VAR n/g obviously | Vital Football

VAR n/g obviously

I

ian08040

Vital Squad Member
Mate just sent video of Holstein Kiel v Bochum in Bundesliga 2
Bochum player shoots at goal,misses by a mile,Substitute warming up stops the ball fractionally before crosses line,VAR comes into play,substitute is booked,and VAR awards a penalty to Bochum which they score,
 
F###### ridiculous. Absolute disgrace.

A bit like in cricket if the batsman picks up the ball out of politeness and lobs it back to the bowler, technically that is obstruction. Never seen a player given out for it and if I were an umpire I deliberately wouldn't hear any appeal.
 
Captainreblue said:
So how should the ref have restarted the game, or are you saying VAR shouldn't have got involved?
Click to expand...

To be honest I'd just given a goal kick as the decision would have been if no touch had been made. The VAR guys could have just buried their heads in the sand and said the video isn't clear enough to over rule the referee's initial decision to give a goal kick.
 
But there is a written rule in the laws of the game of how a ref should deal with such a situation and how to restart the game. To suggest VAR guys should bury their heads in the sand is madness, especially when the footage is clear. They best thing would have been for the sub not to have been a tool. To blame VAR or the ref IMO for implementing the rules or doing their job is as 58 put it, fucking ridiculous.
 
Captainreblue said:
So how should the ref have restarted the game, or are you saying VAR shouldn't have got involved?
Click to expand...

I've no idea what the rules of the game actually say - presumably if the ref/VAR have given a pen, it's because that's what the rules say? In which case it's not the fault of the ref or the VAR, but it's a ridiculous rule. There needs to be an element of common sense in something like that. It's not like the player went on to the pitch, he was well behind the line, including the foot that stopped the ball. By all means give him a yellow card, but how the hell can that be worth a penalty?
 
Captainreblue said:
But there is a written rule in the laws of the game of how a ref should deal with such a situation and how to restart the game. To suggest VAR guys should bury their heads in the sand is madness, especially when the footage is clear. They best thing would have been for the sub not to have been a tool. To blame VAR or the ref IMO for implementing the rules or doing their job is as 58 put it, fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...

In terms of the player then considering both feet were behind the line by a noticeable distance then I would give the player the benefit of the doubt that he expected his controlling of the ball would have been off the pitch. I don't think he had a ruler close to hand in order to check he was a ball distance behind the line.

Looking at the video on my mobile, the ball doesn't necessarily look 100% in from a not ideal angle of the camera. It probably is still a centimeter or two in but the poor camera angle gives a grey area of certainty. From watching Sky Sports I've seen VAR get apparently clearer decisions wrong.
 
Baghdad_Rob said:
If an external player touches the ball then it should be a freekick at the point of the touch. As it happened in the penalty area then it would need to be given as a penalty.
Click to expand...

Well then make it an indirect freekick. I just can't see how you can possibly justify giving a penalty for a player who's off the pitch controlling a shot that's going well wide a millimetre or two before it goes off the pitch. To justify a penalty, for me, he'd have to have run onto the pitch and stopped a shot on target just as the ball's about to cross the line. As I said, surely there has to be a little bit of common sense in situations like that.
 
Captainreblue said:
But there is a written rule in the laws of the game of how a ref should deal with such a situation and how to restart the game. To suggest VAR guys should bury their heads in the sand is madness, especially when the footage is clear. They best thing would have been for the sub not to have been a tool. To blame VAR or the ref IMO for implementing the rules or doing their job is as 58 put it, fucking ridiculous.
Click to expand...
There is such a thing as the spirit and letter of the law; if that was not the case, refs would not be allowed to play and advantage. If Rule No. 3 deals with the number of players on the pitch it also makes mention of interfering with play. The player didn't interfere with play; so, the VAR official is a dickhead for being so pedantic and, Captain, you would appear to have jobsworth tendencies.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
I think it's drop ball unless the rules have changed of late
Click to expand...

Wayne Google the actual current rules. The ref and VAR got it right. Whether you think the law is correct/ right is a different matter. They both applied the laws of the game as they stand.

I personally think its wrong, but I don't make the rules, but the sub was a tit for getting involved. In this country you are not allowed to warm up as a sub along the goaline.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
I think it's drop ball unless the rules have changed of late
Click to expand...

It has always been a free kick as far as I know. Whenever I encountered it at Sunday league football level then a free kick was given. Typically the player off the pitch ended up deflecting the ball in such a way to stop the opposition taking a quick throw on etc and was therefore guilty of the offence of obstructing the opposition which is a free kick offense. While in this case no one was actually obstructed, a free kick is the thing that is normally given.
 
Wayne.Kerr said:
. If Rule No. 3 deals with the number of players on the pitch it also makes mention of interfering with play. The player didn't interfere with play
Click to expand...

The player touched the ball when the ball was still judged to be on the pitch when the game was still live. He couldn't be anymore interfering with play.
 
All bollocks which ever way you look at it. Nobody has come out of this looking good. If I were the penalty taker, I would have booted out (mind you that's what would happen if I tried to take a penalty properly).
 
Captainreblue said:
but the sub was a tit for getting involved. In this country you are not allowed to warm up as a sub along the goaline.
Click to expand...


Ive found it a little strange in the current Rugby World Cup.

When a try is scored there are often substitutes standing behind the try lines. And they come rushing on and hugging the try scorers as they put the ball down. They often (to me) seem to be interfering with play especially if there are defenders who are trying to run full pelt in that direction.

But nothing is said by anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.