Busta Nut Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 12 minutes ago, ropy said: We are just being fobbed off. Ultimately yes, this is what they will do. shite made up excuses or no answers. And I mean in general not yesterday. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 The worst thing about handball is it just feels like a total lottery, both in terms of whether they’re going to give it or not and also a defender finding themselves in that situation where a ball ricochets and their arm happens to be away from their side in that moment. Just in the last run of games we’ve benefitted yesterday plus devlin vs hibs, but suffered against Dundee and st Johnstone. None of which I really want to see given as handballs as a neutral. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 It is handball if a player catches it, blocks it or plays it. Not if the ball plays him. A referee can use his subjectivity to decide what is a penalty. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 On the Shinnie decision the time was up, Collum should have said I want to see the incident again because it would be him that looked a dick on Sportscene. It wasn’t holding the game up. Then he could come to his own conclusion. I wouldn’t have given a penalty but if he was being consistent then he would have. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingjoey Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 50 minutes ago, ropy said: On the Shinnie decision the time was up, Collum should have said I want to see the incident again because it would be him that looked a dick on Sportscene. It wasn’t holding the game up. Then he could come to his own conclusion. I wouldn’t have given a penalty but if he was being consistent then he would have. The VAR system doesn't work that way. The referee has to be asked to view an incident by the VAR, not the referee asking the VAR to see something again, regardless of which point the match is at. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Hahn Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 That yesterday just proved what a shambles VAR has been in Scotland since its introduction. IMO, the biggest detriment to the paying fan's experience since I've been attending games. Scotland's clubs rely heavily on gate receipts for their income and we are making attending fan's experience infinitely worse. When that goal is scored yesterday, no-one sees a handball. No opposition players claiming for it, none of the 1,000+ away fans behind the goal claiming for it, on-field referee saw nothing. When they were first checking the VAR, it's anyone's guess what they're actually checking for, I assumed some kind of offside at the time. When the stadium announcer says "possible handball" it's so not "clear and obvious" that no-one in the ground has any idea who's supposed to have committed the offence or even at what point in the play it occurred. Having now seen the replay on Sportscene, how that goal can be ruled out as a "clear and obvious" error in beyond me. From the angles available, it's not even clear where it hits Bair. From one of the angles they showed, it looks like it hits his shoulder and it skiffs it if anything. However, given as handball, move on. Then the Shinnie "handball" at the end of the game. To my mind, not a handball either. He doesn't really move his arm towards the ball, it's a complete accident but it does hit him around the elbow. Unlike the disallowed goal, many players claiming for it, the fans in that corner of the ground claiming for it, so at least something has been seen. If you give the Bair incident as handball, for me there is no excuses for not giving the Shinnie one as handball. In my opinion neither are handball, but we need something resembling consistency throughout the game. Collum wasn't even directed to the monitor for that one! And this isn't a Motherwell v Aberdeen thing per se, I'm not saying we "deserved" a draw, it was a remarkably even game reflected fairly accurately in the match stats and I'm fully aware that Aberdeen had a VAR shocker given against them in midweek. But I can't say I've seen a more egregious example of incompetent VAR officiating than this, both for the disallowing of the goal and the failure to apply any kind of consistency in the same fucking match, let alone across a season. VAR has been nothing but a detriment to Scottish football, with the paying fan being burdened with the overwhelming majority of the detriment. The technology might be ok but the people operating it are as incompetent as they were before it was introduced. Didn't think there was a way we could make Scottish refereeing even more incompetent than it was before but here we are. GET VAR IN THE FUCKING BIN before we ruin the matchday experience even more for those we're trying to attract to go to games. 15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joewarkfanclub Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 9 minutes ago, kingjoey said: The VAR system doesn't work that way. The referee has to be asked to view an incident by the VAR, not the referee asking the VAR to see something again, regardless of which point the match is at. You are correct. But Steven McLean directed Collum to look at the Bair incident again. He should have directed him to look at Shinnies as well. I dont think either are handball, but they have conspired to give Bairs, so consistency would indicate that Shinnies should be given as well. I think we all agree that the new rules are mental and VAR isnt helping. Just spoiling the game. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 51 minutes ago, kingjoey said: The VAR system doesn't work that way. The referee has to be asked to view an incident by the VAR, not the referee asking the VAR to see something again, regardless of which point the match is at. I know but this was an unusual situation where the time had come and gone, he could have acted differently - it wasn’t a penalty 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewDon Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 They are different incidents, though. Bair’s one is more like Mackenzie’s in midweek than Shinnie’s here - probably technically correct by the state of the laws given the extension of his arm at the (apparent) point of contact (like Mackenzie’s), but not something that any matchgoing football fan should want to be penalised. Shinnie is in a natural position and the movement appears to be making his body smaller, if anything. Much more like the Goldson one against us in Warnock’s first game - not a penalty under the laws, and should never be a penalty. I hate myself for typing out this post. The VAR mob have won, they have got me right where they want me. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 So moving on from that techology… Was our style of play yesterday quite different, as the post match interviews would suggest? Also was Roos deserving of BBC’s MotM award? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Hahn Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 12 minutes ago, DrewDon said: They are different incidents, though. Bair’s one is more like Mackenzie’s in midweek than Shinnie’s here - probably technically correct by the state of the laws given the extension of his arm at the (apparent) point of contact (like Mackenzie’s), but not something that any matchgoing football fan should want to be penalised. Shinnie is in a natural position and the movement appears to be making his body smaller, if anything. Much more like the Goldson one against us in Warnock’s first game - not a penalty under the laws, and should never be a penalty. I hate myself for typing out this post. The VAR mob have won, they have got me right where they want me. Here is my issue with that, and trying to remove as much of my obvious Motherwell bias as possible. Theo's arm is in a natural position for someone jumping to try and contest a ball. Shinnie's is in a natural position for someone standing waiting to react to a ball. Neither have deliberately tried to hit it unnaturally, neither have really gained an advantage from it hitting their arm. There's no blocking it with the hand, there's barely a deflection on the ball in either incident. Same as Mackenzie the other night. His arm is in a natural place for someone jumping for a ball, he's not gained an advantage, he's not blocked anything. Football is a game where the ball is in the air some of the time (a lot of time in our case at times) so we can't be punishing players who often need to jump for a ball. Both players have their arms in natural positions for the actions they're currently doing. From the angles we've been provided, it cannot even be conclusively determined where on the arm it hits Theo, it looks like it's around the shoulder. Is that even a handball if you deliberately shoulder it?! Therefore if we can't even say where it hit him, how can we say that's a clear and obvious error? From the angle's shown, it is however clear that the ball hits Shinnie at a point on his arm that would be considered handball. Again, I stress, I don't think Shinnie's is handball either. But in my view, it's more of a handball than Bair's and if you give one, you must give the other. The handball rule is a total mess but we need to at least apply a bad rule consistently for both teams. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Hahn Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 11 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: So moving on from that techology… Was our style of play yesterday quite different, as the post match interviews would suggest? Also was Roos deserving of BBC’s MotM award? Roos made some decent saves but nothing you wouldn't expect him to make IMO. Defensively Aberdeen looked very solid yesterday, McDonald and Gartenmann were clearer MotM for me. Barron also had a good game in midfield and contributed a lot to Aberdeen looking tidy in possession in midfield. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 13 hours ago, welldaft said: His post match interview on You Tube absolutely mentioned his team were not up to recent standards to lose to a shit poor and embarrassing Aberdeen team. An Aberdeen team with the 3rd or 4th largest budget that have become a laughing stock around the world due to how they are being run and mismanaged. But you glory in beating a team 1-0 with a fraction of the budget with debatable VAR decisions. Shows how far the Famous (were a long time ago) Aberdeen have fallen . Quite funny truth be told… 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 13 hours ago, welldaft said: What point apart from being an obnoxious **** Two handball decisions today. Both almost identical and both ruled against us. In a parallel universe our goal stands and we get the penalty and win the game. But that would reckon on the ref not being the bawbag that is Gollum. Obvs had Aberdeen on his coupon. If only Aberdeen played the way they do against Motherwell in every other game they would be in the top 4. They obviously have a hard on for claret and amber. Probably something to do with Craig Reid day. Now run along and hope you finish 8th this season. I said way back when you binned McInnes be careful for what you wish for. And all Dons fans said he has taken us as far as he can……hello….. At least you're not bothered. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrewDon Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mr Hahn said: Here is my issue with that, and trying to remove as much of my obvious Motherwell bias as possible. Theo's arm is in a natural position for someone jumping to try and contest a ball. Shinnie's is in a natural position for someone standing waiting to react to a ball. Neither have deliberately tried to hit it unnaturally, neither have really gained an advantage from it hitting their arm. There's no blocking it with the hand, there's barely a deflection on the ball in either incident. Same as Mackenzie the other night. His arm is in a natural place for someone jumping for a ball, he's not gained an advantage, he's not blocked anything. Football is a game where the ball is in the air some of the time (a lot of time in our case at times) so we can't be punishing players who often need to jump for a ball. Both players have their arms in natural positions for the actions they're currently doing. From the angles we've been provided, it cannot even be conclusively determined where on the arm it hits Theo, it looks like it's around the shoulder. Is that even a handball if you deliberately shoulder it?! Therefore if we can't even say where it hit him, how can we say that's a clear and obvious error? From the angle's shown, it is however clear that the ball hits Shinnie at a point on his arm that would be considered handball. Again, I stress, I don't think Shinnie's is handball either. But in my view, it's more of a handball than Bair's and if you give one, you must give the other. The handball rule is a total mess but we need to at least apply a bad rule consistently for both teams. I certainly think the argument about the point of contact is a fair one. It probably doesn't help that we are using a Smart Price version of VAR here. There have been numerous incidents this season alone involving handballs where I have thought that the point of contact being assessed was, at best, dubious. I think McLean has probably settled on the point in Bair's action where his arm is out at around the same height as his head, and perhaps judged that the arm is also outstretched as an action against Milne rather than just as part of the 'natural' jumping motion. I suppose it is a bit like Mackenzie's the other night in that it is part of a jumping motion, but Mackenzie had also extended it to challenge a Dundee player, so it is judged as an 'unnatural' position for the jump. In all honesty, reading this back as I type it, I think I am doing an absolutely terrible job of trying to explain what I think the officials are thinking, but there you go. Shinnie's is much closer to his body at the point of contact, sort of in the position that Bair's other arm is in when he's challenging for the ball. I think they have to be viewed as separate incidents, and there has to be recognition that the context is different too. I don't think we should be saying that just because one dubious decision is given, we then have to give what would be (in my opinion) a much more obviously wrong one. I do completely get the frustrations, though. I don't think many, if any, matchgoing fans are happy with the situation at the moment, myself amongst them. 1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said: So moving on from that techology… Was our style of play yesterday quite different, as the post match interviews would suggest? Also was Roos deserving of BBC’s MotM award? There was definitely a more concerted effort to move through the thirds, especially through Barron, who I thought was probably the best player on the park. Mackenzie seemed to have a slightly deeper starting position too, at least compared to Devlin and then Milne on the right side, which gave us more passing options (and probably also simplified things for Hoilett). We did still go direct at times, but weren't having too much joy with first contacts because we didn't have Phillips or Polvara to occupy defenders from Miovski; we were much more competitive with second balls, though, and all of Barron, Shinnie, Clarkson and McGrath did a good job in that regard. Roos was good - he probably would have been disappointed to be beaten by any of the shots he saved, but still made a few decent stops and didn't do anything wrong. It was Gartenmann's best game since around November time, I thought, and that was probably the best in possession I have seen from that combination of central midfielders. We were still a bit shaky under high and cross balls (or at least I felt that way at the game), and sometimes a bit ragged when Motherwell counter-attacked on us. This was likely at least somewhat a consequence of taking more risks in possession, both in use of the ball and shape, than we did under Warnock and probably Robson too. It wasn't a great performance, and on another day Motherwell would take a point without any complaints, but it was an improvement on much of what we have seen recently and can hopefully be a tentative step in the right direction. Edited March 17 by DrewDon 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said: So moving on from that techology… Was our style of play yesterday quite different, as the post match interviews would suggest? Also was Roos deserving of BBC’s MotM award? Mixed. It was quite different going forward. Much more passing through midfield and players running past and for each other. There were some up and unders but as a last resort rather than being the only thing we did. Defensively we had a bit more of a press but were still largely a shambles, didn't stop crosses coming in, caught out by long balls and always seem a man short on the edge of the box. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 3 hours ago, coprolite said: Defensively we had a bit more of a press but were still largely a shambles, didn't stop crosses coming in, caught out by long balls and always seem a man short on the edge of the box. But apart from that, pretty tight, eh? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoF Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 3 hours ago, DrewDon said: I think McLean has probably settled on the point in Bair's action where his arm is out at around the same height as his head, and perhaps judged that the arm is also outstretched as an action against Milne rather than just as part of the 'natural' jumping motion. Couldn’t you equally argue thats still a natural action for that situation? His arm is up there because he’s jostling with Milne. There’s also a case to say Milnes jump plays its part in where Bairs arm goes. Again, all part the natural movement for that situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 Have a feeling the shaky defending will be here until the summer. Hopefully confidence could make us a little less bombscare but fundamentally the personnel just aren’t very good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marinello Posted March 17 Share Posted March 17 Apols if mentioned elsewhere but a nagging thought I have re Collum at the Bair incident. Wouldn't surprise me that having discarded VAR advice at the recent Motherwell/Celtic game he may have had this at the back of his mind on Saturday. Referees as we know don't like to go against their colleagues!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.