Author Topic: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City (Read 2862 times)

Microscopist · « **Reply #60 on:** Mon 11 Nov 2019 23:28 »

Hi again ref fan,

Quote

how long did it take for the ball to travel from Silva's arm to TAA's arm after it was deflected

Well, long enough for him to take two or three steps forward and to turn to set himself to block the ball. Looking at the video again it seems that Aguero had time to pull his hand back out of the path of the ball.

Quote

don't forget he didn't have the angle your shots show.

True, but he was a lot closer to the action - we are seeing figures a few inches tall he can see figures a few feet tall. Doesn't excuse VAR.

Quote

And why even introduce conjecture that he didn't take the VAR's advice? What evidence is there for that?

Well there seem to me to be two possibilities either VAR told him everything was hunky dory or VAR didn't - I presented both. Of course if it weren't for the unwise stance of the PGMOL not allowing the use of pitch-side monitors, and apparently, IFAB not allowing conversations between VAR and the onfield referee to be heard we would be in a much better position to know who was making the decisions and why.

Quote

or was he not even certain the ball had struck the arm?

His position gave him a clear view of TAA's arm he may not have been sure whether it came up off his thigh or went down onto his thigh but I can't believe that he didn't see it hit the arm - TAA's action of immediately (and in a lot less time than he had to react to the "deflection" off Bernardo) pulling his arm back after contact would have been a clue.

Cheers

bruntyboy · « **Reply #61 on:** Mon 11 Nov 2019 23:41 »

Quote from: Ashington46 on Mon 11 Nov 2019 10:23

Quote from: Ref Fan on Mon 11 Nov 2019 09:39
This is a real dog's dinner. We have Hackett saying VAR should have given the penalty but he makes no mention, and probably wasn't aware at the time, of the ball touching Siva's arm first. Clattenburg says no penalty was correct but that the wrong reason has been given - Silva's handball should have been the reason, otherwise it should have been a penalty as TAA's arm wasn't in a natural position; and Halsey thought Oliver's view may have been restricted by Aguero but VAR should have advised a penalty.

Halsey's comments raised a question in my mind: we don't know what Michael Oliver saw or thought he saw and whether he had a good view (I still think it wasn't the best angle). But suppose he thought it might be a penalty but wasn't sure enough and therefore wanted VAR to look at it. Could he have blown straightaway for the VAR check to avoid the risk of a breakaway and goal at the other end, which of course is what happened? (If VAR had then stated no penalty, how would the game restart?) Or, not having made a decision, is he obliged to let play continue?

Football used to be such a simple game both to play and to watch. Players got things wrong, managers got things wrong and officials got the odd thing wrong and yet, we just accepted it all and played the game and enjoyed it at whatever level.

Why is there this obsession that everything must be 100% correct? Football, llike life, is just not like that and never will be, no matter how much technology is introduced. All that has happened with VAR is that it has brought into play even more opinions and, as can be seen from the opinions on this board, there will never be 100% agreement.

I used to love it when the referee's decision was final even if you didn't agree with it.

My take on it is that there was a desire from the fans/viewers/pundits for the following decisions to be reviewed:

1. Ball over the line - goal line technology has fixed this and seems to give a virtual instant decision which always seems to be accepted (although there must be some margin of error/tolerance built in).

2. Referee has missed off the ball incident/SFP or is totally unsighted to see seriousness of a challenge.

3. AR has missed obvious offside - as with the Cardiff v Chelsea goal last season where the Chelsea player was at least 5 yards offside.

4. AR has penalised obvious onside decision.

5. Referee has not seen obvious penalty decision or simulation.

6. Goalkeeper well off the line at penalties or other obvious encroachment.

We did not want offsides by millimetres/toenails reviewed. We also did not want these handball "technicalities".

Ref Watcher · « **Reply #62 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 09:46 »

Quote from: bruntyboy on Mon 11 Nov 2019 23:41

Quote from: Ashington46 on Mon 11 Nov 2019 10:23
Quote from: Ref Fan on Mon 11 Nov 2019 09:39
This is a real dog's dinner. We have Hackett saying VAR should have given the penalty but he makes no mention, and probably wasn't aware at the time, of the ball touching Siva's arm first. Clattenburg says no penalty was correct but that the wrong reason has been given - Silva's handball should have been the reason, otherwise it should have been a penalty as TAA's arm wasn't in a natural position; and Halsey thought Oliver's view may have been restricted by Aguero but VAR should have advised a penalty.

Halsey's comments raised a question in my mind: we don't know what Michael Oliver saw or thought he saw and whether he had a good view (I still think it wasn't the best angle). But suppose he thought it might be a penalty but wasn't sure enough and therefore wanted VAR to look at it. Could he have blown straightaway for the VAR check to avoid the risk of a breakaway and goal at the other end, which of course is what happened? (If VAR had then stated no penalty, how would the game restart?) Or, not having made a decision, is he obliged to let play continue?

Football used to be such a simple game both to play and to watch. Players got things wrong, managers got things wrong and officials got the odd thing wrong and yet, we just accepted it all and played the game and enjoyed it at whatever level.

Why is there this obsession that everything must be 100% correct? Football, llike life, is just not like that and never will be, no matter how much technology is introduced. All that has happened with VAR is that it has brought into play even more opinions and, as can be seen from the opinions on this board, there will never be 100% agreement.

I used to love it when the referee's decision was final even if you didn't agree with it.

My take on it is that there was a desire from the fans/viewers/pundits for the following decisions to be reviewed:

1. Ball over the line - goal line technology has fixed this and seems to give a virtual instant decision which always seems to be accepted (although there must be some margin of error/tolerance built in).

2. Referee has missed off the ball incident/SFP or is totally unsighted to see seriousness of a challenge.

3. AR has missed obvious offside - as with the Cardiff v Chelsea goal last season where the Chelsea player was at least 5 yards offside.

4. AR has penalised obvious onside decision.

5. Referee has not seen obvious penalty decision or simulation.

6. Goalkeeper well off the line at penalties or other obvious encroachment.

We did not want offsides by millimetres/toenails reviewed. We also did not want these handball "technicalities".

By and large this is what we have got. The problem is with the word that appears in four of the six items on your list: "obvious". It needs to be defined. What is "obvious" to one person is not "obvious" to another. How far offside does someone have to be before it is "obvious". If we define it as 12 inches are people going to get upset when a goal is chalked off when someone is 12.1 inches offside because it is too close to 12 inches to be certain? What if a flag goes up and replays clearly show that the attacker was onside by an inch. Would it be disallowed anyway because he wasn't 12 inches onside? Would we have even more interminable delays while VAR, having decided that the referee was wrong, then has to weigh up whether he was obviously wrong or just wrong?

Ref Fan · « **Reply #63 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 09:49 »

Quote from: Microscopist on Mon 11 Nov 2019 23:28

"Well there seem to me to be two possibilities either VAR told him everything was hunky dory or VAR didn't - I presented both. Of course if it weren't for the unwise stance of the PGMOL not allowing the use of pitch-side monitors, and apparently, IFAB not allowing conversations between VAR and the onfield referee to be heard we would be in a much better position to know who was making the decisions and why"

Good morning Microscopist. My take would be that as a subjective decision, it was perhaps what Oliver said to the VAR first that was important. We may be confused on just where the bar is set for "clear and obvious" but if Oliver had as good a view as you suggest and decided for example it was thigh onto arm, or saw the deflection from Silva, or felt there was no time for TA-A to get his arm out of the way, then I doubt VAR would seek to overrule. If Oliver had said he didn't think the ball struck the arm, it would be a different matter.

With my old brain, I'm still not clear what the implication should be of the deflection from Silva's arm. Is it the case that the laws, policy and interpretation don't cover that particular scenario? Or is the view that because it could have been the deflection off the attacker's arm, however accidental, that caused the ball to strike TA-A on the arm, then that has to be penalised and Liverpool awarded a free kick? Outcome: No penalty to City and no goal to Liverpool.

I do agree with your other point, and given the controversy this has caused, surely the PGMOL should offer a fuller explanation as to what happened, what was said by the officials and whether the outcome was correct or not, and why.

Microscopist · « **Reply #64 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 11:08 »

And a good morning top you Ref Fan,

Perhaps I should have been a bit more all embracing with my comment and referred to the discussion between the referee and the VAR - you will perhaps recall when Rodri was wrestled to the ground by the neck in the Spurs game this discussion arose and it did seem that the referee on that day had indicated that he was happy with his decision as part of the conversation.

I don't think that the situation is covered by the laws, and I hope I have made it clear that the problem goes back to IFAB - though made worse by PGMOL. However, there seem to me to be two principles:
A goal cannot be awarded when it directly follows an "accidental or no fault" handball by an attacker and:
That a deliberate handball should not be allowed to play on giving an advantage to the offender.
The first principle seems to me to indicate that a penalty is ruled out since the penalty would have been awarded immediatrely following the accidental handball.
The second principle indicates to me that play should have been stopped when TAA handled the ball, in this rerspect it is irrelevant whether Bernardo's handball was intentional or not (except the difference between an indirect and a direct free kick). My posts have been an attempt to demonstrate that the case put forward by the PGMOL and others that the TAA handball was accidental doesn't really hold water. Consequently, I have tried to show that not only was TAA's hand in an unnatural position and that he had plenty of time to remove it but also the hand (whether by accident, design or reflex) moved into that position whilst whilst the ball was on its way to him after the deflection. Having established that we are into an area where improvisation in applying the non-stated part of the law is needed.
Thar's how I see it.

Readingfan · « **Reply #65 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 11:45 »

The word 'silhouette ' has been mentioned by quite a lot of people and in the media since the new laws came in but I can't actually see it in the LOTG?

I think handball would certainly have been given in the CL but I'm not surprised it wasn't given in the PL.

I don't regard this as a howler by Oliver so I'm happy on balance for VAR not to intervene.

Anna1 · « **Reply #66 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 13:46 »

I am fascinated by some off the comments that have been made around the handball incident on Sunday and to me it has taken the shine off the referees performance which in my opinion was excellent.We all wanted VAR to be introduced to make sure that mistakes by our referees are rectified by VAR before play restarts or like on Sunday when the ball next goes out of play. To me the referee on Sunday had a clear view of the incident and clearly thought is wasn’t a penalty and this was confirmed by VAR and also by others whose opinions I would respect. We are always looking for way to criticize our referees even when they give a performance like Michael Oliver did on Sunday. Oliver and Taylor again showed on Sunday that they are our best referees at this moment in time and now we need to move on and accept that it wasn’t a penalty and that the referee got the decision correct

Ref Fan · « **Reply #67 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 14:18 »

"Oliver and Taylor again showed on Sunday that they are our best referees at this moment in time". I agree Anna1 and made the same point earlier.

For what it's worth, Hackett referred to a "top class performance" by Taylor and "another impressive game" by Oliver.

The mix of view was represented by those former referees who have turned to journalism. As mentioned, Hackett and Halsey said it should have been a penalty and the handball by Silva wasn't relevant because it was accidental and didn't lead to a City goal; Clattenburg said it was the right decision because the deflection by Silva's handball was relevant (but otherwise would have been a penalty) and Dermot Gallagher opined that the decision was correct and VAR right not to intervene.

Actually, despite being a United fan, I'm a Mancunian when it comes to these games and support City. To lighten the mood, from that standpoint it would have been rather fun had Michael Oliver awarded a penalty to City at the Kop end although their reaction may not have helped Aguero taking the kick! Liverpool do seem to have been on the right side of quite a few marginal decisions so far this season so I wouldn't have been dismayed had that sequence been broken.

bruntyboy · « **Reply #68 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 19:55 »

The issue with the TAA handball is that although Oliver might have had a clear view of the incident he was looking straight on and it is only when you see the side on camera view that you can see how far away from his body is arm is and also that the arm moved towards the ball (only VAR or the AR looking side on could tell him this). Also did he think the ball hit the thigh first and deflected onto his arm? Also from the 2 side views it is interesting that it is only on the 2nd side view that it is clear that the ball hits the arm first and then the thigh rather than the other way round.

The sooner refs are miked up and the decision making process is heard the better. Also why do we need an offside decision in such high detail as in Rugby they don't have lines over the screen to determine potential forward passes or offsides?

"Silhouette" might not be in the LOTG but I seem to remember it was the PGMOL who came out with this before the season started to explain how they would determine handball as well as them saying that they wouldn't be looking at minor goalkeeper encroachment at penalties.

bruntyboy · « **Reply #69 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 20:12 »

This thread has been dominated by the handball incidents.

However why wasn't Sterling given a penalty when he ran clear from the defenders into the box towards the goal line and was given a massive shove in the back with no intent by the last defender to try to play the ball?

Readingfan · « **Reply #70 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 21:11 »

I read recently that when VAR was first introduced in Australia they didn't use technology/lines and just relied on whether the VAR could spot what had happened but then they were finding VAR wasn't intervening on situations and broadcasters were subsequently flagging that goals were being incorrect allowed/disallowed so they decided to introduce teh technology used by the Premier League instead.

Microscopist · « **Reply #71 on:** Tue 12 Nov 2019 21:14 »

He is quite close and has a good line of view, although sideways on, he has the advantage over the camera of stereoscopic vision so should be able to see an arm moving away from the body at that distance.

Quote

Also did he think the ball hit the thigh first and deflected onto his arm?

I can accept that as a possibility, surely VAR should give a referee the option of calling the handball and seeing whether it went from thigh to arm or vice versa. It is a sign that referees generally are not trying to use VAR to get the best result.

In the case of the elbow in the back by Mane on Sterling Oliver's view would have been obstructed by, guess who - TAA who was coming across to intercept Sterling - VAR has no excuse, but ....

ajb95 · « **Reply #72 on:** Wed 13 Nov 2019 07:52 »

Quote from: bruntyboy on Tue 12 Nov 2019 20:12

This thread has been dominated by the handball incidents.

However why wasn't Sterling given a penalty when he ran clear from the defenders into the box towards the goal line and was given a massive shove in the back with no intent by the last defender to try to play the ball?

Because he fell over like he’s been shot - never enough contact for a penalty!

Microscopist · « **Reply #73 on:** Wed 13 Nov 2019 13:32 »

ajb95 · « **Reply #74 on:** Wed 13 Nov 2019 16:48 »

Quote from: Microscopist on Wed 13 Nov 2019 13:32

That doesn’t prove anything!

RateTheRef

News:

User

Stats ezBlock

Author Topic: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City (Read 2862 times)

Microscopist

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

bruntyboy

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Ref Watcher

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Ref Fan

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Microscopist

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Readingfan

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Anna1

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Ref Fan

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

bruntyboy

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

bruntyboy

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Readingfan

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Microscopist

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

ajb95

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

Microscopist

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City

ajb95

Re: M Oliver Liverpool vs Man City