Jump to content
  • Sign in to follow this  

    Refs & VAR Overshadow Exciting Draw


    mack

    Once again the use of the Video Assistant Referee system has claimed the bulk of attention as it intervened multiple times in the 2-2 draw between the Wanderers & Newcastle Jets tonight.

    The Wanderers stuck to the same starting lineup as their big win over Wellington while Alvaro Cejudo returned from his long injury layoff to take the place of Jack Clisby on the bench. The home side had the better of the opening stages and if not for the VAR they would have opened the scoring after 3 minutes. Marcelo Carrusca played through Chris Ikonimidis and the cultured winger took a touch then beat Jack Duncan to slide the ball home. Until VAR spent 3 minutes reviewing inconclusive slow motion replays and ruled it out for a non called "offside".

    Former Wanderers captain Nikolai Topor-Stanley gifted Oriol Riera the chance to open the scoring (again) from the penalty spot. Carrusca combined with the marquee striker to attempt a neat one-two passing movement but as Carrusca made his run into the penalty box he was clearly blocked by the big central defender, drawing the penalty & a yellow card. Riera rolled the ball along the turf into the side netting with Jack Duncan going the wrong way.

    The lead lasted just 2 minutes into the second half as the Wanderers defence stood off from Dimi Petratos well inside the penalty area and he fired into the top corner with his left foot.

    The VAR got involved again on shortly after an hour. As the Wanderers streamed into the Jets penalty area an underhit pass from Steven Lustica was intercepted by Topor-Stanley and his attempted clearance slammed into Carrusca from a meter away, and it ricocheted straight back into the hands of Topor-Stanley. Once again the VAR intervened to suggest a review from the referee, and with several minutes of slow motion replays from the man in the middle Riera headed to the spot again. Unlike the incident with Robbie Cornthwaite earlier in the season there was no second yellow for Topor-Stanley. 

    I personally don't believe that a deflection from that close of a distance at the speed the ball was travelling could ever be called a "deliberate" action as the rules require, but we've seen time and again that A-League referees seem to view that rule differently to most of the people watching. In his post-game interview, perhaps in a touch of facetiousness Ernie Merrick suggested he would now train his players to aim at the hands of defenders in the box.

    Riera sent Duncan the wrong way again with another sublime penalty and it was 2-1. For less than a minute. Straight from the kickoff the Jets rolled down the field, Nabbout avoided an awful attempted tackle from Steven Lustica, he attempted an audacious outside of the right foot strike from the edge of the penalty area and despite being a shot that 99 times out of 100 would fly into the stands behind the goals this time it tore past Janjetovic into the far top corner for a goal that will end up as one of, if not, the goal of the season.

    The VAR came to the rescue of the Wanderers after another inept decision from Peter Green as Jason Hoffman slammed into Janjetovic after the keeper had already put his hands on the ball. Hoffman missed the ball completely and his late shoulder barge forced the ball out into the back of the net. It was overturned not long after.

    Both sides had chances to win the game, for the Wanderers it was unfortunate the best of them fell to fullback Josh Risdon, in particular one strong shot on target was palmed away by Duncan for a corner. Neither side would feel happy about the result, and Merrick went ballistic in his post-game interview against both Green and the VAR.

    The Wanderers face Sydney FC in the last derby of the regular season on Sunday (good job Foxtel Federation Australia) February 25 at 6:30PM at the Sydney Football Stadium.

    Sign in to follow this  


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Unless his arm was detched from his torso any position an arm ends up in is natural.

    What matters is if the arm ended in that position as a deliberate attempt to handle the ball.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The only reason his arm was up was because he'd just kicked a ball. That's the natural position. If he kept his arms down like they were in his pockets while he cleared the ball I'd argue that's unnatural.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    9 hours ago, JayZko said:

    fair result disappointing we can’t shoot from point blank 

    Everything is reira’s fault worse player in history of the league 

    give me jardel over him any day of the week 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    46 minutes ago, GunnerWanderer said:

    Everything is reira’s fault worse player in history of the league 

    give me jardel over him any day of the week 

    I’d assumed Jayz meant cejudos miss from 6 yards which was probably the worst of the misses. Risdon could have had three or more.

    Reira is ace 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    10 hours ago, Davo said:

    The only reason his arm was up was because he'd just kicked a ball. That's the natural position. If he kept his arms down like they were in his pockets while he cleared the ball I'd argue that's unnatural.

    Exactly.

    I think the rule - that it has to be deliberate - is too strict and that is why in practice refs often use the "unnatural" thing, as it tends to be a better way of determining what is deliberate when dodgy defenders are trying to make it look accidental.

    But you gotta use common sense.

    Also, this is another problem with video refs in every sport. As soon as you start slowing down things and disecting them to the nth degree, they start ruling according to the exact wording in the rulebook so they have something to back up their decisions (on field refs can just say "that's how I saw it at the time").  But they never update the rulebook to cater for video refs!

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 minute ago, btron3000 said:

    Exactly.

    I think the rule - that it has to be deliberate - is too strict and that is why in practice refs often use the "unnatural" thing, as it tends to be a better way of determining what is deliberate when dodgy defenders are trying to make it look accidental.

    But you gotta use common sense.

    Also, this is another problem with video refs in every sport. As soon as you start slowing down things and disecting them to the nth degree, they start ruling according to the exact wording in the rulebook so they have something to back up their decisions (on field refs can just say "that's how I saw it at the time").  But they never update the rulebook to cater for video refs!

    Watched a bit of La Liga this morning and a similar thing happened, the ball got kicked into the defenders arm and the ref just waved it away instantly and play went on.  Feel for Topor in one sense as there was nothing he could do. Football eh.......lol

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    handballs like the nts one are one of the toughest for the ref to decide I think.

    common perception is this 'unnatural position' stuff - so if hand is away from body and ball hits it then the expectation is that it has to be a pen. under the rules as I interpret them the nts one isn't a pen because as someone said he is just balancing himself after attempting to clear the ball and has no time at all to react to the deflection so its hard to describe it as deliberate in any way but try reffing All Ages and not giving it. Players, coaches, commentators don't really understand the rule or its application.

    I think the wording of the rule needs to be much more explicit.

    Also VAR is an abomination.

    Edited by lloydy136

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Short of mind reading, there is no definitive way of knowing what is deliberate. As mentioned previously, this why refs (sometimes) go for the "unnatural " argument. Too subjective, very dependant on the referee who can then change the course of the game.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 2/17/2018 at 9:10 AM, Stokz said:

    Cejudo is a fraud.

    For a marquee he offers nothing.

    i wouldn’t even say he’s a good foreigner. 

    For a guy who scored a worldie against RM a couple of years ago... Find it hard to believe he's the same player...

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    28 minutes ago, SBW said:

    For a guy who scored a worldie against RM a couple of years ago... Find it hard to believe he's the same player...

    He is the same player ,but he suffered lot of injuries this season,he is a gun when fit.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    15 hours ago, wanderersfanatic said:

    Rgeardless if it is deliberate or not deliberate, would you say it was the correct call? The position of NTS' hand was unnatural. 

    It was incorrect and no penalty.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I would have preferred a 3-2 loss without the existence of VAR and us grumbling about unfair decisions like we have always done rather than what transpired on Friday. That's how much I hate VAR and think it's ruining the game.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    20 hours ago, wanderersfanatic said:

    Rgeardless if it is deliberate or not deliberate, would you say it was the correct call? The position of NTS' hand was unnatural. 

     

    9 hours ago, lloydy136 said:

    handballs like the nts one are one of the toughest for the ref to decide I think.

    common perception is this 'unnatural position' stuff - so if hand is away from body and ball hits it then the expectation is that it has to be a pen. under the rules as I interpret them the nts one isn't a pen because as someone said he is just balancing himself after attempting to clear the ball and has no time at all to react to the deflection so its hard to describe it as deliberate in any way but try reffing All Ages and not giving it. Players, coaches, commentators don't really understand the rule or its application.

    I think the wording of the rule needs to be much more explicit.

    Also VAR is an abomination.

     

    8 hours ago, HillsPanther said:

    Short of mind reading, there is no definitive way of knowing what is deliberate. As mentioned previously, this why refs (sometimes) go for the "unnatural " argument. Too subjective, very dependant on the referee who can then change the course of the game.

    I don't possess a rule book, but I offer the following as an extract quoted from the article by Adrian Deans, entitled "When Will Refs and Commentators Learn the Rules?"  The complete article is available on the Australian Four Four Two website.

    ""I've written before about how ridiculous it is that professional commentators and (even worse) referees don't know the rules.  The situation has actually been made far worse by the VAR..........

    Last night, the Jets conceded a penalty for handball against the Wanderers, so ......let's have a quick peek at the actual laws of the game.

    Handling the ball

              Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm.  The referee must take the following into                  consideration:

                        * The movement of the hand towards the ball (NOT the ball towards the hand)

                        * The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)

                        *The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement

    Note in particular that there is no  mention of

    * getting an advantage

    * arm in an unnatural position

    Those expressions are commentators' glosses that have crept into common parlance in an attempt to clarify the rules, but instead they've muddied the waters.  Let's be very plain about this ...

    IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOUR TEAM GAINS AN ADVANTAGE, AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOUR HANDS ARE

    If the hand hitting the ball was not deliberate, then the correct decision is play on."  (end of quote)

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    5 hours ago, 2549_1494053217 said:

    It was incorrect and no penalty.

    Whilst I'm inclined to agree - a harsh call on NTS.  A good point made on Shootout that beyond NTS were 2 WSW and 1 NJ players, so had he not stopped it with his hand would it have fallen for us and a real chance on goal?

    Whilst the 'deliberate' bit is in the rule, surely the intent of the law is whether or not the ball touching an illegal part of the body creates a distinct disadvantage to the attacking team?

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The 'deliberate' part is hard though isn't it.

    If a player has his arm up as he rushes out to close down a shot on the edge of the area and it strikes his outstretched hand its ball to hand its probably not 'deliberate' in the truest sense of the word but i would argue all day that it should be a pen.

    Similar the player who miscontrols a ball and it bounces up to hit his hand by his side. Not strictly 'deliberate' but again I'm blowing my whistle every time.

    That's my point i guess - its a really difficult rule for refs to apply.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    28 minutes ago, lloydy136 said:

    The 'deliberate' part is hard though isn't it.

    If a player has his arm up as he rushes out to close down a shot on the edge of the area and it strikes his outstretched hand its ball to hand its probably not 'deliberate' in the truest sense of the word but i would argue all day that it should be a pen.

    Similar the player who miscontrols a ball and it bounces up to hit his hand by his side. Not strictly 'deliberate' but again I'm blowing my whistle every time.

    That's my point i guess - its a really difficult rule for refs to apply.

    That second part is interesting because the Mariners first goal against Adelaide came from a free kick that was awarded after the Mariners player kicked the ball up into his own hand. The referee didn't give it and awarded the subsequent foul against Adelaide, but the commentators made a big thing out of it (Fox showed more replays of the "handball" than the actual goal).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Re the NTS handball. I just saw another replay and for the first time realised his hand moved towards the ball just before the contact.  So in terms of the rule quoted above there is more of a case for the penalty. 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    46 minutes ago, lloydy136 said:

    The 'deliberate' part is hard though isn't it.

    If a player has his arm up as he rushes out to close down a shot on the edge of the area and it strikes his outstretched hand its ball to hand its probably not 'deliberate' in the truest sense of the word but i would argue all day that it should be a pen.

    Similar the player who miscontrols a ball and it bounces up to hit his hand by his side. Not strictly 'deliberate' but again I'm blowing my whistle every time.

    That's my point i guess - its a really difficult rule for refs to apply.

    Yes deliberate is interesting, plenty of times I have been called for handball, when not deliberate, I'm just crap at football..

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, StringerBellend said:

    Yes deliberate is interesting, plenty of times I have been called for handball, when not deliberate, I'm just crap at football..

    I can relate to that.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    As a football fan, that was a really good contest and as a WSW fan I’m not overly disappointed with a draw. We still couldn’t hit a barn door though... our shooting accuracy is woeful. 

    I didn’t think Topors hand ball was deliberate but other than that I thought the VAR was ok. It’s how it’s used that’s annoying because there’s still no consistency. Why did the referee need to go over to the little screen for some of the decisions yet the incident with Vedran and Hoffman it was announced on the big screen? Does that imply that for that incident it was the VAR that made the call? 

     

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    12 hours ago, Edinburgh said:

    Re the NTS handball. I just saw another replay and for the first time realised his hand moved towards the ball just before the contact.  So in terms of the rule quoted above there is more of a case for the penalty. 

    his whole body moved towards the ball - of course his hand is gonna move. 

     

    never a penalty, never never never never never never never ever

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I have a bit of humble pie to eat and offer a hearty backslap to Josh Risdon, a few weeks back thought he was slowing up and piling a few pounds on and blowing up by 60 minutes.

    Anyways cannot fault his work for the whole 90 mins Friday night, up and down the line, getting shots on and crosses in.

    Well done Josh, by Christ we're going to miss you Sunday.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I hate VAR.

    Refer to ATB articles on my hate for it *plug plug*

     

    CBF writing a new one, rinse and repeat.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 hours ago, hughsey said:

    As a football fan, that was a really good contest and as a WSW fan I’m not overly disappointed with a draw. We still couldn’t hit a barn door though... our shooting accuracy is woeful. 

    I didn’t think Topors hand ball was deliberate but other than that I thought the VAR was ok. It’s how it’s used that’s annoying because there’s still no consistency. Why did the referee need to go over to the little screen for some of the decisions yet the incident with Vedran and Hoffman it was announced on the big screen? Does that imply that for that incident it was the VAR that made the call? 

     

    I thought the use of the VAR was reviewed following the red cards dished out to Mariners players in an earlier game against us.  It was my understanding that its use was for clear errors - what some commentators are calling "howlers".  I don't believe any of the three incidents last Friday were obvious errors by the referee.  It took numerous slow motion replays to determine that Ikonomidis was a hairs-breadth offside - hardly a "howler" by the on-field referee.  Similarly, if Hoffman was challenging to head the ball, as he is legally entitled to do, who determined that the challenge was clearly illegal rather than it being a goal keeping error by Janjetovic failing to hold the ball - after all, this is a body contact sport as long as it is within the rules,  I believe all three VAR decisions were incorrect and I wonder whether the on-field referee was intimidated by the fact that the VAR referee was someone with more experience than he.

    Edited by Harv

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, Harv said:

    I thought the use of the VAR was reviewed following the red cards dished out to Mariners players in an earlier game against us.  It was my understanding that its use was for clear errors - what some commentators are calling "howlers".  I don't believe any of the three incidents last Friday were obvious errors by the referee.  It took numerous slow motion replays to determine that Ikonomidis was a hairs-breadth offside - hardly a "howler" by the on-field referee.  Similarly, if Hoffman was challenging to head the ball, as he is legally entitled to do, who determined that the challenge was clearly illegal rather than it being a goal keeping error by Janjetovic failing to hold the ball - after all, this is a body contact sport as long as it is within the rules,  I believe all three VAR decisions were incorrect and I wonder whether the on-field referee was intimidated by the fact that the VAR referee was someone with more experience than he.

    Massively disagree on the hoffman-janjetovic one. Shouldn't have needed var. He barges into him and gets nowhere near the ball - its clearly in vedran's hands and the contact dislodges it. If ref is unsighted then see your AR who would have had a really clear view of it.

    Poor refereeing imo. You could be right on the VAR intimidation thing.

    Edited by lloydy136

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Hoffman one was a clear foul. Guaranteed that the referee would have given the foul if there was no VAR, but now it's here we have referees awarding goals they wouldn't have knowing that if they're wrong VAR will (maybe?) step in and correct them.

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, Davo said:

    The Hoffman one was a clear foul. Guaranteed that the referee would have given the foul if there was no VAR, but now it's here we have referees awarding goals they wouldn't have knowing that if they're wrong VAR will (maybe?) step in and correct them.

    Don’t know about guaranteed this is a league referees

    Cant they modify the Var rule to before they give goal, the referee checks with linesman to see is there any concern he has that he wants checking out eg.

    ”I kept my flag down but he may have been offside can you check it? Or there might have been a foul on keeper can you check it?” This would obvious increase referrals (as per League they will probably refer everything) but it will cut the number of goals given and then struck off and also clarify if the the linesman and referee did he see something but wanted Var safety blanket

    if referees and linesman are just not making decisions thinking Var will pick it up later then that’s ridiculous 

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    3 minutes ago, StringerBellend said:

    Don’t know about guaranteed this is a league referees

    Cant they modify the Var rule to before they give goal, the referee checks with linesman to see is there any concern he has that he wants checking out eg.

    ”I kept my flag down but he may have been offside can you check it? Or there might have been a foul on keeper can you check it?” This would obvious increase referrals (as per League they will probably refer everything) but it will cut the number of goals given and then struck off and also clarify if the the linesman and referee did he see something but wanted Var safety blanket

    if referees and linesman are just not making decisions thinking Var will pick it up later then that’s ridiculous 

    I'm certain this is happening now for anything that's close.

    The problem is when the lack of a call doesn't lead to a goal but still gives an advantage to the attacking team it doesn't get reviewed. What if a team breaks the defensive line near halfway, the linesman suspects it's offside but keeps his flag down, the attacker shoots and the keeper puts it behind for a corner. Now instead of having a free kick in the middle of the pitch you're defending a corner and the VAR won't check any of it.

    What if instead of putting it behind for a corner a defender fouls the player, giving away a penalty and getting sent off (cough Baccus Jnr cough).

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.

    Sign In Now



  • Posts

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×