West Ham v Bournemouth

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:51 pm

That's bloody outrageous decision.
Hammer clearly punches the ball goalwards, before the header, and VAR sees nothing wrong.

It doesn't matter which version of the rules you use, that is and always has been handball.

RVclaret · Post by **RVclaret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:52 pm

I’m just completely lost with the handball rule is that’s not a handball?

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:53 pm

Mine was a copy of Colburn’s post so I’ve deleted it. It’s a bloody shambles is VAR.

distortiondave · Post by **distortiondave** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:54 pm

By no measure of todays rules is that possibly a goal.

I'm not convinced he's deliberately played it, but it's hit hands and been directed to assist a goal. It should have been ruled out, surely!

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:55 pm

Mike Dean determined to keep himself in the news.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:58 pm

https://twitter.com/FREEVIVO1/status/15 ... Lrguw&s=19

How did they allow that???

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:59 pm

Dyche clearly lost the plot. Would he say the same had it been against us when he was Manager.

RVclaret · Post by **RVclaret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:00 pm

Both Dyche and Carra think it’s the right decision…

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:00 pm

Hand to ball. 100% Never never a goal.

Flying Without Ings · Post by **Flying Without Ings** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:01 pm

beddie wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 24, 2022 8:59 pm
Dyche clearly lost the plot. Would he say the same had it been against us when he was Manager.

No, which is why Dyche said managers always have double standards.

claretburns · Post by **claretburns** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:02 pm

With the rules at the moment the goal was rightly allowed.

That's not me agreeing with it, just stating the shocking and pathetic rules.

If Kehrer scored himself it would be disallowed, but as it was only an "assist" it is allowed to stand.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:02 pm

RVclaret wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:00 pm
Both Dyche and Carra think it’s the right decision…

They're both wrong,

They say it was accidental, which should be irrelevant, but to me he looks like he's playing beach volleyball, and deliberately knocking the ball goalwards.

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:02 pm

He turned his right hand/ arm to direct it.

Sproggy · Post by **Sproggy** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:11 pm

He deliberately shovels it towards goal.

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:39 pm

No Maxwell Cornet again. Is he out of favour or injured?

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:42 pm

dermotdermot wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:39 pm
No Maxwell Cornet again. Is he out of favour or injured?

Injured I think dermot

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:45 pm

Cornet is saving himself for his glorious return to smash 25 goals for Kompany's Burnley next season in the EPL.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:54 pm

It probably was a pen, under the present rules, although how you slide in like that with your arms behind your back is impossible.
But taken with that earlier shout, it looks like the Premier league are wanting to see Bournemouth relegated.

Lowbankclaret · Post by **Lowbankclaret** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:57 pm

First prem game I have watched in a while.

VAR gets it wrong twice, giving West Ham a 2-0 win.

No wonder the Premier League is becoming a joke.

4:20 · Post by **4:20** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:58 pm

Cornet has a thigh injury, been out a few weeks since the Wolves game but he's "back on the grass" as of yesterday according to Moyes.

That 'handball' decision was ridiculous. In no world should that be able to be explained away.

Claretincraven · Post by **Claretincraven** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:59 pm

I actually hope we don’t go up, don’t want to get involved in such a shitshow. Blatant handball at one end ignored by var and goal stands. No handball at other end and var gives a penalty. Coote is a poor referee at the best of times but had a dreadful game tonight, totally out of his depth. How on earth can supposedly the best League on the planet have the worst officials.

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:05 pm

So the powers that be are saying, if he does exactly the same move and it goes straight in the net its disallowed as hand ball. But because the move continued the goals allowed. So it’s not hand ball then? I’m not sure their second goal should be hand ball.

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:05 pm

From what I’ve seen, the Championship referees are worse.

tarkys_ears · Post by **tarkys_ears** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:05 pm

Did you see the handballs on Saturday?

Prem refs are **** but nowhere near as bad as Champ...

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:28 pm

Sean really! “Should of”.

Clive 1960 · Post by **Clive 1960** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:14 am

That is why I don't like the premiership because of VAR it seems like it's there for the big teams.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:25 am

tarkys_ears wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 24, 2022 10:05 pm
Did you see the handballs on Saturday?

Prem refs are **** but nowhere near as bad as Champ...

Are you referring to the Swansea - Cardiff - Kipre incident? That was difficult for the ref to judge and perhaps even his assistant would find it hard given the speed of the event. That's exactly what VAR is for. However when that Westham - Bournemouth first goal occurs, VAR should have penalised West Ham. According the BBC it was allowed to stand as they deemed the handball accidental and said it had not directly led to a goal.

The FA Law is:

It is an offence if a player:

deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball.

touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised

scores in the opponents' goal:

directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... misconduct

It's therefore down to the interpretation of whether it was accidental or not. It looks deliberate to me quite frankly as he moves his arm to the ball. He had ample opportunity to get his hand out of the way but didn't.

CaptJohn · Post by **CaptJohn** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:47 am

Clive 1960 wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:14 am
That is why I don't like the premiership because of VAR it seems like it's there for the big teams.

Spot on Clive. It was supposed to even up the playing field but is just another tool to beat the small clubs with, lest they have the impunity to challenge the big boys. Once you bring interpretation and human judgement into the equation, it was always going to be the case.

Swizzlestick · Post by **Swizzlestick** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:55 am

What’s it got to do with VAR? The first goal would have stood anyway without VAR and they’ve followed the rules on review - both Dyche and Carragher agreed it was a goal. I don’t agree with the laws, as it happens, but that’s the laws not VAR. The second one is a pen.

beddie · Post by **beddie** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 8:20 am

Turning to their penalty. If you’ve played the game you know that your arms naturally go up as you make that type of tackle, it’s part of when you slide downwards and to get your balance. I get you can influence it by raising your arms higher but I don’t think the lad did. Would you make a tackle like that and as you go down put both arms by your side, I don’t think so. VAR has become farcical.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:06 am

Swizzlestick wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 7:55 am
What’s it got to do with VAR? The first goal would have stood anyway without VAR and they’ve followed the rules on review - both Dyche and Carragher agreed it was a goal. I don’t agree with the laws, as it happens, but that’s the laws not VAR. The second one is a pen.

But it was still deliberate handball by the West Ham player even if it didn't directly lead to a goal.

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:15 am

Spijed wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:06 am
But it was still deliberate handball by the West Ham player even if it didn't directly lead to a goal.

Yes. That happens anywhere else on the pitch, it's handball.
Why it should be different in the box, I'm not sure.

tiger76 · Post by **tiger76** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 9:18 am

Big 3 points for Moyes and West Ham but they certainly carried plenty of luck last night.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:05 am

The furore around the first goal is a classic example of why slow motion replays distort the debate on these issues and why VAR has succeeded only in shifting the point of debate on referring decisions, not shutting them down - to the detriment of the game.

Watch it through at full speed, particularly from behind the goal, and it doesn't look deliberate at all, it looks like the ball just hits his arm at an odd angle in front of his midriff.

Slow it down and it literally distorts his reaction and therefore what you can discern as to his intention. But given as sky pointed out his eyes are closed and his arm is by his side then if it was deliberate that's a remarkable gift he's got (but one he's not using very intelligently - why would someone deliberately spoon the ball up into the scrum like that rather than nudging it towards goal? Doesn't make sense).

As for VAR, the fact Carra and Dyche with all of Sky's angles said no free kick closes it down to me. If they say "goal" then unless you think they're lying, its clearly possible to hold differing opinions (at best) on the incident and therefore its not a clear and obvious error.

These things are not painted in primary colours. They are subjective and nuanced.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:09 am

Exactly as spice says, no way the first one was deliberate.

For the second incident he makes his body bigger - it's a penalty. And the reaction of the player who conceded it suggests he knew it was too.

The handball laws may be ambiguous, but last night's decisions seem to have been called correctly by the officials.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:25 am

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑
Mon Oct 24, 2022 9:54 pm
It probably was a pen, under the present rules, although how you slide in like that with your arms behind your back is impossible.
But taken with that earlier shout, it looks like the Premier league are wanting to see Bournemouth relegated.

A lot of people think like you do, that every single referee is a total cheat who decides (or is willing to be told) which team he wants to win in advance. Does it never occur to you that if there is a conspiracy of dishonesty, someone would have spoken out about it - even if after the event? Or is it just a general assumption that mistakes can't happen and if the referee disagrees with an observer, then the referee is a cheat?

I don't know why the West Ham goal was given, except that quite clearly the ref believed it to be accidental. I would call it deliberate because he had time to get his arms out of the way, and a handball intervention with such a positive result doesn't get benefit of the doubt. The refs didn't agree.

As for your statement that the second one was a correct decision but is still evidence that the ref is a cheat - that's a nonsense. If the secision was correct, it can't be evidence of cheating.

Sproggy · Post by **Sproggy** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:41 am

claretspice wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:05 am

Watch it through at full speed, particularly from behind the goal, and it doesn't look deliberate at all, it looks like the ball just hits his arm at an odd angle in front of his midriff.

Watch the first 5 seconds of this. He shovels the ball towards goal. It looks very deliberate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5Ou9fAZYqU

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:04 am

Sproggy wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:41 am
Watch the first 5 seconds of this. He shovels the ball towards goal. It looks very deliberate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5Ou9fAZYqU

He's trying to head it. That clip is played at about 20% speed, how can that be used as evidence of deliberate hand ball?

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:09 am

Bias in favour of West Ham ? Surely not. The taxpayer funded stadium being given to them was a complete one off

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:24 am

Sproggy wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:41 am
Watch the first 5 seconds of this. He shovels the ball towards goal. It looks very deliberate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5Ou9fAZYqU

I repeat, you can only sensibly judge intent in full speed. By slowing it down like that, you literally distort time.

Watch that at full speed and it doesn't look like he moved the arm before the ball makes contact at all. The only thing slow mo does confirm is that as Dyche said, his eyes are closed. And again, if he was looking to deliberately handle it, why spoon it back towards a scrum of players rather than towards goal?

Sproggy · Post by **Sproggy** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:44 am

"literally distort time" - give over. The lad sees the ball coming over, drops his chin at the last second when he realises it's nowhere near his head and spoons it towards goal with his arms.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 11:49 am

What else is a slow motion replay except a distortion of time?

When you slow stuff down you distort perception of reaction time. Whatever you think of the incident (you are of course entitled to your opinion!) that's just a fact.

Sproggy · Post by **Sproggy** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 12:14 pm

Distort perception - yes. Distort time - no. And whether you're watching it at full speed on TV or in slow motion out of the window of your Tardis, the lad sees the ballcoming and scoops it towards goal. In my opinion.

claretspice · Post by **claretspice** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 12:16 pm

Not sure i follow that distinction, but whatever. As to your opinion of the incident, fair enough. Did well to do that with his eyes closed though, no?

Big Vinny K · Post by **Big Vinny K** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 12:17 pm

All about opinions I know but (!!) not sure how anybody can think that the first one was deliberate handball.
I am pretty sure the player did not think the ball was going to reach him. It’s a half hearted jump from the player which is not timed properly. If he genuinely thought the ball was going to arrive he should not jump at all and he then has a very easy chance to score with nobody marking him.

It’s also completely relevant to look at this at full speed as you can see that it’s impossible for the player to have the reaction time to deliberately handball it.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Tue Oct 25, 2022 1:28 pm

dsr wrote: ↑
Tue Oct 25, 2022 10:25 am
A lot of people think like you do, that every single referee is a total cheat who decides (or is willing to be told) which team he wants to win in advance. Does it never occur to you that if there is a conspiracy of dishonesty, someone would have spoken out about it - even if after the event? Or is it just a general assumption that mistakes can't happen and if the referee disagrees with an observer, then the referee is a cheat?

I don't know why the West Ham goal was given, except that quite clearly the ref believed it to be accidental. I would call it deliberate because he had time to get his arms out of the way, and a handball intervention with such a positive result doesn't get benefit of the doubt. The refs didn't agree.

As for your statement that the second one was a correct decision but is still evidence that the ref is a cheat - that's a nonsense. If the secision was correct, it can't be evidence of cheating.

It was tongue in cheek dsr, chill out.
I don't blame the on field ref, it was Mike Dean who had the howler. I'm amazed that so many pundits fail to see , the clear, imo, motion of his hand to knock the ball towards goal. I think the initial contact was accidental, but he looked to take advantage of it. Either way it should never had stood.
While I think the 2nd was wrong, I could understand why he gave it, it was just extremely harsh. Yet many pundits think that wasn't a penalty either, on the grounds that his arm was in a natural position, for making that kind of tackle.

There is a natural selection when it comes to getting decisions on a football pitch, and the bigger clubs have always benefited at the expense of the lower. There will be the occasional shout in the lower teams favour, but for every one the will be a hell of a lot more that go against. We've suffered from this for years. If you think I'm looking at it through Claret glasses, I'm singing the same tune now on behalf of Bournemouth.