What's new

Premier League 2019–?

Gbspurs

Gatekeeper for debates, King of the plonkers
Jan 27, 2011
26,985
61,896
I get where you’re coming from but that is dangerous territory. You’d then start having to question what happens if a keeper comes to punch out a corner and collide with literally any of the figures in a crowded box.
Plus who gets the free-kick/penalty?

On the pitch players can go in hard and win the ball but if they go too hard and clean out a player in the process of winning the ball it's a foul. Why should it be different for keepers. Its easy to tell when one has gone too far I think.
 
Last edited:

Saoirse

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
6,165
15,644
That’s the thing, people always seem to go along the lines of Sheffield United had a goal that didn’t stand that should and therefore should have won 1-0. It doesn’t work like that though, as mentioned above, if the goal stands it changes the pattern of the game - Villa potentially up their game and grab an equaliser, potentially going on to win. Sheffield United could have gone on to add two or three more, no one knows.

I understand why the media do it, it’s for the controversy. However the idea that a game that finishes 0-0 would have 100% been a 1-0 had a goal been allowed just doesn’t work. That’s why you can never have a legal challenge to a goal not standing.
It would not 100% have been a 1-0. But it 100% would not have been a 0-0. I don't think legal action can work, it'd be a total mess of a precedent for football. But to be honest Villa should have let them score immediately after half time once the error was obvious, especially after Leeds let them do so after a nonsense goal last leason.
 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,572
49,030
It would not 100% have been a 1-0. But it 100% would not have been a 0-0. I don't think legal action can work, it'd be a total mess of a precedent for football. But to be honest Villa should have let them score immediately after half time once the error was obvious, especially after Leeds let them do so after a nonsense goal last leason.
VAR should have awarded a goal, it's absurd that they didn't do that either at the time or at half time. The football authorities continue to self-sabotage by continually failing to do the right and obvious thing in these situations. It's ridiculous.
 

Oh Teddy Teddy

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2017
5,224
12,368
On the pitch players can go in hard and win the ball but if they go too hard and clean out a player in the process of winning the ball it's a foul. Why should it be different for keepers. Its easy to tell when one has gone too far I think.

You’d think so, until you look at the current crop of officials.
 

Marty

Audere est farce
Mar 10, 2005
40,190
63,981
VAR should have awarded a goal, it's absurd that they didn't do that either at the time or at half time. The football authorities continue to self-sabotage by continually failing to do the right and obvious thing in these situations. It's ridiculous.
The rules of the game don't permit a goal being awarded after play has restarted and there is absolutely no wiggle room there. That's not a VAR thing, that's the rules.

But VAR should have stopped the game any time between when the ball went over the line and when Villa took their free kick after the stop in play a minute later, that was the window they had. And now at least they know they can't blindly trust hawkeye and will have to check similar incidents in the future.

As someone said earlier, the job of a linesman is almost obsolete now.
 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,572
49,030
The rules of the game don't permit a goal being awarded after play has restarted and there is absolutely no wiggle room there. That's not a VAR thing, that's the rules.
I'm sure you're right, but they need more flexibility in the rules.
 

C0YS

Just another member
Jul 9, 2007
12,780
13,817
Jesus, take a pill mate!

I'm ambivalent towards Guardiola, but the absolute lack of reaction, even a glance, towards a player who looked in a serious condition, when they're already 2-0 up, struck a chord.

Sentimentality doesn't even come into the equation. He didn't need to fawn over him. It was the absolute lack of any reaction that bothered me.
What kind of pill mate?

I just find your reaction a bit forced. I'm not judging it, just don't see it at all myself. Particularly, because he clearly did have a reaction.

 

hughy

I'm SUPER cereal.
Nov 18, 2007
31,930
57,138
The rules of the game don't permit a goal being awarded after play has restarted and there is absolutely no wiggle room there. That's not a VAR thing, that's the rules.

But VAR should have stopped the game any time between when the ball went over the line and when Villa took their free kick after the stop in play a minute later, that was the window they had. And now at least they know they can't blindly trust hawkeye and will have to check similar incidents in the future.

As someone said earlier, the job of a linesman is almost obsolete now.
Mate that's bollocks, who else is going to make sure the ball is overlapping the quadrant at a corner?
 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,572
49,030
I assume footballers constantly shout at each other even when there's a crowd ("man on" etc), but I always wondered how well they could hear each other above the crowd noise.

Presumably they can hear each other much better without a crowd?
 

muppetman

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2011
9,062
25,282
Can't say I've missed football terribly and this game is doing nothing to change that atm!
 

Col_M

Pointing out the Obvious
Feb 28, 2012
22,786
45,888
With the light and shadow across the pitch it’s really hard to see the Norwich players.
 
Top