Whitey Grandad

'Accidental' and yet a penalty?

They all go on residential courses where incidents such as this are examined in an attempt to get a modicum of consistency. Handball is one such case and the interpretation can change from season to season. That incident last night was too close to the kicker and his hand was moving in that direction before the ball was kicked so it was not an unnatural movement. Consider this, if Roger East had been the video ref would he have overruled the on pitch decision and given a penalty?

'Getting hacked down' is very extreme. There's no video evidence that he was actually touched, certainly not enough to bring him down, and not enough for any video ref to give a ruling. This was examined from several views on Sky.

That always worries me. Anybody who tried that at Riverside Park would end up being kneecapped by the flints just under the surface.

As I saw it his hand was moving before the ball was kicked up at it. There may be one or two referees who would have given it but in general I think most would have turned it down. Long's incident was a long way away from me. My neighbour was adamant that the defender's thigh had caught Long's but how he could have seen that I don't know. I'd have liked to have seen a replay of it. Still, the ref didn't give that nor he alleged foul on Zaha. In both cases I felt that that attacker was trying to initiate a foul.

There was quite a discussion between the referee and his assistant so his flag wasn't just taken at face value. It would enhance understanding if the officials could explain their decision making after the game.

Far too close to give it. Go and learn the Laws of the Game and then take a course in refereeing. No video referee would have overturned that decision.

Not handball. Far too close to give.

Yes, poor decision from the assistant.

That wasn't handball and no video ref would have ever overruled the on pitch decision.

I have played several hundred games and refereed about half that number. You?

No clean sheets since he joined.

Yeah but he would have been injured in September But I agree, management is more than one man.

Not enough goals, especially at home.

Highest number of crosses in the League? https://www.premierleague.com/stats/top/clubs/total_cross?se=54

And wouldn't Spain have to come to our defence?

Fourteen goals? It feels like a lot less.

Any article that starts with a factual inaccuracy like that cannot be taken seriously.

And even then we'd only have drawn.

No need to blockade Gibraltar when they could invade. They could just march across the runway when the traffic lights changed from red to green. We need to send in the SAS to seize the traffic lights control centre and make sure that they stay at red.

The ref is much closer and sees everything in 3D and much higher definition. Slow motion is the most misleading view you could ever have and zooming in doesn't actually give you any more information. Also TV never shows you all the other clues as to what takes place, where the players' eyes are looking, what is said, what is heard, whether the movement looks natural or is manufactured. The referee has the best view in the stadium. You should try it sometime. Video gives you a different view, not a better one.

You have highlighted some of the problems with laws that were intended for a game of sport played all over the world at vastly different levels of playing fields and abilities. The offside law, as currently written, does not suit itself to technological implementation. It was originally aimed at preventing goalhanging.

Subs have ruined the game. Not as much as TV though.

The referee always has a better view than the TV. Judging whether it's a dive involves getting into the mind of the alleged diver. What if the player is just trying to avoid what he thinks is coming? And remember that a lot of the laws are just 'in the opinion of the referee', not 'in the opinion of all those watching on the tele'.