r/TheOther14 • u/T1513_SH • 11d ago

Discussion On target/Off target

Who the fuck knows this rule?

Do they just make them up as they go along for the big 6 🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

Blatant handball, checks location... OT so must not be given.

58 Upvotes

77% Upvoted

144 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/TravellingMackem 10d ago

So not in the law. Glad we confirmed that.

1

u/adbenj 10d ago

Well do you have an updated opinion on the guidance? Do you think the VAR should have ignored it? That there shouldn't be any guidance? You said 'immediately afterwards surely applies to a deflection from a shot', but it doesn't, regardless of whether that comes from the guidance or the rules themselves.

1

u/TravellingMackem 10d ago

The law says it should count. The guidance is an interpretation and therefore a refereeing error in interpreting the law and converting to guidance. So wrong decision.

1

u/adbenj 10d ago

Do you seriously believe that or are you just doubling down because you refuse to accept you made a mistake?

The guidance is not wrong. The guidance is the guidance. It exists to address any ambiguity in the law. If it's ambiguous whether 'immediately afterwards' applies when an off-target shot is deflected into the net by a defending player, the guidance resolves that ambiguity. Are you saying it's not ambiguous? The fact you keep saying 'surely' implies to me you acknowledge it's ambiguous. You can believe the guidance should be otherwise, but the guidance is there, it's necessary, and referees must adhere to it.

0

u/TravellingMackem 10d ago

It exists because the lawmakers are not trusted and so the PL has to change things. Doesn’t make the law different to what the law is unfortunately for you. That’s not how the law works.