Champions League & Europa League 2018/19

[Duffy]

Every team with a 1st leg advantage got knocked out this week, apart from Spurs... #bottlers

Was good from Spurs. Doesn't mean much if they don't win it though or fail to get in the top 4. Bit too early to insinuate they're not bottlers.

[genome]

Every team with a 1st leg advantage got knocked out this week, apart from Spurs... #bottlers

Was good from Spurs. Doesn't mean much if they don't win it though or fail to get in the top 4. Bit too early to insinuate they're not bottlers.

I know, just thought it was funny that they're usually accused of bottling, but out of everyone so far this Champions League round, they're the ones who put in the professional performance. Tuesday was pretty much the perfect away performance. The Spurs of old would've conceded in the first 3 minutes and then crashed out.

Don't think they will win it, Barcelona will now considering everyone else who has gone out.

[Duffy]

Yeah. Spurs are definitely made of tougher stuff these days but still unable to win a trophy at present. They're a bit more subtle in their Spursyness these days.

[genome]

Yeah. Spurs are definitely made of tougher stuff these days but still unable to win a trophy at present. They're a bit more subtle in their Spursyness these days.

It'll come. They need to settle into the new stadium, and buy maybe one or two more players on the level of Son etc. The issue is Spurs have no strength in depth, so when the squad starts to tire and pick up injuries around February/March, they don't have the personnel on the bench that are anywhere near as good. So they start losing semi-finals etc.

If they can keep Poch and their star players and add to that, the trophies will come.

[John Madejski's Wallet]

Are there Champs League highlights shows on normal TV for those of us that don't pay for sports?

[Hendo]

Are there Champs League highlights shows on normal TV for those of us that don't pay for sports?

Try YouTube

[Hoop Blah]

The debate is split though. Even Rio Ferdinand said it wasn't a penalty. I personally can't see how it was clear and obvious. But then the only opinion that matters are the officials and the VAR team.

Pleased that United got through though so in no way is my opinion biased.

Because the clear and obvious error is not seeing the ball strike the hand, not the decision on it a deliberate handball and therefore a penalty.

VAR, at least IMO on this one, addressed the clear and obvious error of missing the point of impact and then let the ref make up his mind on whether it was a penalty. That's a little bit of conjecture on my part of course.

In terms of the studio guests (and fans) debating the decision, it's not a knew thing for players not to know the rules or interpreting them correctly. The arrogance of Hargreaves to suggest that 'these ruling bodies need to have football people on them if they think that's handball' is a bit embarrassing.

[Sanguine]

Last nights handball was debatable though. It wasn't clear and obvious. And as proven this season VAR has got decisions incorrect as well.

The point I am making is that the referee's decision is final. This one is a real 50/50, in which case you really have to accept the referee's point of view and move on.

[Sanguine]

Fwiw I think that VAR would work better with some different protocols. What is great about cricket's DRS is that supporters know what is coming - check for no ball, check for an edge including snicko, and then check the line for lbw. In rugby, the referee clearly asks the TMO for some help making a specific decision, it'll be something like 'I don't know if the ball has been grounded behind the line' - so there is clarity what the TMO is being asked to do, and through the mic there is clarity as to how and why they arrive at their decision.

I think mics should be switched on for VAR decisions, and there should be clear lines of enquiry. So, for example, VAR buzzes referee that he needs to review something, he (and viewers/supporters) are informed what is being checked, and a discussion between referee and VAR officials is on mic. I'd like to see the protocol 'I think a clear and obvious error has/has not been made', in each case.

[Hoop Blah]

I'd like to see the protocol 'I think a clear and obvious error has/has not been made', in each case.

As we've discussed many times though, a clear and obvious error is just too subjective to ever be anything but a contentious way of looking at things.

Does the crowd at the game get to hear the Rugby refs conversations? Or is it just the TV audience?

My understanding (and interest in) of the rules of Rugby is that they're a lot more black and white than footballs very subjective laws. Is that true or is it just my perception? As ever, my gut instinct is that football is too fluid and too subjective a game to be dragged into reviewing decisions over and over again during a game. Sure, a few decisions will be improved, but I think the gains aren't sufficient to outweigh the negative impacts on the game.

[Sanguine]

I'd like to see the protocol 'I think a clear and obvious error has/has not been made', in each case.

As we've discussed many times though, a clear and obvious error is just too subjective to ever be anything but a contentious way of looking at things.

Does the crowd at the game get to hear the Rugby refs conversations? Or is it just the TV audience?

My understanding (and interest in) of the rules of Rugby is that they're a lot more black and white than footballs very subjective laws. Is that true or is it just my perception? As ever, my gut instinct is that football is too fluid and too subjective a game to be dragged into reviewing decisions over and over again during a game. Sure, a few decisions will be improved, but I think the gains aren't sufficient to outweigh the negative impacts on the game.

Some of rugby's rules are, others are not. Perhaps most memorably in recent years the TMO was used by the referee to determine that Sonny Bill Williams had smashed his shoulder into Anthony Watson's face - cut and dry you might suggest, but the questions were around the angle at which Williams had approached the tackle, and whether or not Watson had ducked into the challenge, causing the collision. Whilst a majority thought the red card right, there was some debate as to whether it had been interpreted correctly. A similar 'hard hit' by Owen Farrell on André Esterhuizen last summer was judged no foul.

As I said, I think better adherence to better protocols would help, but none of it will matter if fans can't respect the referee's final decision.

*on the point of the mic at rugby, I've never been clear if the fans at the ground hear it, although they do watch the replays on the big screen.

[Hendo]

Biggest LOL for me is that Neymar is claiming it hit his back... I don't think anyone is disputing the ball hit his arm...

[Duffy]

Last nights handball was debatable though. It wasn't clear and obvious. And as proven this season VAR has got decisions incorrect as well.

The point I am making is that the referee's decision is final. This one is a real 50/50, in which case you really have to accept the referee's point of view and move on.

Last nights I can accept.

But when you have scenario's such as the Carabao Cup 1st Leg Semi final between Spurs and Chelsea where Kane went through, linesman flagged, ref waved play on to leave the decision to VAR and they still get the offside decision wrong it's worrying. Then you have a scenario in the return leg when Higuian was actually onside, but instead of the ref letting the play go on, he blew up for an offside when the linesman raised his flagged.

[Sanguine]

Last nights handball was debatable though. It wasn't clear and obvious. And as proven this season VAR has got decisions incorrect as well.

The point I am making is that the referee's decision is final. This one is a real 50/50, in which case you really have to accept the referee's point of view and move on.

Last nights I can accept.

But when you have scenario's such as the Carabao Cup 1st Leg Semi final between Spurs and Chelsea where Kane went through, linesman flagged, ref waved play on to leave the decision to VAR and they still get the offside decision wrong it's worrying. Then you have a scenario in the return leg when Higuian was actually onside, but instead of the ref letting the play go on, he blew up for an offside when the linesman raised his flagged.

Agreed that VAR tech needs to be improved so that decisions like the Kane one can be equivocal.

The Higuain incident is an example of you wanting VAR to do something it isn't designed to do. If play is stopped, it is stopped, there's no getting around that.

[Stranded]

I'd like to see the protocol 'I think a clear and obvious error has/has not been made', in each case.

As we've discussed many times though, a clear and obvious error is just too subjective to ever be anything but a contentious way of looking at things.

Does the crowd at the game get to hear the Rugby refs conversations? Or is it just the TV audience?

My understanding (and interest in) of the rules of Rugby is that they're a lot more black and white than footballs very subjective laws. Is that true or is it just my perception? As ever, my gut instinct is that football is too fluid and too subjective a game to be dragged into reviewing decisions over and over again during a game. Sure, a few decisions will be improved, but I think the gains aren't sufficient to outweigh the negative impacts on the game.

Some of rugby's rules are, others are not. Perhaps most memorably in recent years the TMO was used by the referee to determine that Sonny Bill Williams had smashed his shoulder into Anthony Watson's face - cut and dry you might suggest, but the questions were around the angle at which Williams had approached the tackle, and whether or not Watson had ducked into the challenge, causing the collision. Whilst a majority thought the red card right, there was some debate as to whether it had been interpreted correctly. A similar 'hard hit' by Owen Farrell on André Esterhuizen last summer was judged no foul.

As I said, I think better adherence to better protocols would help, but none of it will matter if fans can't respect the referee's final decision.

*on the point of the mic at rugby, I've never been clear if the fans at the ground hear it, although they do watch the replays on the big screen.

Good example. A lot of scrum violations are open to interpretation, which is why you will often hear that teams amend their game to suit the ref as much as the opposition - Nigel Owens is often see as quite picky at the scrum whilst Wayne Barnes will often let things go that could be penalties but would otherwise ruin the flow of the game.

As for the mic, certainly if you go to an international game, you can buy an earpiece tuned to the refs mic so you can hear everything the ref says throughout the game. Tried it once and makes things a lot clearer especially if the action is at the other end of the pitch and you can't quite make out some of what is happening.

I'm not a massive fan of watching the replays of an incident on the big screen as often feel the crowd reaction can sway tight calls or lead to things being picked up by the ref that wouldn't - i.e. (and have seen this) he has given a try and sees no reason to refer it then he sees the stadium replay and halts the conversion. In my view, the ref should only be able to refer it if he has reason to doubt something in real time - not on the basis of a stadium replay and potentially the crowd reaction.

[Duffy]

The point I am making is that the referee's decision is final. This one is a real 50/50, in which case you really have to accept the referee's point of view and move on.

Last nights I can accept.

But when you have scenario's such as the Carabao Cup 1st Leg Semi final between Spurs and Chelsea where Kane went through, linesman flagged, ref waved play on to leave the decision to VAR and they still get the offside decision wrong it's worrying. Then you have a scenario in the return leg when Higuian was actually onside, but instead of the ref letting the play go on, he blew up for an offside when the linesman raised his flagged.

Agreed that VAR tech needs to be improved so that decisions like the Kane one can be equivocal.

The Higuain incident is an example of you wanting VAR to do something it isn't designed to do. If play is stopped, it is stopped, there's no getting around that.

I'm just pointing out the inconsistency with similar incidents. Kane offside, linesman puts his flag up, ref waves play on because of VAR to see how it unfolds. Higuian onside, linesman put his flag up, ref blows up for offside.

[Hoop Blah]

As for the mic, certainly if you go to an international game, you can buy an earpiece tuned to the refs mic so you can hear everything the ref says throughout the game. Tried it once and makes things a lot clearer especially if the action is at the other end of the pitch and you can't quite make out some of what is happening.

I can imagine the uproar if Premier League fans had to pay extra to hear a potential VAR commentary.

[Stranded]

As for the mic, certainly if you go to an international game, you can buy an earpiece tuned to the refs mic so you can hear everything the ref says throughout the game. Tried it once and makes things a lot clearer especially if the action is at the other end of the pitch and you can't quite make out some of what is happening.

I can imagine the uproar if Premier League fans had to pay extra to hear a potential VAR commentary.

Oh absolutely - at least with rugby it is the whole game and pretty sure once you've bought it once you can use it at future games to (and it was also a MW radio so you could switch to radio if you wanted)

[Winston Biscuit]

draw coming up

[Old Man Andrews]

Hopeing for a Liverpool v Barcelona draw. Would be fascinating over two legs.