General Premier League Thread 2019-20

Widdensushi

moyes is stubborn not addressing the question he is asked and then blaming var

Esse85

Has Moyes lost the plot during his post match interview?

gimli2112

I've just googled it and see VAR was created in the Netherlands, presumably by bloody foreigners, no wonder they hate it.

RugbyLover123

Would love, LOVE, if a manager for once would just say “yeah that’s the rule we just have to get on with it”

I like Moyes but he’s saying “it’s a good goal for me”.. it’s not though David, the rule is the ball cant touch the hand. Call out the rule, not VAR. And I wish the reporter would call him on it.

CSF

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Indeed, in this case VAR correctly called a rule that happens to be stupid. The rule is at fault, not VAR for spotting it.

I do hate that rule though. Intent being irrelevant, advantage being irrelevant - if the ball touches an attacking player’s hand in any capacity, no goal can be allowed over the following phases of attack. I’ve asked this before, but what’s a player supposed to do? It’s not a foul, so play continues until there’s a goal, so when Rica feels the contact, should he then turn around and boot the ball back to his own keeper to restart the attack?

Think they need to allow the ref to blow ones like that up on the spot (if they see it of course), and not just wait for a goal to be scored and the stadium enraged.


You've a spectrum between advantage and intent and surely common sense should sit somewhere in the middle. You can't just say that all handballs can't be a goal, and you can't just say that all unintentional handballs can't be fouls. Common sense needs to sit somewhere, especially since players very rarely intentionally handle the ball.



If intent was applied to the strictest no common sense rule for defensive handballs, you'd almost never ever see a penalty, because the only time someone genuinely 100% intentionally handles the ball in the box are those ones on the line.

MD1990

Rice loves an interview after the game.

CSF

MD1990 wrote: »

Rice loves an interview after the game.

Battle for most brainless interview going on with his manager. Think David still managed to win that one.

TheCitizen

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Indeed, in this case VAR correctly called a rule that happens to be stupid. The rule is at fault, not VAR for spotting it.

I do hate that rule though. Intent being irrelevant, advantage being irrelevant - if the ball touches an attacking player’s hand in any capacity, no goal can be allowed over the following phases of attack. I’ve asked this before, but what’s a player supposed to do? It’s not a foul, so play continues until there’s a goal, so when Rica feels the contact, should he then turn around and boot the ball back to his own keeper to restart the attack?

Rice felt the contact and went with it and controlled it out in front of him to his advantage. In the old days he would have got away with it. VAR caught him out. VAR is a great tool it just needs to be used properly. In my view it wouldn't be the first time that boy lied, he has form. The sob story from him post match was enjoyable.

Widdensushi

CSF wrote: »

Battle for most brainless interview going on with his manager. Think David still managed to win that one.

You expect it from the players though, when you hear that stubborn childish attitude from the manager what chance have the players of using the rules to their advantage.

Guy:Incognito

TheCitizen wrote: »

In my opinion looking at it several times Rice used his arm intentionally to propel the ball forward and is lying through his teeth

Well what do you know, opinions can be wrong.

This isnt Superman in the justice league movie, there isnt a hope in hell he can know where that ball is headed and move his arm to it in time.

TheCitizen

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Well what do you know, opinions can be wrong.

This isnt Superman in the justice league movie, there isnt a hope in hell he can know where that ball is headed and move his arm to it in time.

I think your opinion is wrong and I think Rice lied in his post match interview.

ShamoBuc

Interviews tonight gave a good insight, but not in a good way.
The right call as per the rules was given.
Var did its job well.

Corholio

Jeez, some would use any excuse to post about Rice, as if reams and reams of repetitive ****e on the Ireland thread wasn't enough. Funny to see though.

Guy:Incognito

TheCitizen wrote: »

I think your opinion is wrong and I think Rice lied in his post match interview.

I didnt see the interview.

Im only going on the match I watched and the ball came too fast to do anything deliberate.
It hit him in a very favourable way and he rolled with it.

TheCitizen

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I didnt see the interview.

Im only going on the match I watched and the ball came too fast to do anything deliberate.
It hit him in a very favourable way and he rolled with it.

The bit in bold, you've got it exactly right. VAR caught him out and he didn't like it much:)

eagle eye

TheCitizen wrote:

The bit in bold, you've got it exactly right. VAR caught him out and he didn't like it much

I'd imagine you watch all the superhero stuff. I'm wondering if you think its actually real-life with your comments here.

TheCitizen

eagle eye wrote: »

I'd imagine you watch all the superhero stuff. I'm wondering if you think its actually real-life with your comments here.

I was merely reiterating Guy's comment there.

Trigger

CSF wrote: »

Think they need to allow the ref to blow ones like that up on the spot (if they see it of course), and not just wait for a goal to be scored and the stadium enraged.


You've a spectrum between advantage and intent and surely common sense should sit somewhere in the middle. You can't just say that all handballs can't be a goal, and you can't just say that all unintentional handballs can't be fouls. Common sense needs to sit somewhere, especially since players very rarely intentionally handle the ball.



If intent was applied to the strictest no common sense rule for defensive handballs, you'd almost never ever see a penalty, because the only time someone genuinely 100% intentionally handles the ball in the box are those ones on the line.

But the rule is worded so they cant do this, they have to wait until the goal is scored in these instances for the rule to take effect

Guy:Incognito

TheCitizen wrote: »

The bit in bold, you've got it exactly right. VAR caught him out and he didn't like it much:)

But thats not at all what you claimed earlier, you said he played it deliberately.

TheCitizen

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

But thats not at all what you claimed earlier, you said he played it deliberately.

When he felt it hit his arm, he went with it ......deliberately.

"Rolled with it" as you put it.

He knew what he was doing. And without VAR he would've got away with it.

Guy:Incognito

TheCitizen wrote: »

When he felt it hit his arm, he went with it ......deliberately.

"Rolled with it" as you put it.

He knew what he was doing. And without VAR he would've got away with it.

It hit his arm and went in front of him and he played it.

Thats not the same as this at all

TheCitizen wrote: »

In my opinion looking at it several times Rice used his arm intentionally to propel the ball forward and is lying through his teeth

TheCitizen

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It hit his arm and went in front of him and he played it.

Thats not the same as this at all

Just a different way of putting it. In my view Rice knew exactly what he was at. The cheek of him then with his sob story post match.

A highly questionable character. One for the watching as they say, but not for any great exploits or notable success with any luck.

Guy:Incognito

TheCitizen wrote: »

Just a different way of putting it..

A different way of putting it because it has a completely different meaning.

It hit his arm, by accident , which resulted in the ball falling in front of him. At which point he played on.


Thats nothing like him deliberately playing the ball with his arm to get an advantage.

TheCitizen

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

A different way of putting it because it has a completely different meaning.

It hit his arm, by accident , which resulted in the ball falling in front of him. At which point he played on.


Thats nothing like him deliberately playing the ball with his arm to get an advantage.

He felt it hit his arm and then he nudged it out in front of him. He knew what he was at. He thought he'd get away it as well. VAR caught him at it. Nice one.

Loafing Oaf

TheCitizen wrote: »

He knew what he was doing. And without VAR he would've got away with it.

CSF

Trigger wrote: »

But the rule is worded so they cant do this, they have to wait until the goal is scored in these instances for the rule to take effect

I know, for me this is part of where the problem lies. Decide what you’re blowing up as attacking handballs, tell referees to blow it up.

In doing so, you limit the ones that get pulled back by VAR after a goal (something the masses clearly aren’t fond of seeing happen in most circumstances) to ones where the ref has just completely missed it, but would conclude that an advantage gained.

The whole handball thing is a mess and is going to be reviewed anyway, so why not do it sensibly this time.

LuckyLloyd

I thought Rice couldn’t become more dislikeable, I was wrong!

matrim

Am I the only one that thinks it could have been a free out anyway because rice bundles into the back of the defender. The defender got there first, headed the ball and Rice's challenge hits him in the back and takes him down.

Widdensushi

I think he is just strong in winning the ball, his hand guided the ball in the direction that leads to the goal, I don't see it as a controversial decision.

Sanity_Saviour

TheCitizen wrote: »

Just a different way of putting it. In my view Rice knew exactly what he was at. The cheek of him then with his sob story post match.

A highly questionable character. One for the watching as they say, but not for any great exploits or notable success with any luck.

No offense mate but with this comment you look like a fcking moron

gimli2112

Widdensushi wrote: »

I think he is just strong in winning the ball, his hand guided the ball in the direction that leads to the goal, I don't see it as a controversial decision.

It's not, this is a sky concoction. They stick a camera in the manager's and Rice's face coming off the pitch, ask them the question and then milk it ad nauseam.

Widdensushi

Widdensushi wrote: »

I don't see it as a controversial decision.

I think at this stage you'd have to wonder are people getting wound up because it's VAR related and it gives them a chance to have a go.

Has any decision, red card, offside, goal disallowed, in a West Ham Sheffield United game ever sparked 5 or 6 pages of debate before? Like, it's West Ham and Sheffield United for starters. If a player's head fell off I'd probably watch a replay, but otherwise I'd think any other incident could only be of interest to fans of those clubs.

gimli2112

Does Moyes think if he keeps saying "good goal" they'll give it to him?

TheCitizen

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

I thought Rice couldn’t become more dislikeable, I was wrong!

He is a thoroughly dislikeable induvidual. The greetin face on him in his post match interview with his hard done by act was a sight to behold. He had nothing to complain about. It was absolutely the correct decision.

Carragher the match commentary pundit calling it wrong also at the time during the match. VAR as a system is really getting it very hard to find support in England. The attitude against it is backward and idiotic.

TheCitizen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I think at this stage you'd have to wonder are people getting wound up because it's VAR related and it gives them a chance to have a go.

Has any decision, red card, offside, goal disallowed, in a West Ham Sheffield United game ever sparked 5 or 6 pages of debate before? Like, it's West Ham and Sheffield United for starters. If a player's head fell off I'd probably watch a replay, but otherwise I'd think any other incident could only be of interest to fans of those clubs.

They've made a pigs ear out of the introduction of VAR in England is the problem and now you have a character like Rice saying all the players want it gone. He should be put in his place. VAR is a brilliant tool and they need to use it properly and get used to it and stop moaning and bitching about it.

Fitz*

The handball rule is black or white now. All goals in which the scorer or assister handballs the ball are ruled out. Intentional or not, it doesn't matter. This could not be clearer.

Designed to clear up what is intentional or not. West Ham need to get over it, it's not a VAR decision, just VAR was used to help the referee implement the rule.

noodler

Thought it was two fouls as well.

Push in the back and a handball.

Correct decision.

TheCitizen

Sanity_Saviour wrote: »

No offense mate but with this comment you look like a fcking moron

:pac: A moronic comment if I ever saw one

y0ssar1an22

FitzShane wrote: »

The handball rule is black or white now. All goals in which the scorer or assister handballs the ball are ruled out. Intentional or not, it doesn't matter. This could not be clearer.

Designed to clear up what is intentional or not. West Ham need to get over it, it's not a VAR decision, just VAR was used to help the referee implement the rule.

Is it only the scorer or assister? I thought it was any hand ball in the phase of play that leads to a goal

Fitz*

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

Is it only the scorer or assister? I thought it was any hand ball in the phase of play that leads to a goal

So did I, but Dermot Gallagher said a few weeks back that it is only the scorer or assister that counts.

TheCitizen

https://twitter.com/SleevesElliott/status/1215761380311207936?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1215761380311207936&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.huddleboard.net%2Fhb%2Fshowthread.php%3F1429513-VAR-West-Ham-goal%2Fpage2

:pac:

Mushy

Lovely goal by Arsenal.

CSF

Correct VAR reversal IMO. Really unpleasant challenge.

JPA

Why aren't BT showing replays?

Shanotheslayer

Siggy Everton captain.

Guess the papers where spoofing about Ancellotti wanting him out.

bangkok

Shanotheslayer wrote: »

Siggy Everton captain.

Guess the papers where spoofing about Ancellotti wanting him out.

Same paper prob said maguire was out for months.

gimli2112

the quality of journalism has tanked in the last few years. I could do it myself if I could do the english gooder.

gimli2112

gimli2112 wrote: »

the quality of journalism has tanked in the last few years. I could do it myself if I could do the english gooder.

It's all about clickbait

gimli2112

Deleted User wrote: »

It's all about clickbait

the Mirror ran a story today that your lot were going to swap two players for Fernandez. I clicked and the article made less sense than the headline. I guess if eejits continue to fall for it they'll continue to make stuff up.

hetuzozaho

gimli2112 wrote: »

the Mirror ran a story today that your lot were going to swap two players for Fernandez. I clicked and the article made less sense than the headline. I guess if eejits continue to fall for it they'll continue to make stuff up.

Boards are the real geniuses... Making money from people talking about clickbait!