Leicester Verdict

[Northampton_wolf]

Did think the officiating we great quite poor in regards to shoulders on the ball and some decisions I'm my opinion

 

[JonahWolf]

Fouls 13-3. **** off Marriner you cheating ****

Wouldn’t have had a problem with him if either didn’t give any soft free kicks at all, or gave all.

Didn’t get a thing out of him, Vardy could have easily had a yellow for persistent niggly nothing fouls.
Very poor. But quite right, no problem with the VAR disallowed goal, them’s the rules now correctly applied.

 

[JadeWolf]

Leicester were awful, we should have won. Poor finishing and poor refereeing.

 

[Sephiroth]

Some people arent getting the VAR when it comes to goals.

ANY handball by the attacking team that leads to a goal means its disallowed. Accidental or not.

Yes it very harsh today. But under the rule, it was correct.

 

[welwynwolf]

Hard to play against 12 men.

 

[WolfOfWellington]

We had our chances, sadly didn't take them.

Take the point and move on.

Never look back.

Keep moving forward.

VAR was always going to be an enemy at some point, have to take a balanced view over the season unfortunately.

 

[wolf of sedgley]

I’d be more annoyed about the result and performance if I was a Leicester fan.

 

[Cookyssweetleftfoot]

I’m still so angry. Rather than correcting awful decisions, VAR has disallowed a City goal yesterday when it was debatable whether Sterling was level or not and today well I cannot believe that has been disallowed. On holiday for the week in Shropshire and both boys and I cheered then minutes later after having to check several times frankly I just feel cheated.

 

[Wolfy McWolf-Face]

Some people arent getting the VAR when it comes to goals.

ANY handball by the attacking team that leads to a goal means its disallowed. Accidental or not.

Yes it very harsh today. But under the rule, it was correct.

I accept the rule is correct but isn't VAR for obvious errors only? The time taken to decide suggests it was not obvious?

I. E. I'd accept VAR in a Boly vs Man City kind of way, so obvious.

 

[George AlooGobi]

Vinagre for Doc considering the latter came off with an icepack on his knee just 4 days ago. I also would have played a weaker squad against Pyunik to keep this squad fresh.

I was a bit disappointed we put our first team out in Armenia.

At least we can rest as many as possible 2nd leg. Surely we won't pick our first XI again

 

[Deleted member 4453]

Someone needs to tell the ref that you stop the game when there's a head injury, regardless of whether you think it was a foul or not, not allow the other team to break and win a corner.

Joke of a ref.


VAR decision was "correct".... but only by ridiculously incorrect rules.

This this this and ****ing this.

The ref was looking straight at it? As far as I know that's the bloody rule, or has it changed? That should be answered for!

I can take decisions, it's swings and roundabouts but far more definite. Not seen the goal again so none the wiser really but as soon as that ball hits the net the decision should be looked at!

If it takes 2 minutes to come to that decision today then the officials aren't good enough, and the FA/FIFA need to look at employing better.

I'm more fuming about Raul than anything. Would've took the point but if that's Leicesters standard I've overestimated them big time.

 

[DasWolf]

I'm gobsmacked that the consensus is that VAR is correct. Imagine if Dendoncker had headed the ball onto the hand of the Leicester defender from point blank range instead of Boly. Do you give a handball and a penalty for that? Would you accept a penalty given at the other hand if a Leicester attacker headed onto the hand of our defender from so close? Where's the common sense?

But by the rules it is correct. If the rules said wearing a gold shirt in the opposition box is illegal it would be correct to give a foul, it would just be a stupid rule.

The rule was applied correctly, it's just a stupid rule. We should be stopping goals like Boly's accidental handball into the net last year, but the same action wouldn't be a handball in the middle of the park, and it wouldn't be handball if a Leicester defender stopped a certain goal under the same circumstances.

 

[Kingswood Wolf]

Both teams pretty bad today, some players totally anonymous.

Gave the ball away a lot, poor in all areas of the pitch really.

Boly MOM by the farthest distance imaginable.

Nuno: rest, sub, rotate.

Happy with a point after that.

 

[Wonder Boyo]

We generated enough chances but didn't put them away.
All of those waiting patiently for the game to start online will know what I mean.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Just to save people stress (or not) I'll post the rule again.
If you interpret the rule that Boly gained possession and then created a goal scoring opportunity Moss was correct.
I think it depends how you interpret possession but the tweet about "hand to ball" or "close range" is irrelevant if you take that view of it (stupid as I think we'd all agree it is)

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
  • the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
  • the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

 

[Ned Stark]

However, as good as VAR will be, it’s still down to opinions.

well it's not is it?

it's about the rules as they currently stand

 

[Monketron]

Point away at Leicester is great in any circumstances, but especially after so much travel. Going to be interesting to see how we hand the Thursday - Sunday games going forward, we looked a little off the pace (bar Jota).

The new rule is a **** one - and it's typical that Wolves would be the first team to fall foul of it - but it was the correct decision to disallow the goal.

 

[Wolfy McWolf-Face]

I was a bit disappointed we put our first team out in Armenia.

At least we can rest as many as possible 2nd leg. Surely we won't pick our first XI again

2nd part of your post perfectly answers the 1st part. Had we have played a weaker team we may have been under more pressure to play a stronger team to get a result just 4 days prior to United at home.

As it stands we have 4 away goals for Thursday, a point away to Leicester and a chance to rest many ahead of United at home.

Couldn't have gone much better (crap new rules aside).

 

[Sussex Wolf]

I can't believe people are backing VAR. We don't have the capabilities for VAR to be implemented yet, including: refs, understanding of the rules, operators etc.
--

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

This is exactly the point. It was entirely accidental, even slowed right down in the replay. It was a ricochet by every definition and his arm was exactly where it would normally be if you were jumping to head the ball. I could actually understand a ref in normal time with no replay disallowing the goal for handball, but not experts watching it with multiple angles and speeds. If this is an accurate application of the new rule, then this will ruin the game. I think it’s an error.

As for the outcome, it totally changed the game. From being sharp and on top after HT, after this farce, we lost our composure and nearly lost the game.

One word. Robbed.

 

[Contrarian]

Do we get a refund on the Lucky Socks? Mine don't seem to be working.

 

[clivewolves]

Taking into consideration the game last Thursday and the traveling I think that was a terrific point. Individuals were poor, but we kept the shape well and if Jota & Jimenez had their shooting boots on we could have had a couple of legit goals.

Leicester looked like a Rodgers team. Lots of possession but little penetration. You ain't in Scotland anymore Mr Rodgers.

Hopefully, we'll rest the bulk of the team on Thursday so the lads have a good week to prepare for United on the 19th.

 

[Golden_Wolf]

Thought that was a solid away day performance, against a decent side.

Considering many people believe Leicester to have strengthened (more so than ourselves), for us to not play at our best but still be solid and reduce Leicester to mainly long range efforts, and for us to miss 2 really good chances. Not bad in my opinion.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

This is exactly the point. It was entirely accidental, even slowed right down in the replay. It was a ricochet by every definition and his arm was exactly where it would normally be if you were jumping head the ball. I could actually understand a ref in normal time with no replay disallowing the goal for handball, but not experts watching it with multiple angles and speeds. If this is an accurate application of the new rule, then this will ruin the game. I think it’s an error.

You've got tho read the bit above though mate - hence why it starts "except for the above offences"

 

[Deleted member 5910]

More rules, less common sense. VAR is in danger of giving mini Hitlers even greater opportunity to spoil games.

 

[Ned Stark]

I accept the rule is correct but isn't VAR for obvious errors only? The time taken to decide suggests it was not obvious?

I. E. I'd accept VAR in a Boly vs Man City kind of way, so obvious.

every goal is reviewed, simple as that

 

[goldeneyed]

Over-use of VAR is going to kill the game if this continues. Should only be used at ref's discretion when for whatever reason he is genuinely unsure about something. Having every goal reviewed come what may kills all the excitement of scoring because everything remains unsure.

Its a good point and yes as usual if we had taken one or two of our chances we could have sneaked it. Leicester were reduced to long shots and never really troubled our defence with Patricio barely making a save. Love this team and love Nuno. Yes we need to recruit one or two more slightly better quality players in the next two windows to give us an extra edge. But overall we look a very solid team that no one will look forward to playing including the top six. Let's get Thursday over with using Cutrone, MGW, Saiss, Vallejo, Traore, Vinagre to start and giving Jota, Jiminez and Moutinho in particular a rest so they are fresh for Man Ure. Surprised at some of the criticism by people here.

PS Having looked at that VAR incident it is absolutely ridiculous the goal was ruled out. The ball brushed Boly's upper shoulder from a couple of feet and it was impossible to avoid. Crazy stuff. However Jiminez and Jota had clear chances to win the game for us and today fluffed their lines unfortunately.

 

[NewarkWolf]

Hard to play against 12 men.

Especially when you only have 9....

Jonny and dendoncker were awful for most the game

 

[Sussex Wolf]

You've got tho read the bit above though mate - hence why it starts "except for the above offences"

What is the bit above for which these are exceptions?

 

[The Fat Bloke]

On the results we had last season, we are 1 point better off now after this fixture.

Onwards and upwards.

 

[Deleted member 3751]

Wouldn’t have had a problem with him if either didn’t give any soft free kicks at all, or gave all.

.

This is the thing, Jota gets flattened from behind and gets nothing, Doherty and Neves combine to take the ball five seconds later, their bloke falls over and Leicester get a free kick. It happened time after time and that can only be biased refereeing

 

[Scott in the Sand]

Just to save people stress (or not) I'll post the rule again.
If you interpret the rule that Boly gained possession and then created a goal scoring opportunity Moss was correct.
I think it depends how you interpret possession but the tweet about "hand to ball" or "close range" is irrelevant if you take that view of it (stupid as I think we'd all agree it is)

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
  • the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
  • the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

Dendoncker headed towards goal.

Boly’s arm saved that goal.

The ball ricocheted onto Boly’s head and bounced onto the floor (all in under 2 seconds).

How the **** is that creating a goal scoring opportunity? ‘Creating’ suggests doing something deliberately. It doesn’t say ‘resulting in a goal-scoring opportunity’.

Great point anyway.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

What is the bit above for which these are exceptions?

This load of *******s

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

 

[peter&thewolf]

great point away from home, especially after all the travelling in the week

 

[Staten Island Wolf]

You cannot underestimate the effect this week's travel had on the team. You could see it in the indecision by raul and Diogo when on goal.
This is a great point.

 

[berwickwolf]

On a better note, we beat the Welsh.

Mate some of us, well me, have recorded that to watch after the football! So I'm sending an angry emoji or whatever it's called

 

[Frank Lincoln]

A decent result against a good team. Clearly some players were feeling the effect of the traveling, hence one or two not being at their best.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

This load of *******s

HANDLING THE BALL

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal
  • creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

Did Boly create a goal scoring opportunity from his accidental handball? Was his the last touch before Dendocker got it and scored?

 

[Wolfy McWolf-Face]

Especially when you only have 9....

Jonny and dendoncker were awful for most the game

Not saying that you didn't go but would be interested to split the comments between those that saw the game and those that didn't.

I didn't go (away in Spain) but commentary didn't suggest to me that Jonny or Donck were too bad.

Prefer to hear from those who saw it with their eyes! And yes, I accept that 2 people can watch the same thing and have differing views.

 

[Deleted member 4453]

I mentioned yesterday in the games thread about not actually knowing the Man City/West Ham score.
Personally think we should just decide the score as we all come out rather than leave it to officials.

 

[Bostin]

With VAR we should have the football equivalent of ‘umpires call’. For those inconclusive or marginal decisions.

Unless the ref has made an absolute howler then his original decision should stand.