Man City Discussion

  • Welcome to NYCFC Forums 2.0. Since completing our upgrade I've had a number of people request to make a donation. If you'd like to Donate you may do so via this Paypal link below. Thank you all for the support and your willingness to cobtribute.
Consider becoming a 'donor' member to help support the forums! Click Here To Upgrade

Ulrich

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,450
25,805
353
VAR has not been good to us and it’s only week 2. That’s 3 goals disallowed? Beat ourselves today. Ederson mistake and allowing the shortest man on the pitch to head the ball.
Perhaps not good from a MCFC perspective, but it’s been fair. It was the correct call today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Christopher Jee

Christopher Jee

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 24, 2014
3,389
8,799
353
36
Perhaps not good from a MCFC perspective, but it’s been fair. It was the correct call today.
The take that resonates most with me is the question around why these laws were modified. Does anyone really want VAR to be used in these situations? Does IFAB even care?

Cc Keith Putnam Keith Putnam
 

moogoo

Active Member
Nov 8, 2017
1,266
2,244
203
NYC
I enjoy the way the epl is doing var. Having the ref run to the screen is such a time waste. If it's clear and obvious like it's supposed to be, there should be no need for a second look. Either it is or it isnt. If a var can't make that determination in his review using all those camera angles then it's not clear and obvious and play should just continue.

Too often var is called in for calls that simply aren't clear and obvious. Today's call was tough for city but it's correct to the letter of the law.
 

Ulrich

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,450
25,805
353
The take that resonates most with me is the question around why these laws were modified. Does anyone really want VAR to be used in these situations? Does IFAB even care?

Cc Keith Putnam Keith Putnam
I want VAR to be used - rules are rules are rules. The change in the handball rule is good because it removes any misinterpretation- it either hit the hand/arm or it didn’t. No more discussion of ball-2-hand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Christopher Jee

twsj91

Junior Member
Apr 2, 2015
262
675
93
28
Was at the Etihad today. Holy shit what a gut punch that was.

Rodri was clearly fouled on a corner in the box in the first half. VAR is shit and subjective. It ruins games.
 

Christopher Jee

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 24, 2014
3,389
8,799
353
36
I want VAR to be used - rules are rules are rules. The change in the handball rule is good because it removes any misinterpretation- it either hit the hand/arm or it didn’t. No more discussion of ball-2-hand.
I sympathize with the idea that rules should not be open to misinterpretation. But I also think that rules should be written in service of producing a "better" sport, by some intersubjective definition of "better". I don't know that allowing rules to be applied objectively is necessarily at odds with the goal of crafting a maximally gratifying game, but it's certainly plausible.

Essentially I'm suggesting that there may be discrepancies between "intersubjectively optimal" and "objectively optimal". Especially when you consider that defining "optimal" requires intersubjectivity. It may be that I'm hoping for is "objectively intersubjectively optimal":

 
  • Like
Reactions: Keith Putnam

Ulrich

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,450
25,805
353
I sympathize with the idea that rules should not be open to misinterpretation. But I also think that rules should be written in service of producing a "better" sport, by some intersubjective definition of "better". I don't know that allowing rules to be applied objectively is necessarily at odds with the goal of crafting a maximally gratifying game, but it's certainly plausible.

Essentially I'm suggesting that there may be discrepancies between "intersubjectively optimal" and "objectively optimal". Especially when you consider that defining "optimal" requires intersubjectivity. It may be that I'm hoping for is "objectively intersubjectively optimal":

It is a better sport if there no longer will be endless argument over whether the player played the ball or the ball played the player - that had ruined the game. And by virtue of the constant debate, all we’re advocating for change, whether they understood the power of their debate or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: twsj91

Christopher Jee

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Jul 24, 2014
3,389
8,799
353
36
It is a better sport if there no longer will be endless argument over whether the player played the ball or the ball played the player - that had ruined the game. And by virtue of the constant debate, all we’re advocating for change, whether they understood the power of their debate or not.
I don't know that debate is objectively bad. Or that there's any less debate now.
 

Ulrich

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,450
25,805
353
I don't know that debate is objectively bad. Or that there's any less debate now.
It may not be bad, but definitive results are good and important in sport - there should be no what-ifs.
 

NYCFC_Dan

Senior Member
Staff member
Seasoned Supporter
Mar 17, 2014
6,768
13,573
303
29
Tampa, Florida
Was at the Etihad today. Holy shit what a gut punch that was.

Rodri was clearly fouled on a corner in the box in the first half. VAR is shit and subjective. It ruins games.
That’s what I don’t understand. It was clear and obvious the ref missed a choke and tackle on rodri with the ball coming for his head. How that wasn’t reviewed is beyond me. The same missed call was reviewed in the Bayern game leading to a penalty.
 

twsj91

Junior Member
Apr 2, 2015
262
675
93
28
That’s what I don’t understand. It was clear and obvious the ref missed a choke and tackle on rodri with the ball coming for his head. How that wasn’t reviewed is beyond me. The same missed call was reviewed in the Bayern game leading to a penalty.
Yup. The picking and choosing of what is properly reviewed and isn’t makes it so frustrating. Hopefully they make changes since it’s relatively new in this sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Christopher Jee

Keith Putnam

Senior Member
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
May 4, 2015
2,326
4,902
323
41
Astoria
highwatermedia.com
It was clear and obvious the ref missed a choke and tackle on rodri
I think he saw it, felt Rodri went down too easily, made a decisive no-call and VAR agreed with his decision. While Rodri is definitely "being fouled" to at least a decent degree, one thing VAR has not done (and we should probably be glad of this) is turn every single foul in the box into an automatic penalty.
 

Falastur

Senior Member
Staff member
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Mar 20, 2014
3,391
4,586
353
32
Herts, UK
I want VAR to be used - rules are rules are rules. The change in the handball rule is good because it removes any misinterpretation- it either hit the hand/arm or it didn’t. No more discussion of ball-2-hand.
I get what you're saying but I struggle with where I stand on this, because to me intention IS everything. There is a planet-sized gulf between someone sticking his hand out intentionally to block a shot and the ball accidentally hitting it, and if the rule is "any contact at all between ball and hand is an offence" just makes football a minefield where it's actually too risky to try putting your body in the way of a shot for fear of giving away a penalty. Let's not even get started on the danger that we could be encouraging a situation where players who don't have a clear shot on goal instead can now simply chip the ball up at their opponent's flank for a pretty good chance of a clear shot on goal from the penalty spot...

I get as angry as the next person at bad refereeing performances, and I'm not totally against technology - Hawkeye has been a godsend - but to me it's the referee's job to make his mind up what happened and what didn't, and giving him 500 ancillary staff feverishly watching replays is oversanitising the game and making it less fun to watch. On top of that, I remember watching the BBC Match of the Day staff have a relatively long discussion (1-2 minutes, it was a TV highlights programme after all) last season where they came to the conclusion that pretty much any action looks intentional when you watch it in slow motion.
 

Ulrich

Senior Member
Elite Donor
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Nov 5, 2015
13,450
25,805
353
I get what you're saying but I struggle with where I stand on this, because to me intention IS everything. There is a planet-sized gulf between someone sticking his hand out intentionally to block a shot and the ball accidentally hitting it, and if the rule is "any contact at all between ball and hand is an offence" just makes football a minefield where it's actually too risky to try putting your body in the way of a shot for fear of giving away a penalty. Let's not even get started on the danger that we could be encouraging a situation where players who don't have a clear shot on goal instead can now simply chip the ball up at their opponent's flank for a pretty good chance of a clear shot on goal from the penalty spot...

I get as angry as the next person at bad refereeing performances, and I'm not totally against technology - Hawkeye has been a godsend - but to me it's the referee's job to make his mind up what happened and what didn't, and giving him 500 ancillary staff feverishly watching replays is oversanitising the game and making it less fun to watch. On top of that, I remember watching the BBC Match of the Day staff have a relatively long discussion (1-2 minutes, it was a TV highlights programme after all) last season where they came to the conclusion that pretty much any action looks intentional when you watch it in slow motion.
The rule is geared towards the attacker, not the defender: a goal can’t be scored or assisted by being played off the arm - it’s to keep a controversial goal from being scored. Accidental contact with defenders arm isn’t automatic to the spot for a Pk.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gotham Gator

Schwallacus

Active Member
Elite Donor
Jan 14, 2016
1,335
3,353
233
White Plains
Difference being that you can argue the Tottenham defender is also going after the ball vs. Rodri, whereas the defender in the Bayern game is simply taking Lewy and throwing him to the ground while the ball is nowhere near the play. Ref is probably going to be a little more lenient when it comes to a duel between a defender and attacker when going towards/after the ball vs. just throwing someone to the ground away from the ball/action.
I see where you're angry with the call, I'm not saying it isn't questionable. Just calling them the same thing seems off to me, given that the ball's location has some influence on the defender in the TOT-MCI game, vs. the defender just throwing Lewy to the ground for no reason in the BAY-BER game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulrich