RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Discuss World Football here. Continental football, International Leagues, and players.
Post Reply
jette1
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 16580
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: seattle
Contact:
RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by jette1 »

This Mexican Ref is applying common sense rather than enslaving himself to VAR which it think has gotten out of control
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
User avatar
ohenhen1
Flying Eagle
Flying Eagle
Posts: 69426
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 5:46 pm
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by ohenhen1 »

They overturned a penalty against Nigeria yesterday by looking at a marginal offside call that had no influence on the foul in the box.
Winners do it the right way.

http://www.weareimpact.com/livebroadcast.aspx
User avatar
Scipio Africanus
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 31698
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:43 pm
Location: Cyberspace
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by Scipio Africanus »

In what alternate universe are you residing, jetti1?

Wha choo looking at?!
User avatar
maceo4
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 46732
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Land of the Terrapins
Contact:
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by maceo4 »

ohenhen1 wrote:They overturned a penalty against Nigeria yesterday by looking at a marginal offside call that had no influence on the foul in the box.
Yea it was offside before the foul in the box, that’s the right call.
Super Eagus 4 Life!
Made in the image of God that's a selfie!
User avatar
achuzia-the-air-raid
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 11143
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 4:54 pm
Location: Umuda-Isingwu
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by achuzia-the-air-raid »

[/video]
Then they said to one another, “We are truly guilty concerning our brother, for we saw the anguish of his soul when he pleaded with us, and we would not hear; therefore this distress has come upon us.” Genesis 42:21

“A doubtful friend is worse than a certain enemy. Let a man be one thing or the other, and we then know how to meet him” (Aesop, 620–564 BC).
jette1
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 16580
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: seattle
Contact:
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by jette1 »

maceo4 wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:They overturned a penalty against Nigeria yesterday by looking at a marginal offside call that had no influence on the foul in the box.
Yea it was offside before the foul in the box, that’s the right call.
Your tunnel vision & loud mouth is too obvious; While video reviewing a current call which is an infraction you cannot then vacate the infraction and rewind the tape and simultaneously start reviewing other previous plays upon which no calls were made before current call especially when current call is an infraction against opponent player and not procedural because review would infringe on the present call being reviewed. Unless you are now saying if a players leg gets broken by slide tackle and VAR shows he was offsite before that then it’s his fault that his leg got broken.
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
User avatar
maceo4
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 46732
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Land of the Terrapins
Contact:
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by maceo4 »

jette1 wrote:
maceo4 wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:They overturned a penalty against Nigeria yesterday by looking at a marginal offside call that had no influence on the foul in the box.
Yea it was offside before the foul in the box, that’s the right call.
Your tunnel vision & loud mouth is too obvious; While video reviewing a current call which is an infraction you cannot then vacate the infraction and rewind the tape and simultaneously start reviewing other previous plays upon which no calls were made before current call especially when current call is an infraction against opponent player and not procedural because review would infringe on the present call being reviewed. Unless you are now saying if a players leg gets broken by slide tackle and VAR shows he was offsite before that then it’s his fault that his leg got broken.
What are you on about, that’s the whole point of VAR, they let marginal offside calls go and review based on the outcome of the play, but they allow the play to conclude then go back. Same way Argentina’s 3rd goal was chopped off. The result of our play being allowed to continue was a PK, and so was rightly brought back after review showed it was offside to begin with. They review the entire lead up to the conclusion of the play.
Super Eagus 4 Life!
Made in the image of God that's a selfie!
jette1
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 16580
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: seattle
Contact:
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by jette1 »

maceo4 wrote:
jette1 wrote:
maceo4 wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:They overturned a penalty against Nigeria yesterday by looking at a marginal offside call that had no influence on the foul in the box.
Yea it was offside before the foul in the box, that’s the right call.
Your tunnel vision & loud mouth is too obvious; While video reviewing a current call which is an infraction you cannot then vacate the infraction and rewind the tape and simultaneously start reviewing other previous plays upon which no calls were made before current call especially when current call is an infraction against opponent player and not procedural because review would infringe on the present call being reviewed. Unless you are now saying if a players leg gets broken by slide tackle and VAR shows he was offsite before that then it’s his fault that his leg got broken.
What are you on about, that’s the whole point of VAR, they let marginal offside calls go and review based on the outcome of the play, but they allow the play to conclude then go back. Same way Argentina’s 3rd goal was chopped off. The result of our play being allowed to continue was a PK, and so was rightly brought back after review showed it was offside to begin with. They review the entire lead up to the conclusion of the play.
Is English your first or second language; let me spell it out in a non technical language for you
They cannot vacate a foul or a bodily harm on a player which just happened and was called appropriately . A goal was not scored on the missed offsite hence that sequence was finish. So was the player no longer brought down.
make peaceful change impossible make violent change inevitable.

"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
User avatar
maceo4
Eaglet
Eaglet
Posts: 46732
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 6:41 am
Location: Land of the Terrapins
Contact:
Re: RSA 1 vs 0 KOR

Post by maceo4 »

jette1 wrote:
maceo4 wrote:
jette1 wrote:
maceo4 wrote:
ohenhen1 wrote:They overturned a penalty against Nigeria yesterday by looking at a marginal offside call that had no influence on the foul in the box.
Yea it was offside before the foul in the box, that’s the right call.
Your tunnel vision & loud mouth is too obvious; While video reviewing a current call which is an infraction you cannot then vacate the infraction and rewind the tape and simultaneously start reviewing other previous plays upon which no calls were made before current call especially when current call is an infraction against opponent player and not procedural because review would infringe on the present call being reviewed. Unless you are now saying if a players leg gets broken by slide tackle and VAR shows he was offsite before that then it’s his fault that his leg got broken.
What are you on about, that’s the whole point of VAR, they let marginal offside calls go and review based on the outcome of the play, but they allow the play to conclude then go back. Same way Argentina’s 3rd goal was chopped off. The result of our play being allowed to continue was a PK, and so was rightly brought back after review showed it was offside to begin with. They review the entire lead up to the conclusion of the play.
Is English your first or second language; let me spell it out in a non technical language for you
They cannot vacate a foul or a bodily harm on a player which just happened and was called appropriately . A goal was not scored on the missed offsite hence that sequence was finish. So was the player no longer brought down.
You are not making any sense, any play that results after an offside and is reviewed by VAR is supposed to be brought back. Same way you say 'was the player no longer brought down', you can say 'was the goal no longer scored' abi? Who cares about the result of a play that was offsides to begin with? I mean why is this simple/straight forward concept so hard for you to understand?

Since English clearly is your second language please read the VAR handbook to get more understanding of how similar situations should be handled and stop yarning 'feelings':

https://www.knvb.nl/downloads/bestand/9 ... k-v8_final
8.17 What happens if the VAR identifies a clear ‘missed’ penalty kick
but also an offside in the build-up to the missed penalty?
The VAR sees that the referee has made a clear error in not awarding a penalty kick but
there was also a clear ‘missed’ offside/handball in the attacking phase leading up to the
incident – what should the VAR do?
This is not easy but for the management of the game and to avoid unnecessary criticism
after the match, the referee should be informed of both situations at the next stoppage. The
referee then has 2 options depending on how ‘clear’ the missed penalty error was and the
state/atmosphere of the game:
• initiate a ‘review’ knowing it will result in a decision that there was an
offside/handball before the ‘missed’ penalty so no penalty is awarded (but everything
is clear to everyone) or
• inform the captain of the team that would have been awarded the penalty that there
was an offside/handball before the ‘penalty’ so the penalty would not have been
awarded (the 4th official would inform the coach and someone in VOR would inform
the broadcasters)
Super Eagus 4 Life!
Made in the image of God that's a selfie!

Post Reply