EPL 2021-22

[WBT 20607]

Damn, what a pinball sequence at the end of the first half of Liverpool-Chelsea.  I agree with the penalty but the red is pretty harsh.

[mdmost 43004]

An Anthony Taylor special. That should not be a red. 

[MoJames 8244]

Welp LiVARpool.

[TexArcher 37974]

FUCKING HORSESHIT!

I'm fine with the penalty, but explain to me how it's a straight red for intentional handball when it came off his god damned knee first?

And Chelsea get a pair of yellows for arguing after Pool did it twice (Salah even kicked the ball in frustration) and no yellows for them?

Utter fuckery.

Fuck you.

Edited August 28, 2021 by TexArcher

[mdmost 43004]

Taylor looked at a freeze frame for about a second before he put up the red. The penalty should stand but he's a moron for not looking at the sequence. 

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

The reffing in this league is a fucking joke. The penalty is questionable since that's arguably not a handball anywhere else on the field, but the red card is just stupid.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Firemans4Horn 18106]

3 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

The reffing in this league is a fucking joke. The penalty is questionable since that's arguably not a handball anywhere else on the field, but the red card is just stupid.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

bro that’s 1,000% a penalty. I could go either way on the red (denial of a goal scoring opportunity is a red card offense). 
 

personally I feel like penalties + red cards are double jeopardy unless it is a last man tackle from behind or a dangerous play in the box. 

[Captain Ron 12883]

Isn’t it an automatic red for stopping the goal from happening? Despite the fact that would normally be no call? Once it stops the goal I think it might not matter.

I mean if there was no handball that’s a goal. 

[TexArcher 37974]

Just now, Firemans4Horn said:

personally I feel like penalties + red cards are double jeopardy unless it is a last man tackle from behind or a dangerous play in the box. 

Yeah, I don't know any fan who disagrees with this.  I don't understand how denial of a goal scoring opportunity is worth an almost automatic goal, a man advantage, plus a suspension.

[hobbes2702 13045]

I thought it was red and didn’t think it was that controversial. 

[Firemans4Horn 18106]

I will caveat that Suarez handball against Ghana in WC2010 is definitely a red card offense handball. 

[ztejas 43467]

4 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

Isn’t it an automatic red for stopping the goal from happening? Despite the fact that would normally be no call? Once it stops the goal I think it might not matter.

I mean if there was no handball that’s a goal. 

I'm not sure what exactly the rule is. I just know that if the rule necessitates a red for an incidental handball off the body it's fucking stupid. 

Pool got hosed a bunch last year so whatever. Ruining a great game is always shitty though.

Also - Reece needs to have his arms down there either way. Chancing it on VAR/ref decision isn't what you want. Just let the ball go in and regroup at half.

Edited August 28, 2021 by ztejas

[Firemans4Horn 18106]

I will caveat that Suarez handball against Ghana in WC2010 is definitely a red card offense handball. 

[Buzzrock 14922]

Isn’t it an automatic red for stopping the goal from happening? Despite the fact that would normally be no call? Once it stops the goal I think it might not matter.
I mean if there was no handball that’s a goal. 

That’s what they said at halftime. It has to be both.

[ztejas 43467]

Just now, Buzzrock said:

That’s what they said at halftime. It has to be both.

That's what he* said at halftime. Don't think Howard views it the same way.

[APMP 688]

Doesn't the letter of the law basically mandate looking at more than a freeze frame before awarding a straight red if the hand is that close to the body? Not sure how you can conclude deliberate intent without seeing if/when/how the arm moved.

Could the ref have ended up deciding it was deliberate and therefore a straight red despite the ball deflecting off the leg first? Sure. But you gotta do work. Pretty sure the VAR rules say you look at slow motion replays (which include more than a single video frame) to determine the point of contact.

[ztejas 43467]

2 minutes ago, APMP said:

Doesn't the letter of the law basically mandate looking at more than a freeze frame before awarding a straight red if the hand is that close to the body? Not sure how you can conclude deliberate intent without seeing if/when/how the arm moved.

Could the ref have ended up deciding it was deliberate and therefore a straight red despite the ball deflecting off the leg first? Sure. But you gotta do work. Prettyvsure the VAR rules say you look at slow motion replays (which include more than a single video frame) to determine the point of contact.

He obviously had his mind made up already. Which seems a little unprofessional.

[Captain Ron 12883]

10 minutes ago, APMP said:

Doesn't the letter of the law basically mandate looking at more than a freeze frame before awarding a straight red if the hand is that close to the body? Not sure how you can conclude deliberate intent without seeing if/when/how the arm moved.

Could the ref have ended up deciding it was deliberate and therefore a straight red despite the ball deflecting off the leg first? Sure. But you gotta do work. Pretty sure the VAR rules say you look at slow motion replays (which include more than a single video frame) to determine the point of contact.
 

 

I'm not sure that there is any publicly facing guidance of VAR reviews are to be handled. Just that they use a monitor to review the play and make a determination.

 

7 minutes ago, ztejas said:

He obviously had his mind made up already. Which seems a little unprofessional.

 

I disagree. I mean maybe. But as he watched the play in real time, he might have seen that the play made by James stopped the goal and when he saw it was a handball via the replay, it was an instant red/penalty.

 

I mean from that position, he might have missed the actual handball, just that it stopped the goal.

 

I will also add that I think he got this call 100% right and that if he only spent an instant looking at the VAR, it doesn't matter, because the call is right.

Edited August 28, 2021 by Captain Ron

[TexArcher 37974]

God dammit, now I've gotta sit through over half an hour of Mourinho-style football from Chelsea again.  Blech.

[ztejas 43467]

2 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

I'm not sure that there is any publicly facing guidance of VAR reviews are to be handled. Just that they use a monitor to review the play and make a determination.

 

 

I disagree. I mean maybe. But as he watched the play in real time, he might have seen that the play made by James stopped the goal and when he saw it was a handball via the replay, it was an instant red/penalty.

 

I mean from that position, he might have missed the actual handball, just that it stopped the goal.

But he didn't give a red. If he's going to use VAR to check it he could at least be thorough in the VAR check. He was clearly itching to give the red. Even if it's the right call at least give the impression you're utilizing VAR properly.

[APMP 688]

He obviously had his mind made up already. Which seems a little unprofessional.

I think he relied on whatever was said in his ear about the arm moving forward. Disappointing because he had access to the video and is supposed to watch the video with his own eyes.

The red card is not the problem for me. The problem for me is that we got a decision overturned based on the VIDEO assistant referee process, which has a "clear and obvious error" standard, with just a single image and no actual video being used.

[ztejas 43467]

Just now, APMP said:

The red card is not the problem for me. The problem for me is that we got a decision overturned based on the VIDEO assistant referee process, which has a "clear error" standard, with just a single image and no actual video being used.

Exactly.

[Captain Ron 12883]

But that was a clear error. James stopped a goal with his arm, that's a red and a penalty. When Taylor saw that the arm stopped the goal, it was an easy call.

I would argue that if he realized his mistake from a single frame of video it makes it an easy call that it was a clear an obvious error.

[mdmost 43004]

Pretty sure that was a piss bottle thrown on the field. 

Edited August 28, 2021 by mdmost

[TexArcher 37974]

Was that a piss bottle?

[Captain Ron 12883]

Just now, TexArcher said:

Was that a piss bottle?

 

Oh yeah, that was piss

[APMP 688]

There's not a lot of official guidance on VAR, but the premier league has at least said

"Real-time speed replays will be used initially to check for intensity. Slow-motion replays will be used to identify point of contact." -- https://www.premierleague.com/news/1297368

If just a freeze frame was considered, then there was no motion used at all in the VAR decision, let alone slow motion.

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

But that was a clear error. James stopped a goal with his arm, that's a red and a penalty. When Taylor saw that the arm stopped the goal, it was an easy call.
I would argue that if he realized his mistake from a single frame of video it makes it an easy call that it was a clear an obvious error.

I just checked the rules. It's not an automatic pk and red card just because a player's hand stops a goal. The play itself has to meet the definition of a handball, which means it had to be intentional or he had to have his hand in an unnatural position. It hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm while he was falling back. That's not a handball anywhere else on the field so it shouldn't be there.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[APMP 688]

But that was a clear error. James stopped a goal with his arm, that's a red and a penalty. When Taylor saw that the arm stopped the goal, it was an easy call.
I would argue that if he realized his mistake from a single frame of video it makes it an easy call that it was a clear an obvious error.

Sure it might well have been a clear error. But that arm was not in an unnatural position, mere inches from James' leg. So if it is not in an unnatural position, I don't see how the ref can determine the ball was handled deliberately from just a freeze frame.

The ball might indeed have been handled deliberately, but ref should actually watch the video before deciding.

[ztejas 43467]

2 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

I just checked the rules. It's not an automatic pk and red card just because a player's hand stops a goal. The play itself has to meet the definition of a handball, which means it had to be intentional or he had to have his hand in an unnatural position. It hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm while he was falling back. That's not a handball anywhere else on the field so it shouldn't be there.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

Eh I think it was totally a handball. I guess I have an issue with the rule. I don't think an incidental handball should be a straight red. 

Cest la vie.

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

Eh I think it was totally a handball. I guess I have an issue with the rule. I don't think an incidental handball should be a straight red. 
Cest la vie.

What's an incidental handball?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[hobbes2702 13045]

7 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

I just checked the rules. It's not an automatic pk and red card just because a player's hand stops a goal. The play itself has to meet the definition of a handball, which means it had to be intentional or he had to have his hand in an unnatural position. It hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm while he was falling back. That's not a handball anywhere else on the field so it shouldn't be there.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

It is when he swings his arm forward 

[ztejas 43467]

1 minute ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

What's an incidental handball?

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

Something that doesn't exist in the rules 😁

[MoJames 8244]

Law from IFAB:

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off: • denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)

Taylor was right no matter how harsh it felt.

[Captain Ron 12883]

3 minutes ago, MoJames said:

Law from IFAB:

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off: • denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)

Taylor was right no matter how harsh it felt.

This. Harsh, but 100% the correct call. 

[Longhornfan1024 1707]

Law from IFAB:

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off: • denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a handball offence (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)

Taylor was right no matter how harsh it felt.

The key is that it has to be a handball offense. What it breaks down to is was james internationally touching the ball with his hands when it hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm. I don't think I've seen anyone argue that would be the case anywhere else on the field. Because it's not. So it isn't in the box either.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk

[Captain Ron 12883]

2 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

The key is that it has to be a handball offense. What it breaks down to is was james internationally touching the ball with his hands when it hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm. I don't think I've seen anyone argue that would be the case anywhere else on the field. Because it's not. So it isn't in the box either.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

You know why that’s not a handball anywhere else? Because anywhere else you don’t care if the ball gets past you and you keep your arm back.

There you do, James did and he threw his arm forward intentionally handling it to make sure it didn’t go in goal. Handball. 

[hobbes2702 13045]

9 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

The key is that it has to be a handball offense. What it breaks down to is was james internationally touching the ball with his hands when it hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm. I don't think I've seen anyone argue that would be the case anywhere else on the field. Because it's not. So it isn't in the box either.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

It was clearly a handball. 

[Cheeseweasel 26438]

13 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

The key is that it has to be a handball offense. What it breaks down to is was james internationally touching the ball with his hands when it hit off his thigh then immediately hit his arm. I don't think I've seen anyone argue that would be the case anywhere else on the field. Because it's not. So it isn't in the box either.

Sent from my SM-G950U1 using Tapatalk
 

[Captain Ron 12883]

47 minutes ago, Longhornfan1024 said:

The key is that it has to be a handball offense. 

 

It is

[midtown 3346]

Without comment

 

[Captain Ron 12883]

5 hours ago, ztejas said:

It was 21-22 to 6 last week without a red in the 35th. 

They get Norwich and Burnley now before Spurs. Have to think Arteta is coaching for his job in these next 3*. 

 

Going back to this for a second. I can't help but think Arteta is coaching for his job against Norwich. Barring anything drastic happening, Arsenal is going to sit in last place over the international break, and that game is for last place to the loser. If they don't get a result that gets them out of last place, do you leave him to coach 1 more game?

[shadow_operative 15932]

1 hour ago, midtown said:

Without comment

 

 

speaking of "the internet keeps winning":

https://www.instagram.com/p/CTHqARTogTD/?utm_medium=copy_link

 

now if only the people who run this site could figure out how to embed IG. 

[mr. littlejeans 184]

2 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

Going back to this for a second. I can't help but think Arteta is coaching for his job against Norwich. Barring anything drastic happening, Arsenal is going to sit in last place over the international break, and that game is for last place to the loser. If they don't get a result that gets them out of last place, do you leave him to coach 1 more game?

no. you go get jack wilshere before it’s too late.

[ztejas 43467]

6 minutes ago, Captain Ron said:

 

Going back to this for a second. I can't help but think Arteta is coaching for his job against Norwich. Barring anything drastic happening, Arsenal is going to sit in last place over the international break, and that game is for last place to the loser. If they don't get a result that gets them out of last place, do you leave him to coach 1 more game?

I think you start discussions over the break and see who might be out there. I suppose they could can him after a Norwich loss but I'm not sure I see them dropping 6 points in these next 2. 

[MoJames 8244]

4 games ago.

https://streamable.com/r15psp

[hobbes2702 13045]

What’s your point

[ztejas 43467]

29 minutes ago, MoJames said:

4 games ago.

https://streamable.com/r15psp

Wow. Either didn't watch this one or don't remember it. How did that not go to VAR?

[Captain Ron 12883]

46 minutes ago, MoJames said:

4 games ago.

https://streamable.com/r15psp

And a whole season too 

[Captain Ron 12883]

3 hours ago, mr. littlejeans said:

no. you go get jack wilshere before it’s too late.

The real life Jamie Tart.