Premier League 19/20: Page 21 - The Arsenal discussion forum and community: One More in the Tolly

Premier League 19/20

Meatwad

fuck subjectivity. when you have scummy officials like mike dean, who wants their "feelings" getting in the way. the ball touches your hand and it leads to a goal for your team, no goal.

flobaba

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
flobaba wrote:
On the flip side does the ref call a pen if the ball strikes the Spurs player in the same manner ?

No, because the rule doesn't say that he should. The new rule states that even incidents that wouldn't normally be handballs shall still be called if it ends up in a goal. By that logic, it shouldn't be a penalty if it was the other way around.

That is, if I've understood correctly.

Fair enough if that’s the case - if we had a winning game goal against Tottenham disallowed in the 90th minute in similar circumstances I’d be livid though.

QuincyAbeyie

Me too, mate. I'm even livid now. 😆

Meatwad

flobaba wrote:
Quincy Abeyie wrote:
No, because the rule doesn't say that he should. The new rule states that even incidents that wouldn't normally be handballs shall still be called if it ends up in a goal. By that logic, it shouldn't be a penalty if it was the other way around.

That is, if I've understood correctly.

Fair enough if that’s the case - if we had a winning game goal against Tottenham disallowed in the 90th minute in similar circumstances I’d be livid though.

and happy if a winning goal for them was ruled out?

Claudius

On the bright side, both bastard teams have dropped points. We finish the weekend ahead of them.

flobaba

Naturally.

My main point is it’s inconsistent if handball is only handball on one side of the pitch, i.e. basically called in favor of the defense only.

goon

Or more to the point, wouldn’t you also be livid if an ‘accidental’ hand ball diverted it to Kane for a winner and it was allowed to stand?

goon

flobaba wrote:
Naturally.

My main point is it’s inconsistent if handball is only handball on one side of the pitch, i.e. basically called in favor of the defense only.

The rules have always been inconsistent and rightly so. It’s designed to reduce the impact of handballs on play. They still expanded the scope of handballs on the other side of the pitch too.

Gunner89

Guardioula is a detestable man so this would be good were it not for the fact that pool or spurs are the alternative to city winning it.

goon

Watching MOTD. That’s a great hat trick from Pukki, not talking about 3 tap ins.

banduan

Quincy Abeyie wrote:
Claudius wrote:
Amen.

There's no rule saying that even accidental handballs should be a penalty, while there is a rule saying that even accidental handballs should result in a disallowed goal. Not quite sure what you mean by flipping the situation into one with totally different rules.

The rule applies only if the handball clearly affects play enough leading up to the goal / non-goal. It's a feckin stupid rule change. It only moves the subjectivity to another line. Even by the current rule change that goal shouldn't have been struck off.

I hope there's enough situations like this turning up the whole season to make FIFA realise what an idiotic change it is.

arsedocmd

jesus 😆 pep 😆

flobaba

banduan wrote:
Quincy Abeyie wrote:
There's no rule saying that even accidental handballs should be a penalty, while there is a rule saying that even accidental handballs should result in a disallowed goal. Not quite sure what you mean by flipping the situation into one with totally different rules.

The rule applies only if the handball clearly affects play enough leading up to the goal / non-goal. It's a feckin stupid rule change. It only moves the subjectivity to another line. Even by the current rule change that goal shouldn't have been struck off.

I hope there's enough situations like this turning up the whole season to make FIFA realise what an idiotic change it is.

That’s the thing isn’t it? They are betting there aren’t enough situations when this happens to make it a problem.

And if there aren’t, then it boggles my mind as to why instate a rule like that in the first place apart from it serving as a cop out for referees who don’t want to have to use their brains or common sense or take responsibility. The city player didn’t use his arm, he went for a header and missed it, and the ball struck his arm unintentionally and wasn’t in an “abnormal” position. How is that hand ball? How do you disallow a whole entire goal for that? It’s a silly rule and it has to be re-examined and revoked. It’s not sensible at all in my opinion.

flobaba

And then what’s the point of giving the benefit of doubt to the defending team only? For me the game is about goals. You reward the offense, not punish it.

JazzG

That game sums up Spurs quite well, the jammy fuckers. Completely dominated but have players who are clinical and it gets them out of trouble. City however won’t be unlucky like this all the time.

Clrnc

flobaba wrote:
banduan wrote:
The rule applies only if the handball clearly affects play enough leading up to the goal / non-goal. It's a feckin stupid rule change. It only moves the subjectivity to another line. Even by the current rule change that goal shouldn't have been struck off.

I hope there's enough situations like this turning up the whole season to make FIFA realise what an idiotic change it is.

That’s the thing isn’t it? They are betting there aren’t enough situations when this happens to make it a problem.

And if there aren’t, then it boggles my mind as to why instate a rule like that in the first place apart from it serving as a cop out for referees who don’t want to have to use their brains or common sense or take responsibility. The city player didn’t use his arm, he went for a header and missed it, and the ball struck his arm unintentionally and wasn’t in an “abnormal” position. How is that hand ball? How do you disallow a whole entire goal for that? It’s a silly rule and it has to be re-examined and revoked. It’s not sensible at all in my opinion.

Completely agree with this. They want to make the game easier for VAR but it took sense out of it now. It's like the game is for robots

Claudius

JazzG wrote:
That game sums up Spurs quite well, the jammy fuckers. Completely dominated but have players who are clinical and it gets them out of trouble. City however won’t be unlucky like this all the time.

I know that City can be devastating if they’re allowed to play, but the extent to which Spurs were anti-football yesterday was unusual for a top 4 team. They just looked to sit back in two banks of four and absorb City. And then hit them with 2 completely unexpected shots.

I’m curious to see how they will set up against us. We have nowhere near the fluidity of City, so can invite some adventure. But hopefully by then we’ve figured out some combination play that will hurt them. I think that AMN-Pepe can be especially dynamic, for example. Aubameyang to that at point and we can have a potent threesome

Jed

The Guardiola-Aguero kiss and make up just before VAR ruled the goal out is some of the funniest television you'll see all season.

lorddulaarsenal

Why is Saliba playing for Sheffield United?

Shady

Chelsea swarming all over Leicester in the opening two minutes. They look desperate to make up for last week.

« Previous Page Next Page »