Leicester Verdict

[Jez]

well it's not is it?

it's about the rules as they currently stand

Rubbish

Why was the villa one not challenged yesterday ??

Because somebodies opinion thought it wasn’t

 

[Skrilla]

Had 0 shots on target but could have scored 2 or 3. No clue how you worked that one out.

2 or 3 balls played across the face of the goal, shots on target doesn't correlate to expected goals.

 

[Tipton Wolves]

Superb point away from home. Not many will take much from the king power. Now rest at least 6 against pyunik to cap off a great week.

 

[paddy]

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

Wrong

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Madness...

Premier League statement reveals why Dendoncker's goal for Wolves was ruled out by VAR

Sorry PL but you ****ed up.

 

[Matthew Clark]

Id taken a point before ko but should have won. Var was, sadly, correct but the refs are the problem with consistency or lack of, we were definitely against 12 out there. Jota and jonny poor today but boly was immense. Hope we rest a few on thursday and then on monday we'll smash utd

 

[vini69]

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.

100%agree.

 

[Deleted member 4453]

Madness...

Premier League statement reveals why Dendoncker's goal for Wolves was ruled out by VAR

Sorry PL but you ****ed up.

"Leicester City fans then proceeded to start chanting ‘VAR! VAR! VAR!” while banging their cardboard clappers."

Made me laugh

 

[Phitsanulok (Poole) Wolf]

How can anyone say VAR was correct when it took a minute and a half to decide.
Doubt not removed.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Premier League news: Leicester 0-0 Wolves: VAR controversy denies Wolves victory | Daily Mail Online

Very well put.

 

[Lisas Husband]

I'm pleased with the point with the way the game went, Leicester seemed to be building up a head of steam in the last ten minutes. We did seem leggy and not as good as we an be when building from the back.
Boly MOTM, and I thought Bennett did well against Vardy who was certainly getting more and more wound up as the game went on.
Poor ref, VAR? Technically correct but I feel its going to take part of the game away from the Premier League and the rest of the leagues still have that part to enjoy.

Grudgingly satisfied.

 

[Deleted at own request (WeAreTheWolves)]

As for the game, thought Jimenez was pretty awful, wrong sub by Nuno taking Jota off instead of Jimenez.

You also got to see the Maguire replacement, Soyuncu absolutely bossed Raul unfortunately and looked a class act. Second best player on the pitch IMO after the outstanding Boly.

He goes under the radar because he's with us but I honestly wouldn't swap him for anyone apart from Van Dijk.

Felt we sat off them too much, too defensive at times. We went with the attitude that a point was very good (and it was) but when Leicester weren't at it I would have liked us to do a bit more to try and win.

Overall, tough away game, rare away clean sheet and a solid performance.

 

[Puregold]

Not a great performance from us today, but we had 3 very good chances to take the lead, how many did they create? Good point, Boly the golden mountain, has to be one of the best defenders in the Premier League.

 

[Deleted at own request (WeAreTheWolves)]

How can anyone say VAR was correct when it took a minute and a half to decide.
Doubt not removed.

It's nothing to do with doubt.

If the ball hits someone's arm and it is involved in a goal, it's disallowed.

VAR is not the issue, the rule is.

 

[Deleted member 8455jwf]

2 or 3 balls played across the face of the goal, shots on target doesn't correlate to expected goals.

Nowhere near and of their players, they created bobbins.

 

[Leigh72]

Given the travelling we have done, that was a very decent point and could and should have been all 3, if not for terrible reffing, AGAIN.

 

[JTWolf]

I’ll take a point but Doherty looked off the pace today, high given his preseason is expected. Jimenez wasn’t quite on it and could have scored 2. Joys a menace and should Of scored at least 1. Donck and Boly played well and Rui rarely challenged.

Cutrone has a nice few touches and tried to put himself about for 15 mins but can’t spect too much from him still, hopefully h gets a start on Thurs.

 

[Superted]

I didn't expect to be on the wrong end of a VAR quite so soon but the rule is the rule I guess.

I can see why they've tried to make is as unambiguous as possible but when ithe handball was so clearly accidental it really stings.

There's no way of knowing whether it will be any better if the accidental element of the contact was open to interpretation.

Isn't it like saying that any challenge that results in injury to the opponent is automatically deemed to be a red card offence even if it wasn't actually a foul?

 

[Wolves in Bucharest]

I don’t expect that many changes next Thursday. The fact so many players seemed off the pace today suggests they haven’t achieved full match fitness yet.

 

[Phitsanulok (Poole) Wolf]

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

Very high on the arm if there was contact, debatable whether it was even shoulder. Would like another ref's interpretation. personally think this was an incorrect VAR decision.

 

[Ned Stark]

Rubbish

Why was the villa one not challenged yesterday ??

Because somebodies opinion thought it wasn’t

I've no idea what happened with Villa but the rule as stated by the Premier League as I've drawn attention to above means it was a correct decision today

you might not like the rule but that's not the point, the consistency of decision-making is also not the point regarding today's decision which is all that we can look at

 

[JadeWolf]

Thought we played well without hitting our best form. Definitely the better team anyway. Defensively very solid.

 

[gonzowolf]

How far back will they rewind to review a goal with VAR? If Leicester had scored following that clear handball on the half way line shortly after our 'goal', would they rule no goal? Where do they draw the line.

 

[Wolfy McWolf-Face]

every goal is reviewed, simple as that

OK, get that. We check every goal but still didn't think decisions would be overruled unless a clear error was made? i.e. A hand of God or a Boly vs Man City?

Even if it did hit him the ref didn't make a clear error as the time it took a panel with slow motion to decide suggests that a regular human couldn't have reliably seen it at normal speed i.e. It was not an obvious error by the ref.

 

[WolvTown]

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.

Just saw it happen in the Manturd v Chelski, ref stopped it after a few seconds

 

[Sussex Wolf]

I've no idea what happened with Villa but the rule as stated by the Premier League as I've drawn attention to above means it was a correct decision today

you might not like the rule but that's not the point, the consistency of decision-making is also not the point regarding today's decision which is all that we can look at

• 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

Did Boly “gain possession/control of the ball after it touched his hand/arm”? Watch the video.

The rule actually makes sense. It’s simply there to stop occasions where a teammate deflects the ball with their hand/arm, and uses this to create a chance for their team to score. The phrase “gain possession/control” is key. This should avoid situations where the ball accidentally deflects off a player and leads to a goal. In the game today, Boly was not in possession or control of the ball during that play, it was a deflection. Hence the rule should not have applied.

 

[Deleted member 3751]

Anyway, away from the dog**** rules and officiating. This is the same Leicester side people were saying are definitely going to be pushing for the top six, had a good window, blah blah blah. We should have won and if it wasn't for some really poor moments of indecision from two players who have looked razor sharp in Europe, we would have won and beaten a well fancied team quite comfortably.

We'll have another decent season

 

[Superted]

• 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

Did Boly “gain possession/control of the ball after it touched his hand/arm”? Watch the video.

The rule actually makes sense. It’s simply there to stop occasions where a teammate deflects the ball with their hand/arm, and uses this to create a chance for their team to score. The phrase “gain possession/control” is key. This should avoid situations where the ball accidentally deflects off a player and leads to a goal. In the game today, Boly was not in possession or control of the ball during that play, it was a deflection. Hence the rule should not have applied.

I can see the argument. Technically nobody was "in control of the ball" at the point Dendoncker smacked it into the back of the net on the bounce.

At what point is the ball considered to be "under control".

 

[Deleted at own request (WeAreTheWolves)]

Anyway, away from the dog**** rules and officiating. This is the same Leicester side people were saying are definitely going to be pushing for the top six, had a good window, blah blah blah. We should have won and if it wasn't for some really poor moments of indecision from two players who have looked razor sharp in Europe, we would have won and beaten a well fancied team quite comfortably.

We'll have another decent season

Bit over the top.

We set up as if we were playing Barcelona. 73% possession to them after about 35 mins (don't know what it ended up)

We played for a draw and got it.

Overall, I think it was a fair result but if any team deserved it, it was us. No complaints really though.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Very high on the arm if there was contact, debatable whether it was even shoulder. Would like another ref's interpretation. personally think this was an incorrect VAR decision.

Please don't make me defend this *******s any more!

 

[The Wolf In The North]

Weird game. A highly typical Wolves game. Set up to contain and break, which looks great and slick when it works but turgid and scattered when it doesn't.

Leicester outpassed us. Tielemans and Ndidi ran the midfield, Periera was an absolute menace and had Johnny on the back foot throughout, Soyuncu was solid... but we created the better pure chances and should have won by a couple of goals with our standard counter-attack. Jota and Raul were physically fine, but mentally a step behind after the midweek travel, and their decision making was poor in front of goal. Donk's disallowed goal was well executed but he was shattered and clumsy otherwise, gave the ball away a half dozen times. Boly was terrific, Bennett deserves credit for marshalling Vardy, but our defence are always good.

For me, the glaring evidence is that Rodgers set up irritatingly well, pinning back Johnny and Doc and smothering midfield, pushing us twenty yards back towards our goal throughout the game, save for our dominant fifteen minutes after half time where we should have won it. He was able to do that because he knew what our team would be, and how we would play. Everyone does. We play one way. We have no variation, no guile. We defend, we press, we counter, and it's bloody effective at times, but it's all we are. Substitutions are like-for-like. Same faces, same formation, same, same, same.

We are a good team, but we are predictable. This summer was our opportunity to add a new dimension to our play and we ****ed it.

 

[Deleted member 5910]

It's nothing to do with doubt. If the ball hits someone's arm and it is involved in a goal, it's disallowed. VAR is not the issue, the rule is.

Yes, increasingly I must agree. Disallowing any goal that is created after striking an arm, regardless of intent, is an awful ruling. It's bureaucracy for its own sake, and confusing to everyone concerned. That would not have been given as a penalty, nor as a freekick anywhere else on the pitch, but is ruled out when a goal results from it? What happened to giving attacking teams the benefit of the doubt?

 

[Deleted at own request (WeAreTheWolves)]

Yes, increasingly I must agree. Disallowing any goal that is created after striking an arm, regardless of intent, is an awful ruling. It's bureaucracy for its own sake, and confusing to everyone concerned. That would not have been given as a penalty, nor as a freekick anywhere else on the pitch, but is ruled out when a goal results from it? What happened to giving attacking teams the benefit of the doubt?

I understand it to a degree, a goal is obviously more match-defining than a free-kick though.

I also remember people saying technically the Boly goal vs City should have counted as he had no intention of playing that with his hand, it was an accident, so should that have been allowed? IMO, no way, that has to be ruled out.

So, I think some thought a good idea would be to disallow any goal that involves a hand, forgetting incidents like today.

It should be ruled individually. Most would agree Boly vs City has to be disallowed, regardless of intent. Most would agree today's has to be given. To blanket every potential moment was daft.

 

[Tezthewolvesfan]

Weird game. A highly typical Wolves game. Set up to contain and break, which looks great and slick when it works but turgid and scattered when it doesn't.

Leicester outpassed us. Tielemans and Ndidi ran the midfield, Periera was an absolute menace and had Johnny on the back foot throughout, Soyuncu was solid... but we created the better pure chances and should have won by a couple of goals with our standard counter-attack. Jota and Raul were physically fine, but mentally a step behind after the midweek travel, and their decision making was poor in front of goal. Donk's disallowed goal was well executed but he was shattered and clumsy otherwise, gave the ball away a half dozen times. Boly was terrific, Bennett deserves credit for marshalling Vardy, but our defence are always good.

For me, the glaring evidence is that Rodgers set up irritatingly well, pinning back Johnny and Doc and smothering midfield, pushing us twenty yards back towards our goal throughout the game, save for our dominant fifteen minutes after half time where we should have won it. He was able to do that because he knew what our team would be, and how we would play. Everyone does. We play one way. We have no variation, no guile. We defend, we press, we counter, and it's bloody effective at times, but it's all we are. Substitutions are like-for-like. Same faces, same formation, same, same, same.

We are a good team, but we are predictable. This summer was our opportunity to add a new dimension to our play and we ****ed it.

Jeez we have only played one league game.....

 

[Fifty Niner]

Somebody needs to tell Nuno to rotate the squad or this is going to be a very long season.

A very tiring, long season. Won't do a Burnley but there are going to be some very laboured performances. Unless, of course, we crash out of the Euros early.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

I can see the argument. Technically nobody was "in control of the ball" at the point Dendoncker smacked it into the back of the net on the bounce.

At what point is the ball considered to be "under control".

Exactly. Moreover it needs to be in possession or control by the player committing the offence after (ie as a result of) the handball. The only person of those involved who was in possession and control of the ball was Dendocker, and he didn’t commit the supposed offence.

 

[Deleted member 5910]

I understand it to a degree, a goal is obviously more match-defining than a free-kick though.

I also remember people saying technically the Boly goal vs City should have counted as he had no intention of playing that with his hand, it was an accident, so should that have been allowed? IMO, no way, that has to be ruled out.

So, I think some thought a good idea would be to disallow any goal that involves a hand, forgetting incidents like today.

It should be ruled individually. Most would agree Boly vs City has to be disallowed, regardless of intent. Most would agree today's has to be given. To blanket every potential moment was daft.

This is why it's frustrating and more than a little illogical. There is nuance when it comes to handball as pertaining to the rules, yet when it comes to a goal being scored, the FA have decided to eradicate nuance (while retaining nuance in all other instances of handball). Why not eradicate nuance full stop as to eradicate doubt? I noticed on the Premier League page, it showed Boly's goal against City. Ironic then that he is the first casualty of the new rule. Makes me wonder if this new rule was first brought up for discussion after City got shafted?

 

[Fifty Niner]

Rotate the squad in the first game. What an idiot you are at times.

Not really. Tired players out there after a 6000 mile round trip and that's why we have additions to the team.

 

[Streathamwolf]

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.

This. If you read the transfer thread, Leicester and Everton have done such good business compared to us that we haven't a hope in hell of competing with them. Yet, after 6000 miles, at their home, we created more chances and were unlucky to draw! Good result with everything against us, inc Marriner. Solid start to the season imo.

 

[Deleted member 3751]

Bit over the top.

We set up as if we were playing Barcelona. 73% possession to them after about 35 mins (don't know what it ended up)

We played for a draw and got it.

Overall, I think it was a fair result but if any team deserved it, it was us. No complaints really though.

What was over the top? People have been lauding Leicester and saying how good they'll be with Rodgers in charge.
And we didn't play for a draw, setting up to contain and then springing traps is how we play against decent sides that want to keep the ball. I reckon Nuno will be delighted with the performance and we were a decent finish away from the perfect day