Search results

Leicester 0-0 Wolves. Visitors had a goal disallowed by VAR for handball in the build up. https://www.skysports.com/football/leicester-vs-wolves/407985 Highlight video in that article. Corner played in, two wolves players jump to head it, one heads it onto the arm of the other, one of them is...

Yup.

PA system. That applies to two grounds, I believe, but can't remember the other one.

Former players are great for discussions on tactics, what it's like on the pitch, and how they think the rules should be. They are not great for how the laws are, or how the lawmakers want them applied. Lineker also falls into the tv host category, where controversy is king, if he comes on and...

No I haven't. I've proved the point 'daylight' with offsides is nonsense. That is not the same as 'part of the body with which you can legally score a goal being closest to the goal'. Edit to clarify: Think of two different size Xs. You can overlap them so that the points (the end of the lines)...

The law doesn't say offside is the moment the ball leaves the player's foot, but the moment the player 'plays' the ball. This encapsulates the whole moment of kicking it, from the fraction of a second between contact starting and finishing, and probably can be argued to include that moment...

The whole 'daylight' thing is a vaguery some fans suggest should be part of the law that doesn't factor in angles, body shape, and sll sorts of things that can lead to daylight between players in very tight decisions anyway. It's nonsense and people should just ignore it as an idea to add to the...

From SSN Premier League VAR: Showing its teeth on opening weekend

Because you're not offside based on the lines of the pitch, but by comparison to the other players.

?? You asked why there was no retake of the second penalty, I pointed out it was because there was no benefit to the 'cheating', you claimed you understood that but then went off on one about benefiting the attacking team and pinpoint accuracy, which is completely irrelevant to why the second...

I'm not sure you do understand (or you are linking a second issue to this one which isn't really relevant to your initial question) because it's not about benefit of the attacking team. It's about the impact of the infringement - in this instant the defending team infringing the laws didn't stop...

Because he didn't save it? I haven't checked recently, but in recent seasons when it came to penalties if you didn't benefit from an infringement it didn't matter - if the defenders encroach, but the penalty is scored they just get on with it, if the attackers encroach, but miss, just play on.

Can you really judge that with Man City v anyone outside the top 6? They're so used to scoring, and aren't exactly being troubled by west ham, it's a bit of a stroll.

Yes, it is. The video shows he is, by the current definition of the law, offside. You cannot score a goal if you are offside. To allow a goal to stand when you know a player is offside is a clear and obvious error. The offside itself is marginal, but that's not where 'clear and obvious' is...