VAR

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 20 seconds ago
True, but I think with the new rules next season any handball even if it’s unavoidable is considered handball, might be wrong?

But right now I think even if the ref thinks it touched his arm it isn’t classed as handball.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Think you’re absolutely right.

Although not sure whether there’s any variance if the ball hits the hand, then another part of the body and then goes in!

It’s a ridiculous law change brought about by the governing body’s messing with the law.

If this is the new rule then surely players will just purposely kick the ball at opponents arms in the box and get a pen?

So close yet so VAR

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 33 seconds ago
If this is the new rule then surely players will just purposely kick the ball at opponents arms in the box and get a pen?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it’s only if the ball hitting the arm leads to a goal.

Any other situation and it defaults to the current laws (if anyone knows what they are anymore!)

comment by manutd1982 (U6633)
posted 51 seconds ago
If this is the new rule then surely players will just purposely kick the ball at opponents arms in the box and get a pen?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Players doing star jumps whenever the ball is hit low...

Would have been stupid to rule it out.

If they decide handball is handball no matter what then fair enough so long as they remain consistent.

I think the reason why it was given was because the ball would have hit a very similar area of his body and still go in towards goal.

The amount of area that it actually did hit his arm was so minimal that it was deemed not handball if you like.

Now if the direction flow of the ball changed course more drastically after hitting his arm, then that would have been a different outcome.

comment by Prem (U7618)
posted 8 hours, 18 minutes ago
I think the reason why it was given was because the ball would have hit a very similar area of his body and still go in towards goal.

The amount of area that it actually did hit his arm was so minimal that it was deemed not handball if you like.

Now if the direction flow of the ball changed course more drastically after hitting his arm, then that would have been a different outcome.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That's not the law, though, so I don't think that is correct at all.

That said, it does seem that UEFA and referees are making it up as they go along at the moment, so who knows.

Did the ball hit Llorente’s arm? Saw a few replays and it looked like his thigh to me.

Both the big calls were right last night. It’s awful for players and fans to celebrate like City last night, only for it to be taken away; but imagine being Spurs and going out because the lino missed something that he’d see nine times out of ten?

comment by Clockwork Red (U4892)
posted 6 minutes ago
Did the ball hit Llorente’s arm? Saw a few replays and it looked like his thigh to me.

Both the big calls were right last night. It’s awful for players and fans to celebrate like City last night, only for it to be taken away; but imagine being Spurs and going out because the lino missed something that he’d see nine times out of ten?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it did but it doesn't matter, there's no way that's deliberate in terms of how the laws are written.