or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 273 comments are related to an article called:

VAR - loads of s***

Page 6 of 11

posted on 10/4/19

comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 1 hour, 41 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by D'Jeezus Mackaroni (U1137)
posted 3 hours, 46 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 3 minutes ago

If you're a striker in todays game, you're probably better off just aiming for the players arm who's right in front of you instead of the net. This farcical system will give you a pen.

The game is in disrepute.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strikers are pretty inconsistent at hitting a massive, stationary target like a goal - don't think they would have too much success if they tried aiming just at arms.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

If a defender is right in front of you, a striker need only dink the ball at him from a yard away. Throw your hands up and shout penalty and wait for VAR to do the rest.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't be given as handball though. Unless the defender has his arms away from his body in a way that will block the progression of the ball.
Distance from the ball and if it is unexpected is also taken into account.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

so we’re expecting players to run around with their arms flat against their body?

posted on 10/4/19

Ridiculous.

posted on 10/4/19

posted on 10/4/19

If you go diving it with your arms out making yourself bigger it's going to be a penalty, this has been confirmed. So if you don't want it to be a penalty, don't do it. The onus is on the defender not to do it. This is why many defenders put their hands behind their backs when defending. For lunges, get better at it. Players have got better at following the laws as they've changed throughout history, it will happen with VAR also.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 16 minutes ago
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree and settle on that I, along with FIFA, UEFA and the referes don't understand the laws but you do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, classic TOOR, trying to change the debate.

I haven’t said that.

It comes down to this - you think you can form a credible decision about a foul without knowing the law.

It’s a laughable comment so no, we won’t agree to disagree - you’re wrong.

If I know the laws and you don’t, my opinion is more logical and credible than yours.

Thanks for the laugh again

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 16 minutes ago
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree and settle on that I, along with FIFA, UEFA and the referes don't understand the laws but you do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ah, classic TOOR, trying to change the debate.

I haven’t said that.

It comes down to this - you think you can form a credible decision about a foul without knowing the law.

It’s a laughable comment so no, we won’t agree to disagree - you’re wrong.

If I know the laws and you don’t, my opinion is more logical and credible than yours.

Thanks for the laugh again
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I haven't changed the debate, this is the debate. You believe the law makers, referees etc are wrong and you are correct even after numerous examples have shown you are wrong. I told you this would be proven during the World Cup, it was and then has been further proven during the CL.

You still don't accept it.

https://www.ja606.co.uk/articles/viewArticle/391983

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted on 22/6/18

Can't post on it TOOR, because you your precious fanbase having everyone banned.

So here's my response:


Interesting article, TOOR.

I actually think there are two possibilities yesterday:

1. The referee may claim he didn't see it. Yes, he was looking at the incident but the 'handball' occurred behind the player and at speed, so this could well be the case.

2. The referee did see it and the VAR official asked him to review it.

If it is option 2. then you're right.

This is a bit tricky though, without any input from FIFA or the referee themselves.

Partly because they can't clear up 1. or 2. for us and also, because even if it were option 2, I genuinely believe the officials made an error yesterday and would love to hear their take on it.

I've been in two minds about how to word this because I like to be upfront, admit when I'm wrong etc. but equally where you're involved, you cannot do the same and we know from the thread you mention that you don't actually understand the handball law yourself.

On that very thread, you were wrong about how handball is adjudged and you were wrong to say that the linesman in the Stoke game made a mistake.

But, putting all of that aside and focusing on the VAR stuff specifically, I can see why you feel this backs your point up and yes, there's a very real possibility that is the case.

Bizarrely even after you've been proven incorrect you still maintain the law makers and officials are wrong and you're right. You couldn't make it up.

posted on 10/4/19

That’s not what I’ve said at all - you’re lying.

I was absolutely correct in the thread you’ve posted. Melton was too. The only thing that changed is the guidance that we weren’t privvy to, which we now know, and which contradicts the laws. I’ve been clear on that in this article and you’ve outright lied about what has been said to try and save yourself from being laughed at.

You’re desperately trying to get away from the fact that you’ve claimed you don’t need to know the law in order to know whether it’s a foul.

I suspect you now realise what a stupid comment that was, which is why you’re lying about what I’ve said.

posted on 10/4/19

But thanks for showing everyone the thread where you proved you don’t the handball law.

Binary, you called it.

posted on 10/4/19

It doesn't contradict the laws at all. You've failed to show where it contradicts the laws, despite being asked.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
But thanks for showing everyone the thread where you proved you don’t the handball law.

Binary, you called it.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I said it's binary whether the arm moved towards the ball. You keep trying to claim otherwise and I keep having to point this out.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 18 seconds ago
It doesn't contradict the laws at all. You've failed to show where it contradicts the laws, despite being asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I explained that when you asked for it.

In my opinion it does.

Maybe you should spend less time lying and more time reading people’s replies.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 0 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
But thanks for showing everyone the thread where you proved you don’t the handball law.

Binary, you called it.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I said it's binary whether the arm moved towards the ball. You keep trying to claim otherwise and I keep having to point this out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

More lies

When I’m at a computer I’ll copy and paste your comments.

Are you lying or do you just forget things you say? You contradict yourself an awful lot.

Binary.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 9 minutes ago
That’s not what I’ve said at all - you’re lying.

I was absolutely correct in the thread you’ve posted. Melton was too. The only thing that changed is the guidance that we weren’t privvy to, which we now know, and which contradicts the laws. I’ve been clear on that in this article and you’ve outright lied about what has been said to try and save yourself from being laughed at.

You’re desperately trying to get away from the fact that you’ve claimed you don’t need to know the law in order to know whether it’s a foul.

I suspect you now realise what a stupid comment that was, which is why you’re lying about what I’ve said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is what you said, literally. As per below:-

The blame lies squarely with the law makers at this stage.

I think it's absolutely fair to say that:

a) They don't understand the handball law properly

I think UEFA have issued guidance that contradicts the law because they don't understand it.

So yeah you can keep claiming I'm lying but the proof is in this article.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 18 seconds ago
It doesn't contradict the laws at all. You've failed to show where it contradicts the laws, despite being asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I explained that when you asked for it.

In my opinion it does.

Maybe you should spend less time lying and more time reading people’s replies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you didn't. You fired out the old misconception err but it wasn't intentional. I then explained to you as I have had to do before that intentional in regards to handball is different than the dictionary definition, there is criteria to be consider to determine intention. The guidance as well as the law helps referees determine this and they have proven what I said before was correct.

It is time to accept it or forever be flabbergasted by referees correctly following the laws and guidance.

posted on 10/4/19

Yes, the proof is there.

Claiming I said referees don’t know the law is a lie.

It’s a lie to get away from this:

“I don’t need to know the law to know if it was a foul”

TOOR
10th April 2019

posted on 10/4/19

comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 18 seconds ago
It doesn't contradict the laws at all. You've failed to show where it contradicts the laws, despite being asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I explained that when you asked for it.

In my opinion it does.

Maybe you should spend less time lying and more time reading people’s replies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you didn't. You fired out the old misconception err but it wasn't intentional. I then explained to you as I have had to do before that intentional in regards to handball is different than the dictionary definition, there is criteria to be consider to determine intention. The guidance as well as the law helps referees determine this and they have proven what I said before was correct.

It is time to accept it or forever be flabbergasted by referees correctly following the laws and guidance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes I did, I gave an explanation.

You said I was wrong so I posted Graham Poll’s comments that prove me right.

You then ran off.

posted on 10/4/19

If a VAR decision goes in your favour which leads directly to Spurs knocking out City, you'll definitely change your tune OP.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 0 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 8 minutes ago
But thanks for showing everyone the thread where you proved you don’t the handball law.

Binary, you called it.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I said it's binary whether the arm moved towards the ball. You keep trying to claim otherwise and I keep having to point this out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

More lies

When I’m at a computer I’ll copy and paste your comments.

Are you lying or do you just forget things you say? You contradict yourself an awful lot.

Binary.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll do it for you. Here you go:-

Like binary, 1 or 0. Did the player bring his hand towards the ball, it's a 1. Did he not, it's a 0. No interpretation.

So you've produced this lie again, I've proven it wrong again. See you in a few months and we can do this again?

comment by (U18814)

posted on 10/4/19

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 10/4/19

Thanks TOOR, although there’s one other quote that you’ve left off that is the final nail in your coffin.

And you’re still wrong.

The decision isn’t binary because it’s possible the players hand moved towards the ball without it being a deliberate attempt to affect the ball.

Both Melton and I explained this to you at length.

You still didn’t understand.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 8 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 15 minutes ago
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 11 minutes ago
Jesus Winston, I’ve just come back on here having last looked at Ja this morn and see you and TOOR have been having the same trivial argument all day long.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

All day long?

Yeh, okay mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Errrr... yeah, and you’re still facking going
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Errr.... no. A few comments an hour earlier?

All day.



Ace can’t do anything else when posting on here. He sits in a dark room so he can concentrate.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 25 seconds ago
Thanks TOOR, although there’s one other quote that you’ve left off that is the final nail in your coffin.

And you’re still wrong.

The decision isn’t binary because it’s possible the players hand moved towards the ball without it being a deliberate attempt to affect the ball.

Both Melton and I explained this to you at length.

You still didn’t understand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow.

It doesn't matter if it was deliberate in a literal sense. If that was the case you'd barely ever see penalties for hand ball. Whether the arm was moved towards the ball is part of the criteria used to determine whether the referee judges it as deliberate. You still don't understand despite it being proven in the World Cup and CL. You'll still be flabbergasted when VAR is brought into the PL as you can't get away from the literal definition and accept the criteria and guidance referees have been given. Meanwhile every other sane person, whilst not necessarily agreeing with it will understand and accept the laws and guidance are being followed.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Thanks TOOR, although there’s one other quote that you’ve left off that is the final nail in your coffin.

And you’re still wrong.

The decision isn’t binary because it’s possible the players hand moved towards the ball without it being a deliberate attempt to affect the ball.

Both Melton and I explained this to you at length.

You still didn’t understand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and both have been proven incorrect. One accepts that, the other, being you, not surprisingly doesn't.

posted on 10/4/19

Anyway I'm off to watch United park the bus but still get spanked.

posted on 10/4/19

comment by TOORPalaceFan (U1721)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
Thanks TOOR, although there’s one other quote that you’ve left off that is the final nail in your coffin.

And you’re still wrong.

The decision isn’t binary because it’s possible the players hand moved towards the ball without it being a deliberate attempt to affect the ball.

Both Melton and I explained this to you at length.

You still didn’t understand.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and both have been proven incorrect. One accepts that, the other, being you, not surprisingly doesn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------



You were wrong.

You’re still wrong.

But today you’ve topped it all...

“You don’t need to know the laws to know if it’s a foul”

Absolute classic.

Your best yet.

Page 6 of 11

Sign in if you want to comment