I do have an idea, if he had thought it, he'd have given a penalty. Unless he just decided he didn't want to give it?

comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
I do have an idea, if he had thought it, he'd have given a penalty. Unless he just decided he didn't want to give it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What are you going on about?

It is a fact that two referees could conclude differently regarding that incident and neither would be wrong.

Get your head around it, because it won't change.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 2 minutes ago
I do have an idea, if he had thought it, he'd have given a penalty. Unless he just decided he didn't want to give it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

What are you going on about?

It is a fact that two referees could conclude differently regarding that incident and neither would be wrong.

Get your head around it, because it won't change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having thought more about this. I now think you are correct.

There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

Great! If you mean it.

What made you change your mind?

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 25 seconds ago
There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

Great! If you mean it.

What made you change your mind?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I lost the will to live.

There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

Ah, that again.

Yes, well that is your own fault. To argue something so blatantly wrong will lead to going around in circles I'm afraid.

It's 24 hours on and you ignored clear explanations from myself and Melton.

Any referee will confirm for you what I have told you.

That handball decision was not a clear error. Two referees with alternative opinions would both be entitled to their view, because it's not binary as you told us.

You are wrong.

Well then I'll agree to disagree and we will find out during the World Cup and after. Deal?

There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

No we won't and no deal.

What you're saying about the handball law and the specific incident against Stoke is wrong. 100%.

Before we even get to trying to agree about VAR, you need to understand that.

comment by Manfrombelmonty (U1705)
posted 1 day, 22 hours ago
I'd suggest you research what Fifa's definition of clear and obvious is, as that is the only one that counts and it is the one that proves you wrong.

-----------------------

Can you post it for us.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Still waiting on a link to this....

Manfrombelmonty (U1705)

I posted an explanation of it.

It's effectively the disagree with a decision vs identify a clear error part that I've explained multiple times.

Well I'll agree to disagree anyway if you don't mind. Cheers.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Manfrombelmonty (U1705)

I posted an explanation of it.

It's effectively the disagree with a decision vs identify a clear error part that I've explained multiple times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Explanations are all fine and dandy....but where's the link?

There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)

You can do what you like - won't change the fact that you're wrong.

Manfrombelmonty (U1705)

http://www.theifab.com/projects/vars/background-scope

This is one... it's on various web sites in different guises.

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
Manfrombelmonty (U1705)

http://www.theifab.com/projects/vars/background-scope

This is one... it's on various web sites in different guises.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So the definittion of "clear and obvious" is ""WAS THE DECISION CLEARLY WRONG?"".

So he could look at he Stoke penalty and decide he was clearly wrong and then give the penalty.

Cheers for clearing that up

Manfrombelmonty (U1705)

The definition is that it is not whether you disagree with the decision, it's whether there has been a clear error.

Fairly clear to me, but perhaps not to you.

Certainly it has TOOR baffled.

Honestly, i don;t care, i'm just feckin with you

Manfrombelmonty (U1705)

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

The VAR agreed with me here in a very similar but less clear cut decision as it was closer. Shambles about the way it happened with the referee calling halftime but right decision made in the end.

https://mobile.twitter.com/btsportfootball/status/985977301169913856/video/1

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11670/11193104/arsenal-handball-decision-would-have-been-more-informed-by-var-admits-pgmol

PGMOL saying that VAR would have reversed the decision by the referee who thought it was intentional but actually replays show he was trying to get his hand out of the way.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11670/11193104/arsenal-handball-decision-would-have-been-more-informed-by-var-admits-pgmol

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Both incidents show VAR correcting the referee in regards to the referee thinking the player had intentionally/unitentionally(intentional in the context of the rules of handball) handled the ball.

Sorry Winston, you're wrong.

comment by Fuorigrotta Globetrottas (U19575)
posted 30 seconds ago
VAR cannot reverse a referee decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, the referee can after being alerted to a clear and obvious error from him, by VAR.

comment by Fuorigrotta Globetrottas (U19575)
posted 20 minutes ago
not red the argiement but can be assure that TOOR is incorrect, whatever it is.

This is a fact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


This thread needs to die a death.