Rate the Ref (& VAR) v Sheffield United - Lee Mason

[ealinggreen]

Var was spot on, the ball did not hit the hand or lower arm which were in an unnatural position. It was not a penalty. The ref was really good as with so many this season.

 

[foreigner]

Am I the only one to see a blatant push in the back on Aimson I think which should have been a pen to us?

 

[Returnofthepob]

Am I the only one to see a blatant push in the back on Aimson I think which should have been a pen to us?

Thinking the same Foreigner. I was going to mention this too. The commentators said the same.

I saw it more as a climb than a shove - but still a Pen.

Down the years I’ve always thought it odd how many refs let the “climbing” go unpunished.

 

[djg145]

Thought he did ok, easy game to ref. Although the advantage rule didn't seem in his thoughts. Danny got a bit upset with him at one stage. And the offside??
I assumed as soon as the player who is offside touches the ball the flag should go up. Perhaps I'm wrong

The guideline is to wait until the passage of play ends. That way if it then turns out he was onside and goes through and scores, that opportunity isn't denied.

But the stupid thing is - it gives the opportunity for a player involved to be injured i.e. the goalie trying to save at the forwards feet. So much better when if the player is offside the flag goes up straigh away.

 

[Cdp]

Both pretty good. Only thing with ref was a bit quick to blow when advantage was a n option.
And I still don't think it was a pen. Yes his hands were raised but he was protecting his face and his head was turning as a reaction. So he wasn't watching the flight of the ball he turned his head away and lifted hands to his face as protection again a gut reaction, he didn't seem to raise his hands deliberately towards the ball as he wasn't watching the ball. So for me ball to hand , not hand to ball.

 

[kernow19]

So for me ball to hand , not hand to ball.

The way the rules are these days, I didn't think that made any difference any more? If the ball hits the player's hand or arms which are in an "unnatural position" it's handball, whether it be deliberate or not.

 

[WoodsyGreen]

Excellent performance from an excellent ref. Doesnt want to be noticed, controls the game well without getting involved or fussy.

My issue with the offside rule was actually mentioned by the co-commentator today, why when a player is 5 yards offside, do we have to wait for them to "finish the passage of play" before flagging. One day very soon a goalkeeper or centre forward are going to fully commit to a big physical collision, someone will break a leg, miss a year of playing or worse, all for something that was offside and irrelevant. Whoever came up with this change wants certifying.

I agree it's annoying but they do it to allow the move to play through just in case the lineman's offside decision is wrong. The alternative is for the lino to flag as soon as the player collects the ball, but then you'd end up with goalscoring chances being denied to teams due to incorrect offside decisions.

The suggestion that players might get injured is offset by the potential upside that teams are given every opportunity to score.

They could change the law back again but you wait for one of the big boys to be denied a goal because a lino got an offside call wrong. There'd be hell to pay and people would magically forget how outraged they were by the prospect of players getting injured.

 

[rsp4]

Am I the only one to see a blatant push in the back on Aimson I think which should have been a pen to us?

I saw it once the commentary team pointed it out. I thought that was what VAR was for. The ref and lino didn't see it but the replays showed the foul.

I don't watch much premier League football so not sure how VAR is supposed to work in this case.

 

[Presto]

Excellent ref. As far as I am concerned he did not put a foot wrong. Overall the game was free flowing and very few fouls.

 

[Cdp]

So for me ball to hand , not hand to ball.

The way the rules are these days, I didn't think that made any difference any more? If the ball hits the player's hand or arms which are in an "unnatural position" it's handball, whether it be deliberate or not.

It's a tough one, is protecting your face a natural or un-natural reaction.
I still think it would have been harsh on watts due to the power that the ball was hit at.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Am I the only one to see a blatant push in the back on Aimson I think which should have been a pen to us?

I saw it once the commentary team pointed it out. I thought that was what VAR was for. The ref and lino didn't see it but the replays showed the foul.

I don't watch much premier League football so not sure how VAR is supposed to work in this case.

There was one in the Premier League recently where a player on the blind side of the referee put hand to ball but even VAR didn't notice it. Even the players didn't appeal because it was in the main unseen. However replays showed it ticked all the boxes for a definite penalty.

The rule is, VAR has to intervene before play restarts and if he thinks there is something he needs to look out more closely he informs the referee to hold up any restart. VAR are bound to miss things live occasionally and not realise that they have something to look at. We can't delay every restart for VAR to check everything and once play recommences, it is too late to go back.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

So for me ball to hand , not hand to ball.

The way the rules are these days, I didn't think that made any difference any more? If the ball hits the player's hand or arms which are in an "unnatural position" it's handball, whether it be deliberate or not.

The VAR decision was..... his arms may have been raised into an unnatural position but the ball didn't clearly hit any part of his arm that constitutes hand ball. That's what he meant when he said "green zone."

 

[Dan Ellard]

Lee Mason is one of our best refs in the country. Didn't put a foot wrong today. Some are saying he could have played the advantage rule at times but awarding a free kick instead of playing advantage isn't a wrong decision.

On VAR and the penalty shout, with the hand in an unnatural position it would have been a clear penalty...... had the ball hit the hand or arm. Jarred Gillett was clearly heard saying that the ball hit him in the green zone, ie the upper arm above the "T-shirt" line.

Blimey, I didnt know that fractionally above the elbow was the "t-shirt line".

Clearly the FA are looking to redefine anything above your elbow as your shoulder. I didn't realise that was the correct description of the human anatomy, but there we go.

Or, of course, it was a wrong decision by the VAR official. Not that "wrong officiating decision" is a phrase in your vocabulary eh :wave:

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Lee Mason is one of our best refs in the country. Didn't put a foot wrong today. Some are saying he could have played the advantage rule at times but awarding a free kick instead of playing advantage isn't a wrong decision.

On VAR and the penalty shout, with the hand in an unnatural position it would have been a clear penalty...... had the ball hit the hand or arm. Jarred Gillett was clearly heard saying that the ball hit him in the green zone, ie the upper arm above the "T-shirt" line.

Blimey, I didnt know that fractionally above the elbow was the "t-shirt line".

Clearly the FA are looking to redefine anything above your elbow as your shoulder. I didn't realise that was the correct description of the human anatomy, but there we go.

Or, of course, it was a wrong decision by the VAR official. Not that "wrong officiating decision" is a phrase in your vocabulary eh :wave:

I'm only explaining the decision and not saying whether it was right or wrong. Was it clear and obvious that the ball hit the defender in the red zone? He decided not. Therefore "no penalty" is most definitely the correct decision. Your opinion of where the ball hit might be different of course.

 

[Dan Ellard]

Lee Mason is one of our best refs in the country. Didn't put a foot wrong today. Some are saying he could have played the advantage rule at times but awarding a free kick instead of playing advantage isn't a wrong decision.

On VAR and the penalty shout, with the hand in an unnatural position it would have been a clear penalty...... had the ball hit the hand or arm. Jarred Gillett was clearly heard saying that the ball hit him in the green zone, ie the upper arm above the "T-shirt" line.

Blimey, I didnt know that fractionally above the elbow was the "t-shirt line".

Clearly the FA are looking to redefine anything above your elbow as your shoulder. I didn't realise that was the correct description of the human anatomy, but there we go.

Or, of course, it was a wrong decision by the VAR official. Not that "wrong officiating decision" is a phrase in your vocabulary eh :wave:

I'm only explaining the decision and not saying whether it was right or wrong. Was it clear and obvious that the ball hit the defender in the red zone? He decided not. Therefore "no penalty" is most definitely the correct decision. Your opinion of where the ball hit might be different of course.

Once again, all you can do is trot out the "in the opinion of the referee" line, clear proof that you know it was not the correct decision. I wouldn't expect anything else, referee's union. Good afternoon :wave: