GWT: PL Matchweek 12

[S E P H]

Sterling has also been dropped from the game because he confronted Gomez and was mad over losing.

Good for Sterling, winners never accept losing. Wish we had some of that in Arsenal's squad, but sadly we have the mental toughness of Justin Trudeau.

 

[bluesfan94]

Good for Sterling, winners never accept losing. Wish we had some of that in Arsenal's squad, but sadly we have the mental toughness of Justin Trudeau.

Can’t really call him a loser though.

 

[hatterson]

Good for Sterling, winners never accept losing. Wish we had some of that in Arsenal's squad, but sadly we have the mental toughness of Justin Trudeau.

There’s a clear difference between being fine you lost and starting a fight with a random sub from the other team the next day.

It’s not like him and Gomez got into it hard during the game, or Gomez put in a harsh tackle in training, he just randomly decided to go at him out of nowhere.

Also you saying “the mental toughness of Justin Trudeau.” like it’s a bad thing explains so, so much.

 

[Burner Account]

 

[PeteWorrell]

Raheem Sterling: World-class talent with a pea brain.

You cannot pull stunt like these and then whine about how unfairly the English media treats you.

 

[YNWA14]

There’s a clear difference between being fine you lost and starting a fight with a random sub from the other team the next day.

It’s not like him and Gomez got into it hard during the game, or Gomez put in a harsh tackle in training, he just randomly decided to go at him out of nowhere.

I mean they did get into it a little bit in the game on the weekend. Joe picked him up and shoved him away like the child he is. Little man syndrome I guess; Gomez would smash him.

 

[PanniniClaus]

I mean they did get into it a little bit in the game on the weekend. Joe picked him up and shoved him away like the child he is. Little man syndrome I guess; Gomez would smash him.

Little man syndrome....in a game that is filled with little men....a game that would not be much without little men....This is not the NFL or NBA.

Not condoning what Sterling did but he is amongst the worlds best players at his position...a player England need more than they need Joe Gomez.

 

[YNWA14]

Little man syndrome....in a game that is filled with little men....a game that would not be much without little men....This is not the NFL or NBA.

Not condoning what Sterling did but he is amongst the worlds best players at his position...a player England need more than they need Joe Gomez.

Not sure what that has to do with anything or how that addresses what I said. Nobody is saying he’s a bad player.

 

[Chimaera]

It's certainly stupid. But I don't think it's a really big deal. Better managers might have handled it in house. I am certain there have been more than a few bust ups between players. Some of it is also related to the English press, who are going to find out and use anything. Maddison going to a casino, Wilshere smoking, you name it. Things like this get blown out of proportion with the English team because they sell papers.

Raz doing anything is going to sell papers. He's immature, and there's a bit of a concern there, but it's really not a story if Southgate handled it privately. He also needs him. Probably their best player right now.

 

[Chimaera]

Little man syndrome....in a game that is filled with little men....a game that would not be much without little men....This is not the NFL or NBA.

Not condoning what Sterling did but he is amongst the worlds best players at his position...a player England need more than they need Joe Gomez.

They need Gomez. He's probably one of their starting central defenders, or at least would be if he was playing regularly. He also offers some options at Rightback and versatility in the squad. You assume Maguire is playing, but who is next to him is up for debate. I guess Timori on form, maybe Stones on sheer ability, though his form is crap. In either case, in the next cycle or two, Gomez is going to play quite a bit.

 

[PanniniClaus]

Not sure what that has to do with anything or how that addresses what I said. Nobody is saying he’s a bad player.

I just feel the little man syndrome shot is not necessary in a game that is filled with them and needs them.

 

[PanniniClaus]

They need Gomez. He's probably one of their starting central defenders, or at least would be if he was playing regularly. He also offers some options at Rightback and versatility in the squad. You assume Maguire is playing, but who is next to him is up for debate. I guess Timori on form, maybe Stones on sheer ability, though his form is crap. In either case, in the next cycle or two, Gomez is going to play quite a bit.

Agreed - defenders don't grow on trees. I feel that Sterling is needed though if they plan on winning Euro 2020...they will need his goals to stand any chance.

 

[Duchene2MacKinnon]

Agreed - defenders don't grow on trees. I feel that Sterling is needed though if they plan on winning Euro 2020...they will need his goals to stand any chance.

Even if they had 2 sterlings they wouldn’t win.

 

[robertmac43]

Even if they had 2 sterlings they wouldn’t win.

I don't think any amount of Sterlings will be the difference. 0,1,2,5,11. It doesn't matter, he is not the be all end all for the Euro 2020 hopes of England.

 

[YNWA14]

They need Gomez. He's probably one of their starting central defenders, or at least would be if he was playing regularly. He also offers some options at Rightback and versatility in the squad. You assume Maguire is playing, but who is next to him is up for debate. I guess Timori on form, maybe Stones on sheer ability, though his form is crap. In either case, in the next cycle or two, Gomez is going to play quite a bit.

Gomez and Tomori would be their best pairing but I doubt they drop Maguire. They'd honestly probably do best with a 3-4-3 since the midfield is lacking in quality anyway. Gomez - Maguire - Tomori with Trent on one side and Chilwell on the other as attacking wingbacks.

I just feel the little man syndrome shot is not necessary in a game that is filled with them and needs them.

Do you know what that expression refers to? There are plenty of 'small men' that don't act like that, or feel the need to prove themselves by acting thuggish with guys that are twice their size. It has nothing to do with the composition of players in the game as a whole, nor does it represent other smaller players or the game's need for them. He's a tool, individually.

 

[YNWA14]

Offside wouldn’t do anything if the player hasn’t played the ball yet, which is this similar situation.

A ball accidentally hitting an attackers hand is only a foul if either a.) it goes into the net or; b.) an attacker controls the ball and scores/generates a goal scoring opportunity. Arguero did not gain control, Sterling did not gain control. And a potential offense by the other team doesn’t negate an offense by you.

The rules say nothing about gaining an advantage or negating a foul by the defense.

Pretend this is the situation: The ball goes past TAA, and TAA doesn’t handle it. Just as Sterling it about to slot it in (before he touches it), someone rugby tackles him from behind. That player is 100% getting a red and its a pen regardless of if it hit Silva’s arm or not.

The comparable to offside that I made was the following situation.

Attacker sends a cross in towards a player is in an offside position. That player is making a back post run to head the ball in. A defender sees the run and before the ball gets to the back post he jumps up like an NFL receiver and grabs the ball out of the air. In that situation, the potential offside does not negate the handball offense. The attacking team has not committed an offside offense yet.

The same applies here. City had not yet committed a handball offense because the ball neither went in the net nor did a City player gain control of it. It would have been an offense if the ball went to Sterling, but TAA handled it before it got there.

There’s a reason why the PGMOL made zero mention of Silva, because a *potential* offense by one team does not negate an actual offense by the other team.

All of the commentary I’ve seen supports that, and the only former referee I’ve seen argue the same as you is Bobby Madley. There clearly is plenty out there I haven’t seen, but I’ve tried googling a lot and I haven’t found hardly anything outside of Twitter.

The real reason it wasn’t given seems obvious. Oliver was in a decent enough position that they were able to claim he had a good view, play continued for a while, and Liverpool scored. VAR didn’t want to be the reason for a significant shift in the title race like that. The controversy around not giving a handball is far less than it would be around erasing a goal and giving a penalty the other way.

The thing is that they don't have to be in control of the ball or directly score in the literal sense. Creating a dangerous situation out of the ball touching an attackers hand immediately results in a handball with no questions asked as per the new rules. Clattenburg weighed in:

VAR and Michael Oliver made the correct call in allowing Fabinho's early goal to stand, although I disagree with the reasoning the Premier League have provided.

There were strong suggestions at the time that the effort should be disallowed and a penalty awarded to Manchester City because Trent Alexander-Arnold had handled at the other end moments before the goal.

However, it is the arm of Manchester City forward Bernardo Silva that deflects the ball onto Alexander-Arnold and that is why, for me, play should not be brought back.

If Silva's arm does not divert the ball, then yes, I believe a penalty should have been awarded as Alexander-Arnold's arm is in an unnatural position and he is using it to make himself bigger.

The previously unknown canceling eachother out rule as explained by a ref!!!!

There was another ref but I didn't bother to look it up (as well as the post game panel on DAZN IIRC). I don't think we're going to agree on this one and I see the points you're making but by the law and the intent of the rules in place at the moment there's no way a penalty would ever have been the result of that situation. It's either that they allow play to continue because they feel the handball would have been called on Silva and the play has since progressed past the point of calling it back for that free kick, or they call it back for a free kick for Liverpool in their box.

As for the foul things...I mean you see it happen on the field all the time where a foul is committed after another foul but because the initial foul is called the second isn't punished, etc. It's not an uncommon occurrence IMO. Especially with the speed of how things happen in the sport an initial foul can have plenty of cascading effects in terms of timing, placement, etc.

 

[Savant]

Little man syndrome....in a game that is filled with little men....a game that would not be much without little men....This is not the NFL or NBA.

Not condoning what Sterling did but he is amongst the worlds best players at his position...a player England need more than they need Joe Gomez.

They don’t need either against Montenegro. If they were playing like Spain, I doubt Southgate takes a stand. If Sterling was the one who initiated, which is being reported, if he had to pick one to sit there was only one choice.

 

[Savant]

They need Gomez. He's probably one of their starting central defenders, or at least would be if he was playing regularly. He also offers some options at Rightback and versatility in the squad. You assume Maguire is playing, but who is next to him is up for debate. I guess Timori on form, maybe Stones on sheer ability, though his form is crap. In either case, in the next cycle or two, Gomez is going to play quite a bit.

Would rather have Gomez and a Tomori at CB than Maguire and Stones, but that might just be me.

 

[hatterson]

The thing is that they don't have to be in control of the ball or directly score in the literal sense. Creating a dangerous situation out of the ball touching an attackers hand immediately results in a handball with no questions asked as per the new rules.

The thing is, that's not what the new rules actually say.

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:

1. scores in the opponents’ goal
   
2. creates a goal-scoring opportunity

• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

At the time TAA handled the ball, what Silva did wasn't a handball offense. It was a potential offense in the same way a guy making a back post run from an offside position doesn't commit an offside offense until he actually becomes active in the play.

If TAA doesn't handle the ball, Sterling lets the ball go past him, City picks it up out wide, and then develops another attack by recycling the ball around the edge, it wouldn't be a handball offense.

The new handball rules explicitly require either the ball to go in the goal or for the attacking team to gain possession.

Under the interpretation you're mentioning (that Clattenburg supports), once the ball touches the attacking team's hand/arm, the defending team could do literally anything they wanted to either break up the attack or start a counter and not be punished for it on VAR, which is clearly absurd.

As for the foul things...I mean you see it happen on the field all the time where a foul is committed after another foul

Yes, that happens all the time, and if the ball actually got to Sterling and TAA handled it after that, the new rule would clearly apply.


The one thing I think most people agree on is that the PGMOL's reason for not calling the TAA handball was terrible. The difference you and I have is one of the interpretation of the rules. The PGMOL's defense of VAR is just ignoring what basically every person who looked at the play called a handball. If the ball went to TAA after deflecting off of Silva's knee instead of hand, does anyone really believe it shouldn't be called under the rules?

 

[YNWA14]

The one thing I think most people agree on is that the PGMOL's reason for not calling the TAA handball was terrible. The difference you and I have is one of the interpretation of the rules. The PGMOL's defense of VAR is just ignoring what basically every person who looked at the play called a handball. If the ball went to TAA after deflecting off of Silva's knee instead of hand, does anyone really believe it shouldn't be called under the rules?

Yep, I agree. If that ball goes off anything but Silva's arm I think it would, and should be, a penalty. My reasoning for why they didn't call it back for something in the box lines up more with what Clattenburg explained and it makes sense to me not to call back a goal that happened a whole phase of play later to give Liverpool a free kick in the box and I understand why others would disagree with it by the letter of the way the rule is written, but I do think that the implication is also there that if a handball from an attacker would directly create a goal scoring opportunity (ie. a penalty) it should still be considered an infraction in the same way as if it has just fallen to his feet. It's definitely a more direct scoring chance than say bringing it down with your arm but still having a defender in front of you.

 

[Chimaera]

All that really needs to be said on the Sterling bit is that it seems even Henderson went to the manager to try and get the decision rescinded.

I think some of this is on Southgate as much as it's on Sterling.

 

[YNWA14]

All that really needs to be said on the Sterling bit is that it seems even Henderson went to the manager to try and get the decision rescinded.

I think some of this is on Southgate as much as it's on Sterling.

According to whom? I've read he talked to the two players but nothing about him talking to Southgate about rescinding the decision. It's a good power move by Southgate, in a good situation to do it given their upcoming fixture and place in qualifying, showing that if he wants to keep this England team working properly there won't be any infighting/bad blood like ages past.

 

[Burner Account]

Sterling has ensured we no longer discuss potential handballs from Sunday's match

 

[Chimaera]

According to whom? I've read he talked to the two players but nothing about him talking to Southgate about rescinding the decision. It's a good power move by Southgate, in a good situation to do it given their upcoming fixture and place in qualifying, showing that if he wants to keep this England team working properly there won't be any infighting/bad blood like ages past.

It's in the Guardian. While not clearly stated directly, it seems to suggest he went to him.

Raheem Sterling believes Southgate has overreacted to Gomez altercation

 

[robertmac43]

It does seem as though Sterling was too easily dismissed, would tend to agree with the press in that regard.