Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Mr Wallin

Members
  • Content count

    6,438
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mr Wallin

  • Rank
    Third Team

Biography

  • Biography
    Winner of the Yul Brynner Memorial Geosense Cup

About Me

  • About Me
    Katrineholm, middle of everywhere, Sweden

Interests

  • Interests
    -35 degrees Farenheit and business as usual...

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    The Arsenal

Recent Profile Visitors

2,197 profile views
  1. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    As much as I'd like to join the FIFA bashing this isn't really on their head (not mainly at least). FIFA are epic crowd pleaser's. If fans (and pundits) ever came to agree on diving = bad and get some coherent idea about what is a dive then FIFA and the rest of the confeds would have new instructions for their referees out before the next set of matches. But for the majority of dives/simulation (and past the "my player/club" bias) you'll never find anything close to a majority to agree that a situation is a dive bad enough to deserve a caution.
  2. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    It actually pretty much is. It is not a hard/strict rule but the recommendation is that you determine facts (on/over the line, hand makes contact or not and so on) by looking at it in slow-mo or freeze frame and then decide on the judgement parts by looking at it at full speed. For the PK in the WC final he did both, first a few freeze/slow screens and then a forward/backward shot at fairly high speed at the end. Seemed like a good way to do it to me tbh. I'd say so yes.
  3. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    Diving isn't on the list of things that can be reviewed directly. So for most dives the VAR couldn't have gotten involved, regardless of cards being issued. But I agree that the referee instructions for this WC really didn't help making matches better (but then again neither did it in 2014 but FIFA still hailed that as great due to the low card count ).
  4. Mr Wallin

    FIFA World Cup Fan Dream Team

    This is the fan vote.
  5. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    You'd still run into the same issues if you caution 5 minutes later or 10 minutes later or during half-time. IMO if you'd really want to combat diving (which there is not real will to do, not from fans, not from players, not from leagues nor from FIFA) then I'd allow referee to caution a player that dives but still give him the FK if he was fouled to and then encourage referees to be strict about diving. As long as the ones that issues instruction/guidelines to referees aren't bothered by diving neither will referees be.
  6. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    As I said above, there are a lot of issues with changing/adding decisions after play has been restarted. You could review and hand out fines/suspensions post-game though.
  7. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    That is a difficult one as it can't/won't be done in that way as you would have to wait until after the FK is taken to know if you can review it or not. And that would mean you'd have to breach one of the most sacred laws/principles of refereeing, that you can never change a decision after play has been restarted again. And that is something I don't expect will ever happen as that would open up for a whole truck load of problems. Which means you'd have to widen the scope a bit and either allow reviews of diving on all FK's close enough to goal to have a shot. But that might not solve all potential situations like the one in the WC final so then you'd have to allow reviews of diving at all FK's. But if you limit it to just reviewing diving to earn a FK you have the same arbitrarily drawn line as now where some unfairness is reviewed and some isn't so you'd soon have calls (and discussions like this one) to review everything for those FK's (was it a foul? was there offside? and so on). And then you are well and truly far into the slippery slope of being able to review everything. And that will mean increasing the time spent doing reviews by quite a lot which I don't think will go over well with neither teams, fans of broadcasters. In short, I definitely see where you are coming from but I think that unfortunately it will be really hard to solve your issue without introducing a lot more new issues into the system.
  8. Mr Wallin

    The VAR Thread

    Along with bookings for delaying a restart or dissent or time wasting.
  9. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    That argument works both ways though and I'd wager quite a lot on the referee have spent a lot more hours playing football than what Keane have spent refereeing.
  10. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    The only thing that is obvious is that very few fans (or pundits) have any clue to how the handling law works. Don't get me wrong, I can accept that some won't think that it is handling but a lot of the arguments made have no basis in the laws. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have for a fan. For a referee however there is no basis in law to reason or call situations like that. Yes and no IMO. I see this situation as being very much like the Henry handball v Ireland a few years ago. Both players were moving in perfectly normal ways. Both players arm/hand were moving in natural ways. Both times the ball reached them somewhat unexpected. Both times the ball ended up in very close proximity of their arm/hand without them intentionally making it so. And both times the players used the opportunity to steer/guide the ball in a favourable direction (obviously Henry gained more from it but that is irrelevant to the decision). Was it more of an instinctive reaction than an intentional act? Yes, but that doesn't matter. Looking for if a player tries to take advantage of unintentional contact is something that referees are taught when they progress from beginner levels and IMO both Perisic and Henry did just that. They are both just as clear offences (and that's regardless if it is at this WC or any other competition). And here the wast majority of referees around the world agrees with you. The lines for what can/can't be reviewed is somewhat arbitrarily drawn and it presents just as much of an issue as the question about how the things that can be reviewed is reviewed.
  11. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    But that's not how it works... The time it took the referee to complete the OFR and the question of IF it was a clear error are not in any way related. If Pitana had called a corner (indicating he had seen a touch by the Croat) then I don't think that the VAR had sent up a review as not calling a PK from that contact wouldn't have been a clear error. But as Pitana called a goalkick (meaning he thought the last touch came of a French player) then the VAR, if he thought that the contact likely should be a PK, was free to send it up for review because not seeing the contact at all is easily a clear error. I also think that if this had happened in a CL match a few months ago where there are no VAR's but instead are AAR's then the end result would still have been a PK.
  12. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    No offence mate but you don't really know the rules for VAR do you??? The referee (Pitana) initially gave a goalkick (which would indicate he didn't see the contact by the Croat at all). The VAR had a look and though it was likely a foul (and penalty) and the difference between a goalkick and a penalty is a clear error and thus he sent it down to Pitana to have a look. Pitana then looked a several angles and decided to award the penalty. This is all just as the procedure is meant to work. The FK that was awarded to France ahead of the first goal was a simple foul outside the PA. That is not a situation that the VAR is allowed to send down (unless he thinks that the offence was actually worthy of a red card that the referee didn't call). You might not like or agree with one or both calls but VAR followed its instructions fully there.
  13. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    Oh believe me, most referees agrees with that. But there have been enough instructions through the years that referees almost never have trouble with the deliberate/intentional distinction but fans, coaches and players do and that creates problems for referees so a better wording would be welcomed. Not my fault the FA is too backwards to update the text. But it's bit strange because the rest of the text is updated just fine. No problem at all.
  14. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    @Razzler @m_fenton "deliberate" is the word in the laws. And while that might read a lot like "intentional" in a dictionary that is NOT the way that the laws are meant to be interpreted. You are working with some old laws there mate. Those two where broken out in the most recent changes of the laws and are now their own point (with an FK/PK restart).
  15. Mr Wallin

    In your opinion, handball or not?

    The movement of the hand/arm (up and then down) is normal movement for jumping and he couldn't really expect that the ball would come trough at all or at that angle. And those all count in favour for the defender. But right at the end there is a small adjustment and stiffening of the wrist/hand before the contact. So yes the defender didn't intentionally stick out an arm and block the ball like Suarez 8 years ago but he did make use of the happy coincidence that the ball came at the hand to direct it away. And that is still 100% a foul and a penalty. Possibly the most 100 % PK of the tournament.
×