to reach it with his feet.
i've resized the image on the left so that the red line extending from the six-yard box over the darker green stripe is ~100px in both images (your original on the right is ~20% larger than the image in the middle).
If you look at the distance covered by the other defenders and assume Mount was going no faster (conservative estimate IMO), then the the middle image shows where mount would have been had he not been fouled.
The ball (bearing in mind 2d doesn't show trajectory properly) is in and around head-height (blue line) well before the end of Mounts predicted path.
Regardless of the definition of DGSO, the ball definitely wasn't gong to be 3 yards away from him.
From the extract of the laws, above, i'm pretty sure a red card wouldn't have been rescinded had one been given.
Corco65
Well-known member
If people want absolute correct decisions within the laws of the game, all of the time then referrees will need VAR and more.
If on the other hand, people accept that on occasions the officials always have and always will get it wrong sometimes and in some cases it will go in your favour and sometimes it will go against you, that's football and is very often subjective as to what has happened and why in that split second, although most fans much further away and with a more limited knowledge of the laws of the game then the officials, often know what has really happened.
The only situation to worry about for me is if an official is corrupt and is deliberately making wrong decisions. Other than that, it is what it is, wrong decsions on ocassions are part and parcel of the game, i accept and expect it, human errror and human judgement with the best of intentions, thankfully the vast majority of decisions throughout a game are correct, sit back and enjoy the game.
If on the other hand, people accept that on occasions the officials always have and always will get it wrong sometimes and in some cases it will go in your favour and sometimes it will go against you, that's football and is very often subjective as to what has happened and why in that split second, although most fans much further away and with a more limited knowledge of the laws of the game then the officials, often know what has really happened.
The only situation to worry about for me is if an official is corrupt and is deliberately making wrong decisions. Other than that, it is what it is, wrong decsions on ocassions are part and parcel of the game, i accept and expect it, human errror and human judgement with the best of intentions, thankfully the vast majority of decisions throughout a game are correct, sit back and enjoy the game.
Malaguena
Well-known member
.... and then Saka fell over looking for a foul which rightly wasn't given.
Just about every attacking player does it now if they lose control of the ball - we only have to look at our own No2 to see a master of the art
It does happen, and it happened in this World Cup twice. One was the Ghana Uruguay match, when the ref was asked to watch a possible penalty. He decided he hadn't made a CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR so stuck with his decision.
Was the Saka incident a clear and obvious error? It might have been a foul, or possibly not. Hard to say, so not a clear and obvious error. Ditto the possible Kane penalty.
The Mason Mount penalty was a clear and obvious error. Very few people thought Mount was going to reach the ball, so not DOGSO. But it was a penalty and a yellow.
Refs are human. They make mistakes just like players. It's impossible to ref without having to be subjective so some will always disagree. But when you see incidents back, I think most refs get it right most of the time. VAR should be a tool to help refs. They still have the final say, so no danger of games being reffed from a tv studio for the time being.
Rofesleg
Well-known member
Really?
I didn't celebrate because it seemed an obvious handball in real time. If they hadn't changed the law a few months before it would have been disallowed straight away. Nothing to do with VAR.
Muttley
Well-known member
Everything to do with VAR. When Crooks scored the winner on Saturday, no flag from the lino, ref allows it... go mental. With the Watmore one in the absence of VAR it would be like when Hasselbaink scored against the Gerodies by punching it in with his first, celebrate straight away and later laugh about having got away with one. VAR robs us of that moment.