Football is Ruined
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 03. 2024
- Zealand Playing:
► Twitch: / zeaiand
► CZcams: / @zealandonyt
Zealand Stuff:
► Instagram: / theoldzealand
► Twitter: / theoldzealand
► Discord: / discord
► Reddit: / theoldzealand
Gadjet (Editor):
► Gadjet’s Instagram: / miloszoric7 - Sport
Bro became the penguinz0 of football.
Did he
Not enough penis metaphors,
So just talking to camera makes him in to penguinz0? He isnt as obnoxious as penguinz is
I agree with the other guy. Critikal makes drama videos with toilet humor for children.
@@mmanu6126 I agree I'm not a fan of Charlie either. But you can't deny he's taken some inspiration from him just looking at the thumbnails and titles.
That second one was definitely a foul BY Gordon. He was kicking the other guy's leg.
It's just like the basketball example he gave, or ones even more egregious than that. I've seen players just go straight up in the air in basketball and get called for a player just launching themselves into them at a stupidly awkward angle because "well, they left their feet, so the foul HAS to be called, right?"
Harden is a perfect example, because he just started looking into all sorts of parts of the rule book and throwing himself into defenders and flailing all around the place, or taking a ludicrous amount of steps before a shot (I believe he found a loophole that allowed him to take FOUR steps before a 3-pointer one pre-season), and he exploits these things like some kind of super-weasel defense attorney..
@@JimTheFly Yeah, but if you get the defender in the air on a fake shot, then you deserve to get that call. That's how it's been for forever. Harden is another story though, he's a weasel.
Agreed
In the Netherlands we would call such situations 'spelbederf', which would translate to 'gamespoiling'. It's not smart, it should be frowned upon.
I don't get why that would not be a foul on Kalvin Philips. Like from another perspective Gordon is "kicking" Phillips right?
No. Gordon planted his foot in between the ball and Phillips foot. He wasn't going for the ball. He was just trying to literally get kicked.
Imagine a boxer is working out on a punching bag, and you suddenly jump in front of the bag mid-swing, then call the cops because you claim you were assaulted. That's literally what this is. It's insurance fraud.
I agree. Gordon isn't in possession of the ball, isn't even attempting to take possession of the ball, and is lunging/throwing himself in the way out of control looking for contact.
It's not even an issue of 'spirit of the game', it's just not a penalty and I wish rules would come in to punish simulation already it's ridiculous.
Exactly, on today's rules this could (and imo should) be interpreted as a foul by Gordon, not on him.
This has been a controversial debate down the pub for years; where does a trip end, and a kick begin? My solution is if the ball is under control of the kicking player(through a touch or turn of the body), then its not a foul.
That’s how it used to be. Gordon’s impeding Philips from playing the ball. I think var refs feel the need to justify being there.
Always knew Anthony Gordon had James Harden posters on his wall growing up
James Harden? The fat English guy?
As a referee, I am just calling it on the attacker for tripping the defender/hampering the defender from making a play on the ball.
Yeah, but you can't expect EPL refs to be on the same level as a Sunday league ref. That's too high a standard.
Then your a terrible referee, your going to punish the attacker because the defender was too slow? Gordon got himself in between the ball and the player as you should because if he touched Phillips while coming from behind then yeah it should be a foul, but he didn’t, clearly got inbetween the ball, Phillips was too slow, kicked Gordon. Clear penalty
@@ryaneveritt8324wrapped himself around phillips from behind and kicks phillips? but he shouldn't be penalised lol
@@rayyanchowdhury8306 Did you see Gordon make any contact with Phillips at all? No. Did Gordon get inbetween the ball in time? Yes. Did Phillips kick Gordon? Yes. Unintentional but still a penalty none the less
@@ryaneveritt8324 Troll
"there is no way a VAR will look at a dude getting kicked in the box and not give a penalty!"
I hear Jeremy Doku laughing.
No stupid redcards and onside disallowed goals - watch Tottanham - Liverpool, lol
As a Newcastle fan I was over the moon with this penalty. But I completely agree with you, the rules are broken and broken rules get exploited. Something has to be done to stop this sort of thing becoming a trend.
They've called this type a thing a pen for years.
VVD on Lamela in stoppage time in the classic Liverpool 3 Spurs 3 game is one stained in my memory.
Bruno Fernandes won a stoppage time pen as well doing the same thing
He initiated the contact so he is the one comiting the foul, when were the rules changed?
@@bilyscr1 But he didn't, he simply put his foot down, Philips didn't pay attention and kicked him
The ref was so against us yesterday
@@Motlier he came from behind with no intention of playing the ball. Crystal clear foul wtf is this bullshit. Same with the Goalkeeper get your shit togetger Premier league referees
"guy gets kicked in the box and its a penalty. That's the letter of the law." Looking at you, PGMOL for not calling a pen against Doku in the LFCvMCFC match.
No cool lights, not even a cat jumping... Of course it would lead to zero views. Are you even trying, Z?
TBH i love the no production value of this channel, it's just pure stream of thoughts from a guy who cares about Football. Gives me Virgin Islands rivalry vibes - it feels so disconnected from the general landscape of content that i love it.
If he isn’t careful he may end up with a broken leg cause that’s just ask for all the studs on your shin bone
I was just thinking about that. Or equally possible, one defender gets fed up with it, sees it coming, and just decides to go for a leg breaker.
@@dallasdrotts4907hopefully
Even in the rule of the law gordon never gets that second penalty.
Its a tackle from behind and he makes no contact with the ball, if anything he should get a yellow for it.
If I may interject as a referee at the local level:
I saw this literal interpretation coming a mile away when VAR was being introduced. Our jobs are already hard enough without being judged by ultra slow-mo HD replays being broadcast 5 times by the time the next stoppage in play has happened. But enough higher-ranking members of the football community demanded that VAR be introduced, and soon enough it happened. Along with the unintended consequences of not rewritting the entire Law book to co-exist with the fact VAR is now present. While the initial intent of VAR was to prevent incidences like the Hand of God, or Henry's Hand of God II, it was advertised as a way to rid the football world of dubious penalties and phantom offside calls, which was not it's intent, and the higher level referee organizations and figure heads, including Howard Webb and Mark Geiger, even said as much, saying "VAR is not meant to re-referee the game." Lately, though, it seems leagues, fans, FAs and other stakeholders in the sport have wanted VAR to expand to re-refereeing a match, which will only lead to more of the issues presented here.
The Laws are still mostly the same as pre-VAR times. Including the parameters of a foul, along with offside (which is a huge can of worms in it's own right...). The dilemma comes with the way the IFAB (the people who actually modify the Laws, not FIFA) wants the Laws written. They want the Laws applicable for all matches, from local parks to the World Cup Final (they actually use those terms in the Law book itself). This inherently creates a gulf in the way the Laws are applied. In matches without VAR, referees like myself can judge the game more in line with what that particular match deems a foul. A more freeflowing game between opponents who legit want to play football, and not use it as an excuse to kick their opponents, is vastly more enjoyable than stopping the match every minute for a foul.
Matches with VAR means the referees need to judge the foul solely based on that individual challenge. While some argue that this is how matches should be officiated anyways, it makes for situations like what is presented in this video: fouls which, while by letter of the Law are correct, certainly doesn't feel like one worthy of a penalty kick.
Now, 99.9% of matches don't have VAR. For every match with VAR, there are hundreds (if you include all levels from the local park leagues all the way up to National B leagues, since most B leagues don't have the resources to have VAR) of matches without it. But the matches with VAR are the most important ones, which amplifies the "issue". I put it in quotes because, again, relatively few matches with VAR, and of those matches, not all of them have these kinds of incidents.
unrelated question but what was ur motivation to become a ref?
seems like a pretty thankless job
@@kmir1791 For me, mainly it's a great job to have in college, flexible schedule, good pay etc. I also just enjoy being around competition/game environments. I do agree with the OP in that there's an art to reffing where not all games are the same. I do not ref u12 rec games the same as intense, spirited high school games. My methods are different for both, and my interpretation of the Laws are different for both because they include different sets of people and emotions. Using VAR makes a process that should be artistic increasingly robotic.
And at the same time, some games without var shows how VAR is needed. Even with all the problems, it helps a lot. ( Spain got 2 penalty against Brasil thanks to not having VAR on the match)
VAR I don't think is the problem. It's always been human error. It's inconsistency. Of the refs and the laws they interpret.
We already have seen this in Rugby League when video refereeing became a thing in the late 90s. It was meant to be a tool for the refereeing. It can't call forward passes. Whilst it has more authority to direct issues to the on field ref these days, on field ref has final say. The issue with VAR in Rugby right now is the referees on field and behind the screen being poor quality
A foul is a foul regardless of if it’s in the box or not. Anyone who thinks there should be a higher bar doesn’t actually care about “the integrity of the game.
Saw this game live and my first reaction was "this is not a penalty", for me this is similiar to a player slowing down his pace to get tripped by the player pursuing him, or in the case a player put his leg in front of the adversary's running path only to get a cheap foul.
Even the announcers were perplexed
Not a cheap foul at all. Phillips was too slow to the ball. You can’t call a foul because Gordon got himself inbetween the ball and player like you are told to do from a child 😂
@@ryaneveritt8324 newcastle fan detected, now pls shut up
@@felixmustermann790 Me? Newcastle fan? Absolutely not 😂 next time mate
@@ryaneveritt8324 then stop defending masochists wanting to feel pain while making fouls on their own
for me, even under the letter of the law, it's a foul by Gordon as he challenges Phillips, doesn’t get the ball, and impedes him. they got a similar dodgy one against us aswell
Yeah this is absolutely ridiculous. I believe in the Man City vs Crystal Palace game Mateta did the same when I think Foden was trying to clear
I think that was different
Refs did it in Utd v Liverpool when it was 1-2 and Bruno was on a yellow and gave away a free kick which should’ve been a yellow. Even the commentators mentions the only reason he weren’t sent off was cos it was a really good game and would’ve ruined the flow
This is probably the most annoying part of football because it's exactly the type of situation the VAR was brought in for but VAR doesn't even help remove them.
Considering how inconsistent calls are a lot of the time it really surprises me that this garbage is held onto to tightly.
If anything it should be a dive by Anthony Gordon.
Or create a new category called "forced foul" or something but we can not let Gordon and whoever else might attempt this get away this easily let alone reward them with a penalty.
Jamie Vardy was doing something similar during Leicester's title winning season and beyond. He was deliberately hanging his leg out to create the contact, it wasn't even subtle 😂
Happy Easter to you and your family Z. Also Happy Easter to everyone else as well. Hope you all have an amazing and relaxing day with your families❤
Ty, and happy Easter to you and your family!! Enjoy ❤
I was a football (soccer) referee and there was something we were tought, it was drilled into us. They used to say is that there were 2 rule books the laws of the game, that consisted in the 13 football rules. And then there was the unwritten one, that was the good sense rule book. And that was the most important one.
Totally agree, this is pretty bad already but has the potential to get much worse. I think the best solution would be to change the rule to be less focused on who kicks who, and more on who is intentionally trying to impede the others players from playing normally, this should actually be considered a foul from Gordon.
So when a defender tries to let the ball roll out but all he does is impede the attacking player is that a foul ? Because the attacking player in that case is normally the only one making a play for the ball and often the defender will hit the ground like bricks if touched even if not trying to play the ball.
@@ministoz93 see impeding is in the laws. If they ball is in playing distance you can shield all day. Now I will agree refs do not call it ever when the ball is not close.
to me, the best way (at first glance) is to write in about 'desire to play the ball' or something along those lines, just to push the attacking player to actually go for the ball. Reason i would say its important to not just do a 'defender trying to kick the ball' is because there are very legitimate examples of attacked nipping in front of defenders taking the ball but getting hit, i personally dont mind a foul like this if they try to play the ball, but in the anthony gordon examples he just isnt.
"Dora the explorer absolutely malding"
There is a rule that ,if you endanger yourself, then it's an indirect freekick to the opposition.
"Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury".
Running into players and getting kicked deliberately would be to "play in a dangerous manner".
Brian Clough said that if you want players to adhere to the rules, then you would have to punish the managers along with the players.
Even in the champions league, there were insane situations like with psv against bvb
One insane offside
and a penalty
Or the opposite in the RM vs RBL game where they didn’t give a red card to Vinicius JR
12:56 time for a dance break ... didn't see that coming xD
this is a really cool genre of video, some like critikal football slop videos is all i want sometimes
even in a world where people would still want this, possibly injuring yourself for a Penalty shouldn't be celebrated & FIFA needs to change it even if its just protecting the players from themselves
I think if VAR is gonna try and diseect this, there needs to be a rule change and likely a sort of "Embellishment" foul that exists in ice hockey.
If players get given a free kick against them and even a yellow much like diving where you're doing something to draw a foul than earnestly playing then that should be bookable.
Would i love to see Gordon doing this for England during National games? Yeah obviously, and rule benders you hate because theyre not on the team you have. And thats a point Zealand mentions and newcastle fans agree, its not a penalty but great for gordon to play the rules to his advantage
This is the reason the ball needs to be 'within playable distance' law was added to gain a penalty. Before, players would push the ball past a defender and intentionally go over an incoming leg. A simple law change to add 'and must be attempting to play the ball' would end this loophole. I was a fast striker who used to wait for a tackle to come flying in, push the ball forward, and go over the front leg tackling. It wasn't diving, it was taking the tackle without the ball. 'Within playable distance' stopped that.
His explanation would also apply to the arsenal goalkick mix up against Munich, and I think that should've been a penalty, while this one shouldn't have been.
VAR should be used more cleverly than this. It should be used like TMO (rugby) but now it’s being to be like American sports. If your foot is offside then yeah - it’s offside but if your hand/arm is then no it isn’t offside. Also VAR has now given teams and bad players the ability to be bad eggs and manipulate the outcome the games. I think in situations like this - enough is enough- just change the god damn rule because otherwise you’ll ruin the spirit of the game. This is more opportunistic and worst than diving!
im pretty sure this will change soon, like when players started tryying to kick the ball on the adversary hand to get a pen
I am a Newcastle fan and I completely agree with what you say. According to the rules of the game this is a penalty, but this is just another (cleverer - or trickier) version of Sterling / Vardy trying to kick the ball somewhere before the defenders tried clearing it and get kicked. I dont agree with these penalties, but this is the current state of the game - which I agree something needs to be done.
I also do think that West Ham's second goal should be disallowed though - its a fast taken free kick when Schar was down for his head.
the 3rd goal went out of play in the build up too
I would call stuff like this Manipulation. It's not quite simulation and its definitely not a foul. If anything, those examples are players coming together that should get no call. But if the ref has to review it because he already stopped the game, then award a drop ball for Manipulation.
I could be mistaken, but isn't there a rule against intentionally obstructing the keeper without making a play on the ball? Maybe that's just on corners, it's been a long time since I played
I think goal line technology is absolutely essential but everything else that came with VAR is just too much. My best idea is to copy cricket; the ref lets the game go as much as it used to but the captains can call for a VAR check, and the key thing is they only have a limited number of requests. Say you get 5 chances, if the call was good they stay on 5, but if it was a bad call they only have 4 left.
I don't know if that's what actually happens in cricket, but I picked it up from somewhere
Malicia is a simple skill (not easy skill) to master.
I swear the first Newcastle pen was offside aswell 😂
I’m pretty new here but wanna say I really enjoy your videos man
Murican knows ball❤
to me this seems similar to when a defender steps in front of a forwards run and basically forces the forward to body check them. That is always called as a foul on the defender in favour of the forward. The differance to what Gordon is doing is that he is 'shielding the ball'. How you can write a rule to prevent drawing fouls like this when not even attemping to keep the ball i do not know.
Football is a game that gets dirtier and dirtier. Grown men wallawing in ficticious pain, takiing off like airplanes with no contact with the opponent, time wasting with no concequences (would love to see a 2nd yellow on a goalie for this), "tactical" freekicks, refs being disrespected to no end. It is hard to watch even the best of games nowadays. It is sucking the fun out of it.
I am pretty sure that if a striker is trying to shoot and a defender interferes with the shot like this it is pen.
Can't wait for this to be added to FM 🙏
The FA definition
''Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.''
Gordon is deliberately putting himself in front of opposition players trying to kick the ball, not trying to play the ball himself, and endangering himself and the opposing players. The rules of the game already have this scenario well covered. It's only a matter of referees being competent and knowing the rules of the game, in letter and spirit.
I get this spirit thing, but I guess that is something for the highest levels of the game. As a fan of a team that plays now in the Brazilian second tier that used to be on the losing side of those subjective calls when playing the likes of Corinthians, I feel that when we go more towards the letter of the law, we are actually lessening the gap between smaller teams and bigger teams in leagues that have lower ref standards or when refs are trying to actively manipulate results.
The Premier League has done the worst job implementing VAR anywhere in the world and it’s not close
At what point is he legitimately putting himself in a dangerous position for both himself and the other player. You’re 100% spot on. Harden reference was immaculate
This is the exact same as defenders throwing their heads into a high boot shot
this reminds me of the situation when Antony stepped on Hummels leg and Hummels getting a red for it
All of this would've been avoided if Phillips hadnt taken that second touch though
Var should be if you can't decide within one minute then the decision on field stands. That second penalty is ridiculous there is no way that should be given.
The comparison to Harden doesn’t really work. Maybe if a player was deliberately trying to chip the ball on to someone’s hand.
There are numerous examples in football where the aim of a play is to get yourself between the man and the ball. If you successfully achieve this the other player is no longer in possession of the ball and if they impede you it’s a foul. You might not play the ball immediately but you’d still have control.
For example when defenders Shepard the ball out for a goal kick. They get themselves between man and ball with no intention to play the ball. If the attacker kicks them it’s a foul to the defender.
To stop this you would have to make some radical changes to the rules that say a player cannot guard the ball without touching it.
This is spot on. Great job contextualizing. To me, this should be akin to simulation fouls. If the player is intentionally initiating contact (instead of playing the ball) in the opponent’s box, 🟨. It will likely take another of high profile instance or two, but I imagine that it will eventually happen.
The second one is a foul by Gordon. Philips is in control of the ball. Gordon makes a move to “play the ball or win possession or Tackle” and does not get the ball with his movement but makes contact with the player in possession. It’s a free out
"Even is on."
You could argue he's hindering the defender from passning the ball, freekick to the defender. But that's a hard decision to make as a ref in the penalty box. But this is not a hard situation to handle imo.
in hockey, that would be called interference, a penalty
Interference by the attacker and penalty for the defending team?
Before video reviews became very exact (i.e. hd cameras), in basketball at least, this flow over rigorous rule application happened. Go back and watch old games and you'll see a ball go out of bounds that is given to the "wrong" team but what is happening is the ref is awarding the ball as opposed to calling a foul. So he's giving both sides a break. Now it's down to the fingernail or arm hair and the can't call fouls after the fact so you can watch someone take an elbow to the nose on the same play but they pretend it didn't happen. It's silly.
He must have gone to the Dave Wilson school in Ipswich, London.
I think if the attacker is the one who initiates contact, like in this case, then it shouldn't be a foul. You see this a lot too when players are 1-on-1 with the keeper, I remember a couple of years ago seeing Jota win a penalty against Palace where you could clearly see on the replay he actually changed direction to get contact from the keeper rather than continue to dribble the ball around him.
This happened between rangers and Celtic in September. Dessers did what Gordon’s done lagerbielke, stopping him playing the ball and the goal was disallowed. Possibly the only correct decision Scottish var has made this season.
same thing is happening in cricket with the 'spirit of cricket' the rules need to be flexible buy still maintain the integrity of the game
So now not only can defenders not touch attackers in their own box, now they cant even clear a ball for fear of an opponent just sticking his leg between the player and the ball without trying to play the ball just to draw contact
then you watch your back simple
@@timmyjoshua276 with those eyes in the back of your head that you don't have
@@blinkydoo82 why do you think defenders have to check who is around them else they wont notice who is about to make a run, its sloppy from Kelvin Phillips, everyone knows gordon is quick and he decided to press Kelvin and got kicked
This is, unfortunately, the monkey's paw curse of wanting the US to like soccer. Eventually, the US will take control. One way, or another.
This also shows how unbalanced penalties are, Gordon's xg was probably basically 0 but with the penalty sky-rockets to something like 0.8 lol
10:41 bro really loves the defender😂😂
Yeah I thought the pen looked light but I didn't realise how clearly Gordon actively positions himself to be fouled, thanks for pointing this out
Even if VAR interferes, if it's clearly not a foul because the player just throws him into the defender to get fouled, the referee can still say no. This happened in a bundesliga just the same day and the referee said its not enough to just get kicked, even if it is the letter of the law. I was watching the SKY BUNDESLIGA KONFERENZ and saw that (leipzig vs mainz) and was very happy it wasnt given.
Or at least it was a game where a player was getting kicked in the boot but he just threw his leg in front of the other player. It was the conference, it could've been another game
Offside traps have existed for decades, and this is where we draw the line?
The rule doesn't say that this HAS to be a penalty and VAR doesn't make any decisions during a game. The on-field referee is the one who ultimate decides. VAR advises that he might have gotten a decision wrong. The ref listens to it, if necessary watches the images and makes a decision based on all the info he has.
I would bet that, if this same play happens in Newcastle's box (or City's, or Liverpool's, or United's...) against Forest or Luton or any of the "lesser" teams, the ref wouldn't call it a penalty.
A few weeks ago, they didn't give a penalty for Doku's karate kick against Liverpool. Which should be a sign that there's no "letter of the law" in these situations.
A few years ago I remember hearing someone saying that a ref will never be able to get these 100% because they never played at a high enough level to understand it. Who knows?
One way to avoid this is simply not awarding the penalty. Like, if the ref didn't blow it immediatly the VAR should analyze the foul and look at the fouled player intention, if the intention was to get a penalty, the penalty shouldn't be given. And this should be of course only if the ref didn't make the penalty themselves and the fouled player wasn't with possession of the ball. Kind of complex, but the handball rules are also unnecessarily complex.
He wasn't even fouled. He's the one causing contact. You could even argue that he should get a card for trying to fool the ref, but that's subjective
Also, handballs are simpler than people think.
1-is the hand in a natural position? (basically in most scenarios this means A-posing is absolutely fine - as taught by a ref that took part in european matches)
2-If the arm is in a position that is not natural, it's handball if the player moved his arm willingly - didn't hit a player, wasn't pushed, etc (forgetting to return it to a legal spot or arms wide to jump higher are not allowed)
3-Didn't result in a clear goal opportunity for the offender (you can't score or assist with your arms, even if by accident, even if in a legal position) but you can make a save with your arms in a legal position (this is probably the hardest call you can ever make)
If any of the points weren't clear, just ask, I'll do my best to clarify
If he keeps doing it someone's gonna stick the studs in and really give him something to roll about for.
I just noticed this channel is like if m0istcr1tikal made football content
Well the VAR must have gotten a big Saudi check.
Players have been doing stuff for this for ages. A classic is players will back into players when going for a header and go to ground and will more often then not get a freekick
Zero views should be motivation to run
So glad for this video because I’ve been thinking this for a long time.
It's like when attackers leave their leg out straight to drag it into the defenders leg while going down early...lame
I agree that you can't blame Gordon for these penalties, it falls on the Referee's, VAR and the law makers who can't apply any common sense to situations. You can forgive the referee making incorrect decisions in the heat of play but when it comes to VAR who have multiple angles, speeds and the ability to re-watch a passage of play making the incorrect decision is untenable.
Sadly however it happens every week, mainly because of the boys club at the PGMOL who protect each other constantly no matter how many mistakes they make or how bad it looks. You can't even criticise referee's without being fined or punished in some way
"When carrying the ball" can't be the qualification, what about when a cross is coming in? Binary logic rarely overlays analog life neatly, that's the whole point of a referee, a human interpreter
I think what you said about the Americanization of the game is a good point.
In American sports we see Referees as cops essentially. They're there to enforce the letter of the law to prevent people from cheating and punish people who do.
But in soccer, as you stated, this wasn't really the case. Refs are stewards of the game. They're there to make sure the game runs smoothly and as fairly as they can. Not fair in terms of letter of the law but in terms of "spirit of the game." I remember there were FIFAs or PESs where you could choose a ref and how tightly they would call fouls. Whether or not that ref supported a more physical version of the sport or not. But that personality, that vision of the game is removed from Refs in the VAR Era.
I'd much much much rather my refs be permitted to call the game in the way they viewed as fair rather than cite subsections of a handbook. Remember those like 10 years where the NFL didn't know what a catch was but everyone watching did? That kind of mess gets cleaned up when Refs are actually given a bit more freedom to interpret rules.
Just to be clear this isn't a VAR issue or an AG10 issue. This was like 80% of Joe Cole's game and that was well prior to VAR and he won a Champions League
Been given all season, only a problem when it goes our way
The solution must be carefully considered, and the law written precisely: we don't want to go too far the other way; I can envisage defenders wildly swinging at first touch clearances, knowing that they can injure attackers while drawing a foul.
I agree mostly with your points, apart from the fact that by the letter of the law it’s a pen… it shouldn’t be, both are reckless and careless challenges and on both instances Anthony Gordon should have the foul given against him and yellow carded, potentially even a red card for endangering another players safety… and before anyone thinks I’m a salty West Ham fan… almost fully opposite, I hate West Ham with a burning passion, I’m a spurs fan! Anthony Gordon should have been booked for both of these incidents
As a newcastle fan neither of those penalties were penalties, I've seen a few of them this season, stupid rule, needs changing
That second one is just a foul on Kalvin Phillips. It's simply a bad decision from the ref and VAR. They've got in their own heads and overcomplicated it and come to the wrong decision. Phillips is in possession and is impeded my Gordon making no attempt to play the ball. Definition of a foul
Nope, I'm out. As somebody who grew up with football as the dominant sport in their country, I despise the arbitrariness of the rules. The fact that a game lasts about as long as the referee wants it to last, which gives a team that scores a goal after five minutes a monumental advantage over the entire flow of the game. The fact that the idiocy of one single person is capable of tipping the entire balance of the game one way or another. The ridiculousness of how the entire fate of clubs can be sealed by one simple wrong decision without any chance of help to get it right.
People who mainly watch VAR-officiated competitions may have forgotten what it is like to have an entire game turned on its head by one obviously bad call that hasn't been looked at afterwards at all. I have been watching amateur-level football for a decade or so, and the things I've seen are so harrowing it still makes my blood boil with anger. Keepers picking up clear passes in the middle of their own box with no consequence. Penalties awarded for fouls that were meters in front of the penalty area. Referees used to officiating in front of 200 viewers clearly out of their league when suddenly faced with 10,000 fans, mentally disintegrating for everybody to see. Linesmen too unathletic to keep up with the backline, guessing at offside decisions.
The level of officiating, at least in Germany, is lightyears behind the level of play that has been reached. The decisions made by at best decent and at worst abysmal referees influence promotions and relegations, qualification for Continental competitions and championships. These things may literally be the difference between a club keeping afloat or going bankrupt. They need every little bit of help that they can get. Old, crusty, reactionary men have ruled over the sport for so long that football has been so thoroughly disconnected from technology that most fans regard it as witchcraft. The fact that football is the only sport without a precise match clock is so unfathomable to me; every other sport ends a game once the time has run out, only football tries to make up for its huge potential of time wasting by adding a few arbitrary minutes of play time to the game.
VAR is far from perfect, but in theory it has made it possible to retroactively overrule wrong decisions. Why do people feel like it is being used inconsistently and sometimes excessively? Because there are no clear guidelines for VAR officials. If you told the replay official in the NFL to "just wing it", that would be just as bad. instead, there are clear rules what kinds of situation will be looked at automatically, and what kind of decisions can be challenged, and what a successful or unsuccessful challenge will result in. If you make it law that all goals will be reviewed automatically with a specific time during build-up taken into consideration, and all red cards will be reviewed automatically, and both managers have a specific number of challenges that they can make, and other than that, the referee himself has to feel uncertain enough to initiate a review themselves, it would be much more coherent.
But why would I expect a governing body that hasn't been able to clearly define handball to the satisfaction of the majority of its fans for over a century to come up with coherent rules for anything more complex than what tax haven to hide their bribe money in?
and this is exactly why Doku didn’t foul MacAllister
In Italy, to change the rules, the FA needs the permission of the government
Maybe they adapt the nfl’s needs to make a “footballing move”
Newcastle fan and referee here: Never a penalty and if the rules say it has to be, then I don't like the way the rules are written.
my favorite bit of speech ever in all the Zealandisms lmao 11:02
poor dora
To me if it's clear that the attacker did not try to play the ball then it should not be a penalty anymore.
Dude. Some old head would just kick his knee or ankle out after suffering this once. There are no old head center backs anymore. Center backs that can actually play (like it is the norm today) do not kick people just to prove a point.
Never a penalty for me. Even my Newcastle supporting friend I was watching with couldn't believe it was given
If it can be decided that a foul has been committed because there was 'no attempt to play the ball,' a decision should have been decided in the defenders favour for the same reason.
I'm scottish, and live in canada, but i have to say I'm okay with the americanization of football to an extent. in terms of players and the players' union having more power (as they do in america), that's better. however obviously the best choice is to take the good and leave the bad, and we have to really be clear on what our values are if we want the game to keep growing.