[Football] Handball or nah?

Acker79

Well-known member

NSC Patron

Nov 15, 2008

31,915

Brighton

• Jul 12, 2020

• #21

Absolutely the correct decision. We need to congratulate the refs when they get them right and not create a pile on to push agendas.

I reserve the right to the opposite opinion when it is anyone other than palace.

 

Jeremiah

God is great

Mar 15, 2020

2,211

Hove

• Jul 12, 2020

• #22

Not handball in my opinion but it appears to strike the same area of the player that meant the Harry Kane goal was disallowed at Sheff U - so consistent I guess

 

Miami Seagull

Grandad

Jul 12, 2003

1,465

Miami Florida, USA

• Jul 12, 2020

• #23

This season that is handball. Rule changes next season and anything above a short sleeve, i.e. top of the arm and shoulder will be ok. Not this season though. Which, in this case, is good news.

 

B

b.w.2.

Well-known member

Jan 8, 2004

5,182

• Jul 12, 2020

• #24

Miami Seagull said:

This season that is handball. Rule changes next season and anything above a short sleeve, i.e. top of the arm and shoulder will be ok. Not this season though. Which, in this case, is good news.

Click to expand...

Bad news


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Giraffe

VERY part time moderator

Helpful Moderator

NSC Patron

Aug 8, 2005

26,598

• Jul 12, 2020

• #25

Nope not handball, but it’s Palace so yes.

 

Psychobilly freakout

HellBilly

Feb 23, 2009

23,093

Brighton factually.....

• Jul 12, 2020

• #26

Dirty Dave said:

Surely if its inconclusive, the benefit should be with the attacking team. No?

Sent from my SM-A405FN using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Dear Dirty Dave, when the attacking team is Crystal Palace, the correct answer is always, always NO

 

S

sams dad

I hate Palarse

Feb 7, 2004

6,383

The Hill of The Gun

• Jul 12, 2020

• #27

Much as I hate Palace, no way is that handball.
Since the restart, VAR has been totally discredited and must be abandoned before next season .

 

G

GloryDays

Well-known member

Jul 5, 2011

1,619

Leyton, E10.

• Jul 12, 2020

• #28

I can see why it was ruled out.

Just very frustrating how AV are quite the beneficiary of VARmares this restart. Free point at home to Sheffield Utd and a massive boost with that being ruled out.

I know the pen v united was a little harsh, but they were always gonna get put right by Greenwood and Co. anyway, so they can shut their pie holes about that. Very lucky plebs indeed.

 

drew

Drew

Oct 3, 2006

23,073

Burgess Hill

• Jul 12, 2020

• #29

Can we stop referring to VAR ****ing up. It was Jonathan Moss. Useless when on the pitch and useless when off it.

 

AZ Gull

@SeagullsAcademy Threads: @bhafcacademy

Oct 14, 2003

11,817

Chandler, AZ

• Jul 12, 2020

• #30

There is absolutely no way that is handball - it comes off the top of his shoulder, FFS.

I think that is the worst VAR decision I've seen in the Premier League this season, and there is some pretty stiff competition!

 

D

dsr-burnley

Well-known member

Aug 15, 2014

2,194

• Jul 13, 2020

• #31

I can just about see why a ref might disallow it and VAR leave the ref's decision as is.

I can't see why VAR should say it is a clear and obvious error.

And I'm absolutely certain that Moss having watched the replay 14 times and not been able to make his mind up, could say on the 15th viewing that it was clear and obvious.

 

Acker79

Well-known member

NSC Patron

Nov 15, 2008

31,915

Brighton

• Jul 13, 2020

• #32

As it's a question of 'fact' rather than opinion i.e. 'did the ball touch the arm?', not 'do you think he meant for the ball to touch his arm?', it's not about "clear and obvious", is it? So questioning the VAR involvement on the basis of whether it was "clear and obvious" or not, is irrelevant.

It all comes down to whether the VAR believed it touched Saka's arm or not.

 

Blue3

Well-known member

Jan 27, 2014

5,588

Lancing

• Jul 13, 2020

• #33

Should not have been overturned clear goal