The play stopped on 86.00 for the VAR to be reviewed for penalty , the kick off after the twice taken penalty was scored was just before 90.00 +4.00 so 8 mins for that alone which could count as 6 mins maybe , I don't know how long they add on for pens and goal celebrations
also she didn't blow the whistle properly so the players weren't sure the game had ended .
anyway my 13 year old son is as bitter as me and was jumping around the room at the demise of Scotland , used to love em in the early eighties and cheer them on in World Cups with Dalglish , Hansen and co but having witnessed the sweaties rejoicing at Englands demise over the years fuck it I can be as sad as them irn bru drinkers
Japan play it around as well as any team but they do as you say have a blunt attack. England did well, they beat the team that knocked them out in 2015 2-0. Also Neville made 8 changes and they will get a game they should win to take them into the quarter finals. You don't want to peak too early, and 3 wins out of 3 should mean England are very satisfied with things.
I'm looking forward to the controversy next season, 0-0 between Liverpool and City and a last minute penalty is missed then retaken because a keeper was slightly off his line or moves a millisecond before the kick is taken...
If you think clear and obvious it was a split second - millimetre decision between her leaving the line and the ball being kicked - it was intended to be instaenous - makes it harder for keeper as they have to accurately predict kickers run that doesn't have to be consistent
Bit of common sense has to be used in these VAR scenarios- used in the penalty decision was fair game but in the second decision you are expecting a robotic response from keeper
The clear and obvious error thing is for the decision itself.
The retake is nothing to do with clear and obvious she either moved or she didnt and if she moved of her line and saved it then by the letter of the law it has to be retaken
That is awful. Both Scotland and Argentina can feel cheated by that. I do something which I call my little trick during Charlton games I watch, I say how many minutes the ref will add at the end without looking at my watch throughout the game. I am very rarely wrong and the reason is refs don't keep time properly.
It seems that foreign refs are worse at it than English ones. So you see a free-kick given away in a European game in added time. The winning team take 50 seconds to a minute to take it and the ref doesn't play a second over the added time allocated.
Tonight should be the moment when FIFA look at this anomaly. it happens at the level I coached at - the refs never allow anywhere near the time lost to be played. I shouldn't brag but I have been known to point out where the bushes are thickest in my half time team talk in case we are narrowly winning near the game's end. Actually the season before last it nearly led to World War three in the car park.
Japan were awkward but you can't knock 3 wins out of 3 so job done.
I've watched a few England games over the last couple of years. Can anyone tell me why Pearce and others fawn over Duggan? She seems distinctly mediocre to me.
Not that it will do much good, but seeing as the error can be easily proven, I wouldn't be surprised if Argentina and Scotland lodged a joint complaint - they were probably robbed of at least six minutes at the end which could have allowed one team to get a result that would see them qualify for the next round!
Japan were awkward but you can't knock 3 wins out of 3 so job done.
I've watched a few England games over the last couple of years. Can anyone tell me why Pearce and others fawn over Duggan? She seems distinctly mediocre to me.
Four years ago before the WC, Duggan was our number 1 forward, since then Taylor, White, Parris and Mead have arrived. Plus Kirby and Daley Who can play in various striking positions. Toni Duggan wouldn't be starting on that performance.
Bardsley had a good game but her kicking was a bit weak. Daley was good. Houghton was excellent as was White. I think we will need a bit of luck but we are definitely one of the few teams that can win it!
Japan were awkward but you can't knock 3 wins out of 3 so job done.
I've watched a few England games over the last couple of years. Can anyone tell me why Pearce and others fawn over Duggan? She seems distinctly mediocre to me.
Because she's an excellent forward. She's just shaken off an injury and looked like a player trying to return to match fitness. This was the perfect game for her to play to do that and she did alright considering. Her performances will likely improve as the tournament goes on, but she'll do well to replace Mead on current form
That new penalty rule is awful. Puts the keeper at such a disadvantage. What happened to injury time too?
No it really does not.
A penalty is supposed to be 12 yards away any less gives the keeper the advantage.
I think the new rule is brilliant, keepers should remain on the line
But a keeper needs to be able to move in order to give themselves momentum to get across the goal. Her foot was about 5mm off the line, it's a joke.
VAR is supposed to be for clear and obvious errors, but now instead we have referees just using it for every decision to cover their arses. If you need to watch a replay back half a dozen times in slow motion to decide that a keeper had her foot 5mm off the goal line, then it's farcical.
I think the Scottish keeper took a two footed jump forwards just before the kick was taken. The tightening up of the rule does increase the odds for the penalty taker but it is so split second, you do need VAR to tell if the keeper has dived off his/her line.
Keepers will adapt to it but will have developed a technique for saving them over years. My son is a keeper and even at youth level you should listen to him how he tries to read players. With some takers you can see what they are going to do by how they address the ball.
I feel sorry for Scotland. I was watching the England game but was flicking channels. one thing that was clear to me from watching them against England and Japan is offensively they are very good, with strong, direct players. But defensively, they are a bit of a disaster. Both games showed that their best approach is to go at teams. Maybe when you are 3-0 up with 15 minutes to go you do think about closing out the game, but when Argentina pulled a goal back I feared for them.
The Scottish keeper is a decent shot stopper but can't deal with high shots. That is a pretty big liability for starters. Until they find/develop better defenders, my advice to them would be to appoint a manager who doesn't have a defensive bone in his or her body.
VAR is going to make the game more and more tedious as officials check whether a rule has been broken by millimetres. As one poster said penalty shootouts are going to last an age as the goalkeepers movements are analysed in microscopic detail - short of the keeper not moving at all this will cause ongoing problems.
There might be rules but there also has to be common sense.
I think it could have been implemented much better than it has been. I don't have a problem with there being the odd mistake, we seem to get them even with VAR as it is often down to interpretation. I would rather teams have a challenge available to them (that they are penalised for if they use wrongly/overuse) to prevent massive miscarriages of justice.
VAR used correctly - the 'keeper cheated by coming off her line to make the save. The fact the kick was awful and Harry Redknapp's gran could have saved it is irrelevant.
That new penalty rule is awful. Puts the keeper at such a disadvantage. What happened to injury time too?
No it really does not.
A penalty is supposed to be 12 yards away any less gives the keeper the advantage.
I think the new rule is brilliant, keepers should remain on the line
I thought the old rule meant that 'keepers had to stay on the line anyway (now they just need to have one foot), just referees were terrible at enforcing it
Isnt it now that they've got to stand still and not move to put the taker off like we've seen in the past
Yes, effectively they've gone back to what it was before the stupid decision to allow 'keepers to jump up and down and side to side before the kick's taken. The only differences to what it used to be are that the 'keeper gets a booking for coming off the line and VAR is there to give the ref a help in determining if the 'keeper moved.
Before VAR, the ref couldn't look at the ball being kicked and the 'keeper's movement at the same time because of the position they were required to take up. The ref's assistant is best placed to make this decision, being on the goal line, but we all know ref's assistants are even blinder than refs and very rarely give anything slightly contentious.
Japan were awkward but you can't knock 3 wins out of 3 so job done.
I've watched a few England games over the last couple of years. Can anyone tell me why Pearce and others fawn over Duggan? She seems distinctly mediocre to me.
They're enamoured with her full make-up!
Seriously, she is a good player but was off her game last night.
Part of me wonders if its not helped that referees have been so scrutinised by the media over every little decision over the last few years
Now VAR is in place they're going to use it as often as possible to get people off their backs - Its why I've long agreed with Muttley's view that the video technology shouldnt be in the hands of the referees but as a challenge system like in tennis
Part of me wonders if its not helped that referees have been so scrutinised by the media over every little decision over the last few years
Now VAR is in place they're going to use it as often as possible to get people off their backs - Its why I've long agreed with Muttley's view that the video technology shouldnt be in the hands of the referees but as a challenge system like in tennis
The constant criticism of referees gets a bit tiresome. Pundits have the benefit of action replays and criticise refs when they make marginal mistakes.
If VAR is not used in a sensible manner it will render the game unwatchable.
You see in cricket, a team uses a challenge wrongly and then doesn't have it for a decision that would have been overturned. Nobody complains about that. If you accept you can't be 100% fair, then fairer has to be where you pitch it.
I think refereeing is in crisis. The problem is you need a lot of them and whilst there are excellent ones, there are also many crap ones. The solution within the game is to remove the judgement aspects that makes good refs good! But the rules become too complicated to understand and interpret.
Look at handball, nobody has a clue what is going on there. We fell foul of it last season, where our defender tried to boot the ball upfield with a clearance and sliced it onto his hand. Nobody was near him and it was obvious there was no intent to handle. When I spoke to the ref at half time, he said this is the guidance he has received.
If you look at the penalty not given to Scotland against Japan, it is clearly more of a penalty than the other handball ones given in the competition.
At risk of turning this thread into a VAR one I dont get why it has to be four referees in that room monitoring whatever way it goes forward - Why not hire a load of ex-players so that each VAR decision is reviewed say by two officials and two players so the latter can try and explain the reason for a player doing something (especially with handball) - After all they're not running around the pitch so we dont have to worry about their fitness levels
Comments
so 8 mins for that alone which could count as 6 mins maybe , I don't know how long they add on for pens and goal celebrations
also she didn't blow the whistle properly so the players weren't sure the game had ended .
anyway my 13 year old son is as bitter as me and was jumping around the room at the demise of Scotland , used to love em in the early eighties and cheer them on in World Cups with Dalglish , Hansen and co but having witnessed the sweaties rejoicing at Englands demise over the years fuck it I can be as sad as them irn bru drinkers
The retake is nothing to do with clear and obvious she either moved or she didnt and if she moved of her line and saved it then by the letter of the law it has to be retaken
It seems that foreign refs are worse at it than English ones. So you see a free-kick given away in a European game in added time. The winning team take 50 seconds to a minute to take it and the ref doesn't play a second over the added time allocated.
Tonight should be the moment when FIFA look at this anomaly. it happens at the level I coached at - the refs never allow anywhere near the time lost to be played. I shouldn't brag but I have been known to point out where the bushes are thickest in my half time team talk in case we are narrowly winning near the game's end. Actually the season before last it nearly led to World War three in the car park.
Japan were awkward but you can't knock 3 wins out of 3 so job done.
I've watched a few England games over the last couple of years. Can anyone tell me why Pearce and others fawn over Duggan? She seems distinctly mediocre to me.
VAR is supposed to be for clear and obvious errors, but now instead we have referees just using it for every decision to cover their arses. If you need to watch a replay back half a dozen times in slow motion to decide that a keeper had her foot 5mm off the goal line, then it's farcical.
Keepers will adapt to it but will have developed a technique for saving them over years. My son is a keeper and even at youth level you should listen to him how he tries to read players. With some takers you can see what they are going to do by how they address the ball.
I feel sorry for Scotland. I was watching the England game but was flicking channels. one thing that was clear to me from watching them against England and Japan is offensively they are very good, with strong, direct players. But defensively, they are a bit of a disaster. Both games showed that their best approach is to go at teams. Maybe when you are 3-0 up with 15 minutes to go you do think about closing out the game, but when Argentina pulled a goal back I feared for them.
The Scottish keeper is a decent shot stopper but can't deal with high shots. That is a pretty big liability for starters. Until they find/develop better defenders, my advice to them would be to appoint a manager who doesn't have a defensive bone in his or her body.
There might be rules but there also has to be common sense.
Before VAR, the ref couldn't look at the ball being kicked and the 'keeper's movement at the same time because of the position they were required to take up. The ref's assistant is best placed to make this decision, being on the goal line, but we all know ref's assistants are even blinder than refs and very rarely give anything slightly contentious.
If they are going to be so penal on keepers they also need to clamp down on taker run ups that effectively dummy the keeper into moving.
Seriously, she is a good player but was off her game last night.
Now VAR is in place they're going to use it as often as possible to get people off their backs - Its why I've long agreed with Muttley's view that the video technology shouldnt be in the hands of the referees but as a challenge system like in tennis
If VAR is not used in a sensible manner it will render the game unwatchable.
I think refereeing is in crisis. The problem is you need a lot of them and whilst there are excellent ones, there are also many crap ones. The solution within the game is to remove the judgement aspects that makes good refs good! But the rules become too complicated to understand and interpret.
Look at handball, nobody has a clue what is going on there. We fell foul of it last season, where our defender tried to boot the ball upfield with a clearance and sliced it onto his hand. Nobody was near him and it was obvious there was no intent to handle. When I spoke to the ref at half time, he said this is the guidance he has received.
If you look at the penalty not given to Scotland against Japan, it is clearly more of a penalty than the other handball ones given in the competition.