West Ham

[scawsby steve]

Another suicide goal playing out from the back.

[Donnyjim]

Loved the VAR at the end. Really pissed on the hammers chips lol. I think it was the right decision (accidental or not). If it hadn’t hit Rice’s hand he wouldn’t have created the assist.

[eastender]

Loved the VAR at the end. Really pissed on the hammers chips lol. I think it was the right decision (accidental or not). If it hadn’t hit Rice’s hand he wouldn’t have created the assist.

Ball to hand ,VAR is wrong again.

[RoversAlias]

Loved the VAR at the end. Really pissed on the hammers chips lol. I think it was the right decision (accidental or not). If it hadn’t hit Rice’s hand he wouldn’t have created the assist.

Ball to hand ,VAR is wrong again.

Not VAR at all, that. They changed the handball rule in the summer so now, any touch off an attacker's hand in the build-up to a goal means it's disallowed. It's a stupid rule but VAR followed the laws correctly on this one.

[DRFC_AjA]

Sorry got to disagree, if the ball didn't hit his hand then its gone off in the opposite direction, or am I missing something. Yes it's accidental but he's accidentally controlled the ball down to his feet with his hand.......I'm always amazed at the hypocrisy of a VAR complainer especially the media, who've been calling for tech to help the refs for years. Except for those ridiculous offside decisions recently which just have to stop ASAP and the frustration is completely acceptable.

Imagine if there is as no VAR and you're a Sheff U fan watching the replay, you'd be outraged that refs aren't looking at videos to make crucial decisions. You'd be going home fuming at two points robbed. With Mark Lawrenson spending half hour saying "those points are the difference between survival and relegation" etc

[selby]

Sheff U get a little bit back from the Tevez affair, and as a supporter of a team that has never had any help to buy anything, never mind a bloody great stadium at the tax payers expense, I am quite pleased.

[Rovers91]

The handball rule is a joke and VAR is a joke. That goal shouldn't have been disallowed because where are you meant to put your hands when your sprinting and someone hits it from that close. The game was better when it had the human error in it.

[1-0 to the Doncaster]

Sheff U get a little bit back from the Tevez affair, and as a supporter of a team that has never had any help to buy anything, never mind a bloody great stadium at the tax payers expense, I am quite pleased.

So who do you think build the keepmoat “at the tax payers expense”.

[Campsall rover]

The new hand ball rule is a joke and needs changing back to how it was.

Where is a footballer supposed to put his arms. Is he supposed to have them wrapped around his back. That would be good wouldn’t it. Really be able to run faster then!!!

Ball to hand/arm is not hand ball. Hand/arm to ball is hand ball.
That’s how it has to be or they are going to make the game a farce.

Who are the idiots who came up with this new rule?
Have they ever kicked a football. Probably not.
Total joke imo.

[southwestexile]

People moaned about refs, people moan about VAR. people moan.

[Campsall rover]

People moaned about refs, people moan about VAR. people moan.

Nothing is perfect of course. What we want is a bit of common sense being used.

[southwestexile]

My point is that application of the laws is more accurate and consistent with VAR to the point that it’s highlighting issues with the laws. However, even if the laws seem daft, they are being applied much more consistently than before. Players and fans and maybe even pundits must recognise that as a massive step on. The trouble with common sense is that it is rarely consistent

[Axholme Lion]

Wet Spam to go down. Come on! Haha.

[adamtherover]

The handball rule is a joke and VAR is a joke. That goal shouldn't have been disallowed because where are you meant to put your hands when your sprinting and someone hits it from that close. The game was better when it had the human error in it.

I can see why they disallowed it on this occasion, a simple ball to hand that scrapes a knuckle is innocent. Play on, but if the direction of travel completely changes as in this case, the hand has had a major part in the goal. If it wasnt there the ball would have sailed across the body of rice and the chance was gone...

[ravenrover]

Lets face it most players are cheats, claiming a throw in when they have played it out, diving for a free kick  concealing a deliberate/accidental hand ball. Yes it hit Rice on the hand but was it definitely accidental?

[Campsall rover]

The handball rule is a joke and VAR is a joke. That goal shouldn't have been disallowed because where are you meant to put your hands when your sprinting and someone hits it from that close. The game was better when it had the human error in it.

I can see why they disallowed it on this occasion, a simple ball to hand that scrapes a knuckle is innocent. Play on, but if the direction of travel completely changes as in this case, the hand has had a major part in the goal. If it wasnt there the ball would have sailed across the body of rice and the chance was gone...

adam please tell me what Declan Rice was supposed to do with his arm.
As the ball comes towards him is he supposed to put it behind his back ( in a split second ) or better still without being flippant is he supposed to unscrew his arm and take it off.

The fact is he did not move his arm towards the ball in any way. 

Having said that, although i am no supporter i am pleased Sheff U won as it is good to see a Yorkshire team doing so well in the Premier league.

[adamtherover]

Absolutely nothing mate, it was completely accidental, but I'm trying to get into the mind of why the goal was disallowed, and the fact that the handball was basically an assist was the reason it was ruled.off.  compare with the champions league final, where the ball was kicked to the hand from 2 yards, now that is ridiculous hand ball rules.....

[sha66y]

I love VAR, it removes doubt, it tells the truth, it captures the moment and leaves nobody with a feeling of being cheated..

It also pisses off the Premiershit fans and pillock pundits....

and if it ruins enough games some might migrate to watch matches closer to home without such technologies.....( Donny-shites) ....tongue in cheek

From the bbc site:

Lewis, Leicester: You know the games gone when Dean Henderson is celebrating VAR on his Twitter. Football is currently coming second after VAR. Our sport is a joke at the minute. I seriously would rather watch the Championship than the Premier League, where football is football and nothing else.

[IDM]

It’s the handball rule which is.at fault here.

VAR just helps the officials apply the rules.  For offside, the officials should look at the VAR but only change the on field decision if there is a clear and obvious error - and if  VAR shows that the linesman couldn’t have seen any different in real time, then they don’t change the decision - an umpire’s call like in cricket.

For handball the rule is at fault - it doesn’t matter how the ball touches the arm/hand, if it’s an attacker leading to a goal, it’s an offence.  But if it’s a defender and it prevents a goal, then there is a judgement on the arm’s position - different rules for different players but in the same action.  Now I think that is wrong..

[mjg]

Var or meddling with the rules , it’s still wrong

[IDM]

VAR is only a tool, it’s how it is used which is the issue..

[DRFC_AjA]

The handball rule is a joke and VAR is a joke. That goal shouldn't have been disallowed because where are you meant to put your hands when your sprinting and someone hits it from that close. The game was better when it had the human error in it.

I can see why they disallowed it on this occasion, a simple ball to hand that scrapes a knuckle is innocent. Play on, but if the direction of travel completely changes as in this case, the hand has had a major part in the goal. If it wasnt there the ball would have sailed across the body of rice and the chance was gone...

adam please tell me what Declan Rice was supposed to do with his arm.
As the ball comes towards him is he supposed to put it behind his back ( in a split second ) or better still without being flippant is he supposed to unscrew his arm and take it off.

The fact is he did not move his arm towards the ball in any way. 

Having said that, although i am no supporter i am pleased Sheff U won as it is good to see a Yorkshire team doing so well in the Premier league.

It's not what he's supposed to do with it,it's the fact it hit the hand and the hand did not have the body behind it (if I'm remembering the rule rightly, probably not). Imagine this scenario...Open goal two yards and copps slams it against the defender whose one yard away, it hit his hand but there's nothing he can do.....you want that allowed because there's nowhere he can go? Or you want it disallowed?.....Then what happens if it wasn't going in,it was going to hit the post?

All these ifs ifs ifs aren't needed, what's needed is one clear rule if it hits your hand it's handball. Any ambiguity of "did he mean it" is completely subjective you'd get a different answer everyone you asked.

[Campsall rover]

So when the ball is hammered at a defender in his own penalty area and it hits his arm or hand and it is then not given handball on V.A.R. So why is that different.

Sorry let’s go back to giving benefit of doubt to the attacking player.
If it’s not obviously deliberate and stick to no penalty if the defender can’t get his hand/arm out of the way.

Don’t like this trying to turn the game into something it was never intended to be.
Sanitisation is what i would call it and it will kill the game as we know it.

Off sides should be advantage the attacker and unless a clear and obvious mistake has been made then it should be a goal awarded.
How i would define that is daylight between the attacker and the defender.

[donnievic]

[/b]

So when the ball is hammered at a defender in his own penalty area and it hits his arm or hand and it is then not given handball on V.A.R. So why is that different.

Sorry let’s go back to giving benefit of doubt to the attacking player.
If it’s not obviously deliberate and stick to no penalty if the defender can’t get his hand/arm out of the way.

Don’t like this trying to turn the game into something it was never intended to be.
Sanitisation is what i would call it and it will kill the game as we know it.

Off sides should be advantage the attacker and unless a clear and obvious mistake has been made then it should be a goal awarded.
How i would define that is daylight between the attacker and the defender.

because it didn’t lead to a goal