VAR check poss hand ball penalty

[rudeskaboyuk]

I know that we have benefited from a few soft hand ball penalties but there has to be a better way to punish the offending team.

I just don't think it's right a game could be won or lost with such a unintentional movement of a arm or hand to the ball. 

Now, a deliberate hand ball to stop a certain goal is different.

 

Could we not perhaps award a direct free kick with no wall from the edge of the D ?

At least this would make the difficulty of scoring a bit more challenging. 

[Jim_Duncan]

1 minute ago, rudeskaboyuk said:

I know that we have benefited from a few soft hand ball penalties but there has to be a better way to punish the offending team.

I just don't think it's right a game could be won or lost with such a unintentional movement of a arm or hand to the ball. 

Now, a deliberate hand ball to stop a certain goal is different.

 

Could we not perhaps award a direct free kick with no wall from the edge of the D ?

At least this would make the difficulty of scoring a bit more challenging. 

Just scrap VAR. It’s pointless. For example, they can give a penalty for a questionable handball, but not a free kick and a booking for the Huns player diving on Sunday. One is a slight accident, the other odd blatant cheating. 

 

Keep it for offsides only. 
 

The only reason it was brought in was because the refs got fed up with TV shows showing hundreds of angles of a decision. Well, refs are fallible, just like players and managers. We just have to deal with it. 

[waterboy11]

It’s not necessarily Var that is the issue. It’s the interpretation of the handball rule which is now really overly complex. 
 

simplify the handball rule and it should be workable with Var. Moving hand towards the ball = penalty as it was before the men in suits got involved with the law 

[Footballfirst]

The VAR system is not at fault. It's the people who operate it, those who feel empowered to re-referee a game, a reluctance to ask more senior officials to review their decisions, changes to the laws and inconsistency in the interpretation of those laws.  

[Fort Vallance]

7 minutes ago, waterboy11 said:

It’s not necessarily Var that is the issue. It’s the interpretation of the handball rule which is now really overly complex. 
 

simplify the handball rule and it should be workable with Var. Moving hand towards the ball = penalty as it was before the men in suits got involved with the law 

Spot on. If the arm hasn't moved after the ball was played its not intentional.  Stick your arm out towards the ball or up in the air it's a stick on. 

[casper]

4 hours ago, waterboy11 said:

It’s not necessarily Var that is the issue. It’s the interpretation of the handball rule which is now really overly complex. 
 

simplify the handball rule and it should be workable with Var. Moving hand towards the ball = penalty as it was before the men in suits got involved with the law 

Did you see the Chelsea one at the weekend? Do you think it should have been a penalty?

[Bull's-eye]

It's only in Scotland where it appears that any sort of contact with the ball and the arm results in a penalty,  of course this is subjective if wearing a Blue or a Green and White hooped shirt, but we expect that as those 2 behemoths must be refereed differently for the good of the game. 

 

EPL and CL games recently have been ignoring the really daft ones. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

6 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The VAR system is not at fault. It's the people who operate it, those who feel empowered to re-referee a game, a reluctance to ask more senior officials to review their decisions, changes to the laws and inconsistency in the interpretation of those laws.  

Except you just described VAR in a nutshell. That's why it needs scrapped.

 

You watch a lot of youth team football. Do you ever watch it thinking it would be so much better with VAR? Willing to bet it has made no difference to your enjoyment of it.

[Sir PH]

Keep VAR as it is. It's getting far more right than it is wrong.

[kingantti1874]

I really wish people would stop saying scrap it’s. I understand the sentiment but It’s not happening and never will. 
 

And despite the drawbacks and flaws in those operating it more decisions are right than previous. 
 

need to look for solutions to make it better.  In England offsides will be automated from next season which is a step forward.

 

I’d let the ref take charge of the games and let teams have 2 challenges per half only that they can have reviewed by VAR. Make it an interactive part of the game rather than reviewing everything.  Then it will put focus on the team to challenge at the right time and not moan about everything 

Edited April 25 by kingantti1874

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

I really wish people would stop saying scrap it’s. I understand the sentiment but It’s not happening and never will. 
 

And despite the drawbacks and flaws in those operating it more decisions are right than previous. 
 

need to look for solutions to make it better.  In England offsides will be automated from next season which is a step forward.

 

I’d let the ref take charge of the games and let teams have 2 challenges per half only that they can have reviewed by VAR. Make it an interactive part of the game rather than reviewing everything.  Then it will put focus on the team to challenge at the right time and not moan about everything 

Sweden says hi

[Dazo]

3 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

I really wish people would stop saying scrap it’s. I understand the sentiment but It’s not happening and never will. 
 

And despite the drawbacks and flaws in those operating it more decisions are right than previous. 
 

need to look for solutions to make it better.  In England offsides will be automated from next season which is a step forward.

 

I’d let the ref take charge of the games and let teams have 2 challenges per half only that they can have reviewed by VAR. Make it an interactive part of the game rather than reviewing everything.  Then it will put focus on the team to challenge at the right time and not moan about everything 

Nice idea but all you would end up with is people moaning it isn’t fair they only get two challenges. I agree with you Var is fine as it gets more right than wrong. Needs sped up a bit but interpretation has always been an issue in football, with or without var. 

[Yoda]

7 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The VAR system is not at fault. It's the people who operate it, those who feel empowered to re-referee a game, a reluctance to ask more senior officials to review their decisions, changes to the laws and inconsistency in the interpretation of those laws.  

100% spot on.  In the USA they've had VAR in Basketball & US Football for years and they very rarely get things wrong. Just employ competent, unbiased people.

[The Treasurer]

8 hours ago, rudeskaboyuk said:

I know that we have benefited from a few soft hand ball penalties but there has to be a better way to punish the offending team.

I just don't think it's right a game could be won or lost with such a unintentional movement of a arm or hand to the ball. 

Now, a deliberate hand ball to stop a certain goal is different.

 

Could we not perhaps award a direct free kick with no wall from the edge of the D ?

At least this would make the difficulty of scoring a bit more challenging. 

Basically you are saying a penalty from 18 yards instead of 12.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

15 minutes ago, Yoda said:

100% spot on.  In the USA they've had VAR in Basketball & US Football for years and they very rarely get things wrong. Just employ competent, unbiased people.

Those are sports that have natural breaks between plays, like cricket. Football doesn't.

[Deevers]

8 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The VAR system is not at fault. It's the people who operate it, those who feel empowered to re-referee a game, a reluctance to ask more senior officials to review their decisions, changes to the laws and inconsistency in the interpretation of those laws.  

In a nutshell. 

[kingantti1874]

34 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Sweden says hi

there will be exception but they will reintroduce it at some point otherwise be left behind.

 

VAR will not go away 

Edited April 25 by kingantti1874

[jambo89]

39 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

I really wish people would stop saying scrap it’s. I understand the sentiment but It’s not happening and never will. 
 

And despite the drawbacks and flaws in those operating it more decisions are right than previous. 
 

need to look for solutions to make it better.  In England offsides will be automated from next season which is a step forward.

 

I’d let the ref take charge of the games and let teams have 2 challenges per half only that they can have reviewed by VAR. Make it an interactive part of the game rather than reviewing everything.  Then it will put focus on the team to challenge at the right time and not moan about everything 

I don't like this idea at all. The reason for footballs global popularity is it's fast flowing state of play and it it's simplicity. 

 

VAR has negated both of these to a certain extent, which is why it is so unpopular. Your suggestion adds another layer of complexity.

 

The solution is to simply VAR not make it more complicated imo

[Bull's-eye]

The idea of "challenges" to referee decisions is possibly the dumbest thing I've ever heard. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

29 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

there will be exception but they will reintroduce it at some point otherwise be left behind.

 

VAR will not go away 

We'll see. It will get to the point where fans get pissed off and change will have to happen.

 

Put it this way. I'm pissed off as a fan who gets to see the replays. The fan experience in the stadium sucks even more.

[kingantti1874]

25 minutes ago, jambo89 said:

I don't like this idea at all. The reason for footballs global popularity is it's fast flowing state of play and it it's simplicity. 

 

VAR has negated both of these to a certain extent, which is why it is so unpopular. Your suggestion adds another layer of complexity.

 

The solution is to simply VAR not make it more complicated imo

I’m not sure it would, it reduces the number of occasions VAR is involved materially. Pretty simple for me 

[kingantti1874]

12 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

We'll see. It will get to the point where fans get pissed off and change will have to happen.

 

Put it this way. I'm pissed off as a fan who gets to see the replays. The fan experience in the stadium sucks even more.

We will mate. Thing is you assume all fans are pissed ff but I don’t think that’s the case at all. I sit in the stadium every 2 weeks week, I’ve also been to 5 EPL games and one in la liga this season and I don’t sense any huge resentment to VAR.  more a minor grumble / nervousness when VAR check is going against your team and intrigue tiny bit of excitement when the VAR check is in your teams favour.

 

to much time and money spent to throw it in the bin.  And the reality is, whilst not perfect more decisions are correct than pre VAR. 

 

they need to find ways to to improve that still further and speed it up that’s for sure .  
 

but it will be refinement IMO not chucking the baby out with the bath water 

Edited April 25 by kingantti1874

[jambo89]

12 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

I’m not sure it would, it reduces the number of occasions VAR is involved materially. Pretty simple for me 

I'm not sure about that. 75% of matches have 1 or 0 VAR checks per game and now we are increasing that to 4. Then there is the added aspect of 'tactical' challenges, frivolous calls to break the ebb and flow of the game. Do these then go unpunished? If you have 3 penalty claims in a game and the 3rd is a stonewaller missed by the ref, it can't be appealed because we used our 2 challenges previously? 

 

Each to their own, but I'm more for keeping it as is and changing the view from 're-refereeing' the game to 'clear and obvious'. It seems to work in Europe well enough.

[kingantti1874]

24 minutes ago, jambo89 said:

I'm not sure about that. 75% of matches have 1 or 0 VAR checks per game and now we are increasing that to 4. Then there is the added aspect of 'tactical' challenges, frivolous calls to break the ebb and flow of the game. Do these then go unpunished? If you have 3 penalty claims in a game and the 3rd is a stonewaller missed by the ref, it can't be appealed because we used our 2 challenges previously? 

 

Each to their own, but I'm more for keeping it as is and changing the view from 're-refereeing' the game to 'clear and obvious'. It seems to work in Europe well enough.

Fair enough, if 75% of games have 0/1 VAR check then maybe it’s not as big an issue as some think.  
 

 

[Wee Mikey]

10 hours ago, rudeskaboyuk said:

I know that we have benefited from a few soft hand ball penalties but there has to be a better way to punish the offending team.

I just don't think it's right a game could be won or lost with such a unintentional movement of a arm or hand to the ball. 

Now, a deliberate hand ball to stop a certain goal is different.

 

Could we not perhaps award a direct free kick with no wall from the edge of the D ?

At least this would make the difficulty of scoring a bit more challenging. 

 

I can absolutely see where you are coming from.

 

But, as per below it's a matter of interpretation also. For example there was an instance whereby yon Goldson fella was falling to the ground and stuck his hand down for support resulting in a perfect block with the arm and no penalty as it was adjudged to be a natural arm movement.

 

Call me cynical, but that manoeuvre ("a movement or series of moves requiring skill and care") could be, ahem, practiced and rehearsed.

 

Ditto the one (cannae remember who it was) whereby the defender was looking the other way and punched the ball behind the line.

 

Savvy teams will surely be brushing up on the training pitch, lol.

 

9 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

The VAR system is not at fault. It's the people who operate it, those who feel empowered to re-referee a game, a reluctance to ask more senior officials to review their decisions, changes to the laws and inconsistency in the interpretation of those laws.  

 

In a nutshell. 👍

 

1 hour ago, The Treasurer said:

Basically you are saying a penalty from 18 yards instead of 12.

 

I like the field hockey rules for pens. Maybe worth football taking a lead from their ways.

[JimmyCant]

3 hours ago, Sir PH said:

Keep VAR as it is. It's getting far more right than it is wrong.

Correct. And when you’ve had Celtic and Rangers both having 2 individual audiences with the authorities on the subject since it came in, you know it’s a good thing

Edited April 25 by JimmyCant

[Sir PH]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

Correct. And when you’ve had Celtic and Rangers both having 2 individual audiences with the authorities on the subject since it came in, you know it’s a good thing

Exactly. If it gets us more favourable decisions against those two then I'm more than happy to keep it. No more "honest mistakes" that literally change games. 

[JimmyCant]

Just now, Sir PH said:

Exactly. If it gets us more favourable decisions against those two then I'm more than happy to keep it. No more "honest mistakes" that literally change games. 

It’s the handball rule that needs looked at again, not VAR. Some of the penalties given for what was essentially an inconsequential accidental handball are ridiculous.

 

Offside needs looked at as well. Being offside by a fecking toenail isn’t why the rule is there

[Bull's-eye]

Players cheating, which now occurs all over the park is more of a bugbear for me, a poor touch is now followed by a player hoying himself to the ground now, followed by an award of a free kick. This "clever play by the player" narrative should be done away with. 

 

If referees didn't have to adjudicate 22 players basically trying to cheat at every tackle he could do his job an awful lot better imo. 

[Footballfirst]

If VAR wasn't there, everyone would still be moaning about the decisions of the ref and linesmen, penalties not given, offsides wrongly given, players getting away with red card offences etc. That is why VAR was introduced in the first place.

 

The moans have now moved onto the microscopic analysis of VAR decisions, rather than focus on the competence of the referees which has always been questionable at best. VAR has exposed how many big decisions they actually got wrong pre-VAR and continue to get wrong now.

[The Treasurer]

2 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

It’s the handball rule that needs looked at again, not VAR. Some of the penalties given for what was essentially an inconsequential accidental handball are ridiculous.

 

Offside needs looked at as well. Being offside by a fecking toenail isn’t why the rule is there

Totally agree with everything you say here 

[Harry Potter]

12 hours ago, waterboy11 said:

It’s not necessarily Var that is the issue. It’s the interpretation of the handball rule which is now really overly complex. 
 

simplify the handball rule and it should be workable with Var. Moving hand towards the ball = penalty as it was before the men in suits got involved with the law 

Pretty spot on and how it should be.

[Tommy Brown]

13 hours ago, waterboy11 said:

It’s not necessarily Var that is the issue. It’s the interpretation of the handball rule which is now really overly complex. 
 

simplify the handball rule and it should be workable with Var. Moving hand towards the ball = penalty as it was before the men in suits got involved with the law 

Pretty much correct

 

Hearts v St Mirren - Vargas hits it towards goal. outstretched arm changes ball direction from a scoring chance to a corner. penalty awarded.

Forest v Wolves  - exactly as above, ball stopped from going to where Chris Wood was standing in front of goal. No Penalty

 

One gets a penalty after Var check, the other doesn't even get a var check.

 

It was sore  on St M. but imo the correct decision.

EPL as usual adopting their own take on it and ****ing it up.

[meister]

14 hours ago, Fort Vallance said:

Spot on. If the arm hasn't moved after the ball was played its not intentional.  Stick your arm out towards the ball or up in the air it's a stick on. 

 

Agreed.

 

As for offside, do away with the rule altogether.

[JimmyCant]

3 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

If VAR wasn't there, everyone would still be moaning about the decisions of the ref and linesmen, penalties not given, offsides wrongly given, players getting away with red card offences etc. That is why VAR was introduced in the first place.

 

The moans have now moved onto the microscopic analysis of VAR decisions, rather than focus on the competence of the referees which has always been questionable at best. VAR has exposed how many big decisions they actually got wrong pre-VAR and continue to get wrong now.

If VAR is cutting out just 50% of the abominations we used to have, it’s worth keeping IMO. I think we’ve done pretty well out of VAR overall.

[Sir PH]

1 minute ago, meister said:

 

Agreed.

 

As for offside, do away with the rule altogether.

Don't be silly. 

[stirlo]

As others have pointed out VAR is not the problem and it's not getting scrapped anyway.

 

The rules and the application of the rules needs to be changed so that it becomes much more difficult to win a penalty kick. The fundamental problem is that in many cases where penalties are awarded, the penalty is completely disproportionate to the disadvantage that the attacking team has suffered from the foul or handball.

[SectionDJambo]

It seems to be accepted that Scottish match officials apply a different ruling regarding some hand ball penalty incidents than the English match officials. Scottish officials usually give a penalty.

You'd think that UEFA and FIFA would insist on all associations applying the law equally and consistently. 

At least they seem to be fairly consistent in Scotland. Simplifying the rule, globally, would seem the sensible thing to do.

[meister]

38 minutes ago, Sir PH said:

Don't be silly. 

 

The offside rule needs to be looked at and re-written to accommodate the accuracy that VAR can now determine during a game. The offside rule is there for a reason, but doing away with it means teams would just have to adapt. It'd be a major upheaval, but so what..........

[Sir PH]

24 minutes ago, meister said:

 

The offside rule needs to be looked at and re-written to accommodate the accuracy that VAR can now determine during a game. The offside rule is there for a reason, but doing away with it means teams would just have to adapt. It'd be a major upheaval, but so what..........

You've contradicted yourself there. It can't be done away with. They've tried in the past and it was a disaster. 

[davemclaren]

30 minutes ago, meister said:

 

The offside rule needs to be looked at and re-written to accommodate the accuracy that VAR can now determine during a game. The offside rule is there for a reason, but doing away with it means teams would just have to adapt. It'd be a major upheaval, but so what..........

What is the reason it is there for and why is that reason no longer valid?

[meister]

5 minutes ago, Sir PH said:

You've contradicted yourself there. It can't be done away with. They've tried in the past and it was a disaster. 

 

Was it not brought in to combat poaching ? Not sure how I contradicted myself.

I'll hold my hands up though, wasn't aware it had been tried before and failed, I'll bow to your superior knowledge on this one, perhaps it was a bit simplistic.

[meister]

2 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

What is the reason it is there for and why is that reason no longer valid?

 

Think it was to stop poaching. The point was if we do away with offside, yes it changes the game materially but teams would have to adapt and it stops the 'fingernail was offside' stuff we have now.

 

As @Sir PH has said above though, it has been tried before and failed so I'll chalk this one up to experience (or lack of).

[kingantti1874]

16 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

What is the reason it is there for and why is that reason no longer valid?

Coventry city were offside by 1 inch against many u, but were the lines drawn at the right time.  Is the ball kicked when the foot strikes the ball or when the ball releases from the boot.  
 

I’d like to see the offside rule amended . Striker is onside if any part of the body is in line, I’d also like another set of lines drawn  between half way and the 18 yard box.  And you can’t be offside till you cross it. Will spread the game out, make space for creativity and holes teams can play within.

 

stop this high block, low block nonsense and result in more entertaining fixtures 

[RustyRightPeg]

8 hours ago, Sir PH said:

Keep VAR as it is. It's getting far more right than it is wrong.

 

Semi automated offside technology and goal line technology. Everything else should be referees decision IMO. Teams should be allowed 1 challenge per game to go to VAR off their own back for other decisions.

Edited April 25 by RustyRightPeg

[kingantti1874]

8 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

 

Semi automated offside technology and goal line technology. Everything else should be referees decision IMO. Teams should be allowed 1 challenge per game to go to VAR off their own back for other decisions.

👍🏻

[davemclaren]

9 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

 

Semi automated offside technology and goal line technology. Everything else should be referees decision IMO. Teams should be allowed 1 challenge per game to go to VAR off their own back for other decisions.

We won't be investing in goal line technology any time soon. Too expensive. 
 

I think VAR is fine - just needs greater clarity on the rules and some fine tuning. 

[RustyRightPeg]

Just now, davemclaren said:

We won't be investing in goal line technology any time soon. Too expensive. 
 

I think VAR is fine - just needs greater clarity on the rules and some fine tuning. 

 

Yeah I agree, it's just the way I'd have it personally. Similar to NFL. 

[davemclaren]

Just now, RustyRightPeg said:

 

Yeah I agree, it's just the way I'd have it personally. Similar to NFL. 

👍

[TheBigO]

16 hours ago, Fort Vallance said:

Spot on. If the arm hasn't moved after the ball was played its not intentional.  Stick your arm out towards the ball or up in the air it's a stick on. 

Yup, that's the deal.

 

As for the OP, it's no different to an accidental foul tripping someone. How often you see a clipped heel as an attacker crosses over a defender.  It is a foul/penalty.  Unlucky but the deal.  You could almost say a mis-timed tackle is no different actually.  Didn't mean it to hit my arm, but it is out to the side/didn't mean to trip him up, but yeah I left my leg out.

 

Dems da breaks

 

And as others have said, it's actually not that different, it's just idiots in rooms with tellies getting it wrong now.  I hate VAR, I really do, and especially in Scotland, I just think it's pish and ruins games.  Our officials have shown they can't be trusted with it - even in the stats reported on it with the accuracy which we knew was nonsense simply due to the number of incorrect decisions we'd had which were left off.