I haven't said you weren't fair but it was still slightly amusing how close my guess to what you were gonna say was.
I think if you just admitted you were wrong without trying to find excuses like VAR made a mistake or the referee didn't see it despite his reaction suggesting he did, it would be a lot fairer.
Yeah my son is fine. Woke up with torticollis and will be fine in a few days. Unfortunately for me, I'm now his maid/fetcher.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Glad your son is okay.
Why do you want me to admit I'm wrong, when I don't think it's clear that I am?
I said that I understand why you feel the incident backs you up. I said that there's a possibility that it does indeed do that.
But I've also said why it's inconclusive and that it'd be really helpful to hear from the officials.
I don't think that's unreasonable.
This silliness that you're engaging in on your article is a bit pathetic. Yes, you predicted what I'd say. Doesn't make what I have said any less valid and the running across to tell everyone about it makes you look like you're more interested in the childish antics of forum life than just discussing it.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Glad your son is okay.
Why do you want me to admit I'm wrong, when I don't think it's clear that I am?
I said that I understand why you feel the incident backs you up. I said that there's a possibility that it does indeed do that.
But I've also said why it's inconclusive and that it'd be really helpful to hear from the officials.
I don't think that's unreasonable.
This silliness that you're engaging in on your article is a bit pathetic. Yes, you predicted what I'd say. Doesn't make what I have said any less valid and the running across to tell everyone about it makes you look like you're more interested in the childish antics of forum life than just discussing it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Winston it's really not my fault your banned from the board, you'd have to look closer to home for that but I created an article and felt I should let everybody know what your response to it was.
So you don't think it's likely the referee thought it was handball but not intentional considering his reaction right after the handball before anybody even claimed for it?
If I were the referee I would have thought it wasn't intentional due to it being so close but on replay I would have changed my mind also.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
The mass bannings from your board is a separate subject entirely, but the point was not that you returned to the article, it's what you're writing on it - all a bit childish.
"So you don't think it's likely the referee thought it was handball but not intentional considering his reaction right after the handball before anybody even claimed for it?"
Maybe, maybe not.
I think it'd be a bit odd for him to see that clearly and then come to a different decision after seeing a replay. Could easily have thought the appeal was for the challenge.
Not saying it's unlikely, just that I don't know.
And re: your last post - are you actually saying you now think that was the correct decision?
Oh my.
It was a ludicrous decision.
Of course I think it was the correct decision. Live it looked like it was too close and the defender couldn't do anything about it. However on the replay, considering what intentional means in the context of the rules, it was a handball, less so than the Stoke one but still intentional. VAR got it right and that's the whole point of it, as it would have in my opinion, in the Stoke game.
"considering what intentional means in the context of the rules, it was a handball"
Absolutely clueless.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 54 minutes ago
"considering what intentional means in the context of the rules, it was a handball"
Absolutely clueless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Explain.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What's the point?
You've proven time and time again that you're not capable of understanding these things.
You decide a criteria in your head, make the situation fit and then as far as you're concerned, that's that.
Laughable, but I certainly won't be wasting my time trying to explain such a simple point to you.
I've told you before - go and ask someone qualified. See you can actually learn something.
I've no interest in trying to teach someone so ignorant.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What's the point?
You've proven time and time again that you're not capable of understanding these things.
You decide a criteria in your head, make the situation fit and then as far as you're concerned, that's that.
Laughable, but I certainly won't be wasting my time trying to explain such a simple point to you.
I've told you before - go and ask someone qualified. See you can actually learn something.
I've no interest in trying to teach someone so ignorant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah so it's me that's wrong, the person who agrees with the referee and the VAR and tried to explain it to you before the World Cup? I should have known. In fact I did know. I posted what you would say before you said it.
Alright thee TOOR, I assume you agree with the Iran handball decision as well, yes?
After all, the VAR official and referee can't be wrong, can they?
Good luck aligning yourselves with those incompetent muppets - you'll fit in well.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 hours ago
Alright thee TOOR, I assume you agree with the Iran handball decision as well, yes?
After all, the VAR official and referee can't be wrong, can they?
Good luck aligning yourselves with those incompetent muppets - you'll fit in well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just saw it. Yes according to the rules I would say that's handball. Easy to see with the replay but probably not in real time. His arm is away from his body. Close range yes but why is his arm there? Penalty for me but certainly one which people would have different views on.
Congratulations for aligning yourself with the WC's biggest horror show so far.
If further proof were needed that you have absolutely no idea about the handball law, here it is.
Cheers
Well if you think you're right and the officials are wrong that's fine. Not surprising. I did predict this before the competition started.
In this case it's certainly a debatable one but I agree with the decision.
At least we now know that they will look at handballs, as I said. As would have been the case if we had VAR against Stoke.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
It has indeed aligned with what you said - I'll give you that.
The difference is though, I think that is because the VAR officials have made a mistake. I'm convinced by that.
I think you'll find that is the case and that as VAR takes hold, I'll be proven right. These are just teething errors.
Brilliant that you think the Iran penalty was handball though.
How can we expect you to understand VAR if you don't understand the law itself?
You realise how many people were laughing at that decision?
Thanks for confirming what I already knew. Brilliant stuff.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
It has indeed aligned with what you said - I'll give you that.
The difference is though, I think that is because the VAR officials have made a mistake. I'm convinced by that.
I think you'll find that is the case and that as VAR takes hold, I'll be proven right. These are just teething errors.
Brilliant that you think the Iran penalty was handball though.
How can we expect you to understand VAR if you don't understand the law itself?
You realise how many people were laughing at that decision?
Thanks for confirming what I already knew. Brilliant stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
People can laugh all they like, those who know the rules, have trained in them, passed exams and are professionals watched a slow motion replay and decided it was handball. I agree with that decision. If you think they're wrong and you're right, that's not surprising but you're entitled to that opinion.
Perhaps you need to look into whether you really understand the law yourself?
VAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
You think everyone who knows the rules, who is trained in them etc. thinks that is a penalty?
It was a joke of a decision and you're agreeing with it. Great fun.
You've proven on here with several statements that you don't even know how the law actually works. It's literally in black and white.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 32 seconds ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
You think everyone who knows the rules, who is trained in them etc. thinks that is a penalty?
It was a joke of a decision and you're agreeing with it. Great fun.
You've proven on here with several statements that you don't even know how the law actually works. It's literally in black and white.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well actually I've sided with those who do know them. You've done what you always do and decided you're right, despite already been proven wrong on how VAR will be used in regards to handball. As I said, I expect you to say you're right and the officials are wrong, it's what you do but this incident is a debatable one. I happen to side with the officials. You do not, such is life.
If you think that means I don't understand how the law works, along with the officials but you do, also fine but perhaps it may be time for some self-reflection?
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
But there are plenty who know them who said it wasn't a penalty.
You've just sided with the person in charge of that particular game - the one being roundly mocked for a ridiculous decision.
No self-reflection needed, I've seen enough expert confirmation to know I'm right. I also understand the law.
You don't.
Comments like this prove you've no idea what you're on about:
"His arm is away from his body"
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
But there are plenty who know them who said it wasn't a penalty.
You've just sided with the person in charge of that particular game - the one being roundly mocked for a ridiculous decision.
No self-reflection needed, I've seen enough expert confirmation to know I'm right. I also understand the law.
You don't.
Comments like this prove you've no idea what you're on about:
"His arm is away from his body"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I understand that, which is why I understand it's a debatable one as it's open to interpretation on whether you believe his arm was in an unnatural position and therefore he gained an advantage. I do, as did the officials, which is why they gave the penalty.
"His arm is away from his body" is a perfect legitimate question to be asking yourself when you're trying to determine whether it's handball, which is why referees do it.
You're going for the black and white intentional/unintentional when in actual fact you can unintentionally handle the ball and be punished, as officials take many things into account in determining whether to punish the player. Where your arms are is the main one.
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Technically you could say 'it's open to interpretation' about any handball incident and clearly, some are more obvious than others.
But when you base your opinion on a lack of logic or even a lack of knowledge, then the debate is pointless.
The law clarifies:
"the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement"
So, the fact that you are taking it as 'his arm is away from his body and therefore it's handball' is wrong.
You're the one making this black and white. You read the rule, set the criteria in your mind, and then you decide it's handball.
You called it binary.
It's not, and that last comment 'Where your arms are is the main one' is completely wrong. You've made that up and again proven you haven't got a clue.
Sign in if you want to comment
World Cup VAR
Page 13 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17
posted on 22/6/18
I haven't said you weren't fair but it was still slightly amusing how close my guess to what you were gonna say was.
I think if you just admitted you were wrong without trying to find excuses like VAR made a mistake or the referee didn't see it despite his reaction suggesting he did, it would be a lot fairer.
posted on 22/6/18
Yeah my son is fine. Woke up with torticollis and will be fine in a few days. Unfortunately for me, I'm now his maid/fetcher.
posted on 22/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Glad your son is okay.
Why do you want me to admit I'm wrong, when I don't think it's clear that I am?
I said that I understand why you feel the incident backs you up. I said that there's a possibility that it does indeed do that.
But I've also said why it's inconclusive and that it'd be really helpful to hear from the officials.
I don't think that's unreasonable.
This silliness that you're engaging in on your article is a bit pathetic. Yes, you predicted what I'd say. Doesn't make what I have said any less valid and the running across to tell everyone about it makes you look like you're more interested in the childish antics of forum life than just discussing it.
posted on 22/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Glad your son is okay.
Why do you want me to admit I'm wrong, when I don't think it's clear that I am?
I said that I understand why you feel the incident backs you up. I said that there's a possibility that it does indeed do that.
But I've also said why it's inconclusive and that it'd be really helpful to hear from the officials.
I don't think that's unreasonable.
This silliness that you're engaging in on your article is a bit pathetic. Yes, you predicted what I'd say. Doesn't make what I have said any less valid and the running across to tell everyone about it makes you look like you're more interested in the childish antics of forum life than just discussing it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well Winston it's really not my fault your banned from the board, you'd have to look closer to home for that but I created an article and felt I should let everybody know what your response to it was.
So you don't think it's likely the referee thought it was handball but not intentional considering his reaction right after the handball before anybody even claimed for it?
posted on 22/6/18
If I were the referee I would have thought it wasn't intentional due to it being so close but on replay I would have changed my mind also.
posted on 22/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
The mass bannings from your board is a separate subject entirely, but the point was not that you returned to the article, it's what you're writing on it - all a bit childish.
"So you don't think it's likely the referee thought it was handball but not intentional considering his reaction right after the handball before anybody even claimed for it?"
Maybe, maybe not.
I think it'd be a bit odd for him to see that clearly and then come to a different decision after seeing a replay. Could easily have thought the appeal was for the challenge.
Not saying it's unlikely, just that I don't know.
And re: your last post - are you actually saying you now think that was the correct decision?
Oh my.
It was a ludicrous decision.
posted on 22/6/18
Of course I think it was the correct decision. Live it looked like it was too close and the defender couldn't do anything about it. However on the replay, considering what intentional means in the context of the rules, it was a handball, less so than the Stoke one but still intentional. VAR got it right and that's the whole point of it, as it would have in my opinion, in the Stoke game.
posted on 22/6/18
"considering what intentional means in the context of the rules, it was a handball"
Absolutely clueless.
posted on 22/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 54 minutes ago
"considering what intentional means in the context of the rules, it was a handball"
Absolutely clueless.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What? Explain.
posted on 22/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What's the point?
You've proven time and time again that you're not capable of understanding these things.
You decide a criteria in your head, make the situation fit and then as far as you're concerned, that's that.
Laughable, but I certainly won't be wasting my time trying to explain such a simple point to you.
I've told you before - go and ask someone qualified. See you can actually learn something.
I've no interest in trying to teach someone so ignorant.
posted on 22/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
What's the point?
You've proven time and time again that you're not capable of understanding these things.
You decide a criteria in your head, make the situation fit and then as far as you're concerned, that's that.
Laughable, but I certainly won't be wasting my time trying to explain such a simple point to you.
I've told you before - go and ask someone qualified. See you can actually learn something.
I've no interest in trying to teach someone so ignorant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah so it's me that's wrong, the person who agrees with the referee and the VAR and tried to explain it to you before the World Cup? I should have known. In fact I did know. I posted what you would say before you said it.
posted on 27/6/18
Alright thee TOOR, I assume you agree with the Iran handball decision as well, yes?
After all, the VAR official and referee can't be wrong, can they?
Good luck aligning yourselves with those incompetent muppets - you'll fit in well.
posted on 27/6/18
I haven't seen it.
posted on 27/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 hours ago
Alright thee TOOR, I assume you agree with the Iran handball decision as well, yes?
After all, the VAR official and referee can't be wrong, can they?
Good luck aligning yourselves with those incompetent muppets - you'll fit in well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just saw it. Yes according to the rules I would say that's handball. Easy to see with the replay but probably not in real time. His arm is away from his body. Close range yes but why is his arm there? Penalty for me but certainly one which people would have different views on.
posted on 27/6/18
posted on 27/6/18
Congratulations for aligning yourself with the WC's biggest horror show so far.
If further proof were needed that you have absolutely no idea about the handball law, here it is.
Cheers
posted on 27/6/18
Well if you think you're right and the officials are wrong that's fine. Not surprising. I did predict this before the competition started.
In this case it's certainly a debatable one but I agree with the decision.
At least we now know that they will look at handballs, as I said. As would have been the case if we had VAR against Stoke.
posted on 27/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
It has indeed aligned with what you said - I'll give you that.
The difference is though, I think that is because the VAR officials have made a mistake. I'm convinced by that.
I think you'll find that is the case and that as VAR takes hold, I'll be proven right. These are just teething errors.
Brilliant that you think the Iran penalty was handball though.
How can we expect you to understand VAR if you don't understand the law itself?
You realise how many people were laughing at that decision?
Thanks for confirming what I already knew. Brilliant stuff.
posted on 27/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 42 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
It has indeed aligned with what you said - I'll give you that.
The difference is though, I think that is because the VAR officials have made a mistake. I'm convinced by that.
I think you'll find that is the case and that as VAR takes hold, I'll be proven right. These are just teething errors.
Brilliant that you think the Iran penalty was handball though.
How can we expect you to understand VAR if you don't understand the law itself?
You realise how many people were laughing at that decision?
Thanks for confirming what I already knew. Brilliant stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
People can laugh all they like, those who know the rules, have trained in them, passed exams and are professionals watched a slow motion replay and decided it was handball. I agree with that decision. If you think they're wrong and you're right, that's not surprising but you're entitled to that opinion.
Perhaps you need to look into whether you really understand the law yourself?
posted on 27/6/18
VAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!
posted on 28/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
You think everyone who knows the rules, who is trained in them etc. thinks that is a penalty?
It was a joke of a decision and you're agreeing with it. Great fun.
You've proven on here with several statements that you don't even know how the law actually works. It's literally in black and white.
posted on 28/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 32 seconds ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
You think everyone who knows the rules, who is trained in them etc. thinks that is a penalty?
It was a joke of a decision and you're agreeing with it. Great fun.
You've proven on here with several statements that you don't even know how the law actually works. It's literally in black and white.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well actually I've sided with those who do know them. You've done what you always do and decided you're right, despite already been proven wrong on how VAR will be used in regards to handball. As I said, I expect you to say you're right and the officials are wrong, it's what you do but this incident is a debatable one. I happen to side with the officials. You do not, such is life.
If you think that means I don't understand how the law works, along with the officials but you do, also fine but perhaps it may be time for some self-reflection?
posted on 28/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
But there are plenty who know them who said it wasn't a penalty.
You've just sided with the person in charge of that particular game - the one being roundly mocked for a ridiculous decision.
No self-reflection needed, I've seen enough expert confirmation to know I'm right. I also understand the law.
You don't.
Comments like this prove you've no idea what you're on about:
"His arm is away from his body"
posted on 28/6/18
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
But there are plenty who know them who said it wasn't a penalty.
You've just sided with the person in charge of that particular game - the one being roundly mocked for a ridiculous decision.
No self-reflection needed, I've seen enough expert confirmation to know I'm right. I also understand the law.
You don't.
Comments like this prove you've no idea what you're on about:
"His arm is away from his body"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes I understand that, which is why I understand it's a debatable one as it's open to interpretation on whether you believe his arm was in an unnatural position and therefore he gained an advantage. I do, as did the officials, which is why they gave the penalty.
"His arm is away from his body" is a perfect legitimate question to be asking yourself when you're trying to determine whether it's handball, which is why referees do it.
You're going for the black and white intentional/unintentional when in actual fact you can unintentionally handle the ball and be punished, as officials take many things into account in determining whether to punish the player. Where your arms are is the main one.
posted on 28/6/18
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
Technically you could say 'it's open to interpretation' about any handball incident and clearly, some are more obvious than others.
But when you base your opinion on a lack of logic or even a lack of knowledge, then the debate is pointless.
The law clarifies:
"the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement"
So, the fact that you are taking it as 'his arm is away from his body and therefore it's handball' is wrong.
You're the one making this black and white. You read the rule, set the criteria in your mind, and then you decide it's handball.
You called it binary.
It's not, and that last comment 'Where your arms are is the main one' is completely wrong. You've made that up and again proven you haven't got a clue.
Page 13 of 17
13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17