Ollie Watkins

[lexicon]

14 hours ago, Zatman said:

One of the greatest Champions League assists of all time

They all count 

[juteface]

3 hours ago, It's Your Round said:

I’ve not noticed so much this season but I remember when we defending corners last season, Watkins would so often be the one winning the header in our box that started a counter, sometimes concluding with him having a shot on goal himself. His work rate is phenomenal. 

The Arsenal game was where I noticed it most, Duran came on and done very little in terms of tracking and provided no support for the midfield. 

[juteface]

Watched the disallowed goal in slow motion, doesn't touch his hand.

If I can clearly see that on a YouTube highlights video, how did the VAR miss it?

 

[lexicon]

3 minutes ago, juteface said:

Watched the disallowed goal in slow motion, doesn't touch his hand.

If I can clearly see that on a YouTube highlights video, how did the VAR miss it?

 

Nobody seems to know

[duke313]

3 minutes ago, juteface said:

Watched the disallowed goal in slow motion, doesn't touch his hand.

If I can clearly see that on a YouTube highlights video, how did the VAR miss it?

 

What's even more insane is that the ref didn't go to the monitor for Watkins, but did for the much more obvious Onana handball.

[lexicon]

Just now, duke313 said:

What's even more insane is that the ref didn't go to the monitor for Watkins, but did for the much more obvious Onana handball.

He refs here in Greece quite often and has a reputation for being a dodgy arsehole who makes bizarre decisions. 

[_AA_786]

7 minutes ago, juteface said:

Watched the disallowed goal in slow motion, doesn't touch his hand.

If I can clearly see that on a YouTube highlights video, how did the VAR miss it?

 

They were busy planning how to give Bayern 3 pens in a  game to boost their goal difference. Can't have some upstart like Villa sitting above the Elite in the table, even if for one night.

Edited yesterday at 15:37 by _AA_786

[Rightdm00]

56 minutes ago, juteface said:

Watched the disallowed goal in slow motion, doesn't touch his hand.

If I can clearly see that on a YouTube highlights video, how did the VAR miss it?

 

Im all for a good ref beat down when it's warranted but it touches his left hand after coming off his chest. It's an obvious touch and therefore no need to send the ref to the monitor. The new law states an attacker can't use his hand, whether inadvertent or purposeful, prior to scoring a goal. If it hit Ollie's hand, which it did, doesn't matter the intent. No goal. 

The Onana hand ball was far more harsh, especially even on IFABs website they struggle to define "attacking phase of play". 

[MapleVilla]

1 hour ago, juteface said:

Watched the disallowed goal in slow motion, doesn't touch his hand.

If I can clearly see that on a YouTube highlights video, how did the VAR miss it?

 

Have to say in real time (I saw the highlights) it looked handball. But on the slow mo from behind the goal it looked like it was no where near his hand. Looked like his chest.

[Vive_La_Villa]

5 hours ago, lexicon said:

He refs here in Greece quite often and has a reputation for being a dodgy arsehole who makes bizarre decisions. 

Tbf the ref gave the goal it was VAR that disallowed it. For the Onana missed handball VAR gave him chance to save face. I get the second one being disallowed but haven't got a clue how they know first one hit his hand unless they are maybe using that sound technology they used in the Euros but aren't showing us?

[tinker]

4 hours ago, Rightdm00 said:

Im all for a good ref beat down when it's warranted but it touches his left hand after coming off his chest. It's an obvious touch and therefore no need to send the ref to the monitor. The new law states an attacker can't use his hand, whether inadvertent or purposeful, prior to scoring a goal. If it hit Ollie's hand, which it did, doesn't matter the intent. No goal. 

The Onana hand ball was far more harsh, especially even on IFABs website they struggle to define "attacking phase of play". 

Is this a joke? Onana's was a clear handball,  Ollie's was very hard to spot and tbh I can't see how it was a handball, the ball never changed its rotation at all, the ref should watch the close decisions , not the obvious ones.........sorry but you chat complete drivel.

[Rightdm00]

1 hour ago, tinker said:

Is this a joke? Onana's was a clear handball,  Ollie's was very hard to spot and tbh I can't see how it was a handball, the ball never changed its rotation at all, the ref should watch the close decisions , not the obvious ones.........sorry but you chat complete drivel.

The question isn't about the handball by Onana, that's obvious, no one is arguing that.  It's whether the hand ball was in the same phase of play as the goal. If you go read the rules of var on IFAB then you would have an understanding on what im talking about. There is a valid argument on whether a handball ~20 seconds before a goal is in the same phase of play.  

If you want to get mad at someone,weirdly you choose a fellow Villa fan, then take your anger out on IFAB for its obscure explanation which make it impossible to decipher a referees decision. 

As far as Ollie's goal, it's obvious it touches his hand. Ollie doesn't even protest. Not sure what replays you have but it comes off his chest and hits his left hand. You can even see his finger moves. If you understand the laws of the game, then you know that the on field ref doesn't need to review that call. If the ball hits the hand of a goal scorer then the goal is no good. 

Edited 17 hours ago by Rightdm00
The CBS Sports highlights on YouTube has a definite angle where you can see the ball go backwards after hitting his chest. Sucks for Ollie, but the ref got this one right.

[juteface]

6 hours ago, Rightdm00 said:

Im all for a good ref beat down when it's warranted but it touches his left hand after coming off his chest. It's an obvious touch and therefore no need to send the ref to the monitor. The new law states an attacker can't use his hand, whether inadvertent or purposeful, prior to scoring a goal. If it hit Ollie's hand, which it did, doesn't matter the intent. No goal. 

The Onana hand ball was far more harsh, especially even on IFABs website they struggle to define "attacking phase of play". 

I can't agree with it touching his hand after hitting his chest. Look at it from the far angle and close up, hits his chest and drops. IF it touches his hand, and I don't think it does, it has absolutely no bearing on the controlling of the ball because of how it is dropping from his chest.

[PaulC]

I didn't see a handball but it's the var refs decision not the onfield ref who I thought was good overall and very likeable after hearing what he Said to the two captains before kickoff.

[Spoony]

I’m surprised it’s being debated so much tbh. On the replay the ball hits his fingers on the way down. You can see it. It was the right call. Rules are just insane. 

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

12 hours ago, MapleVilla said:

Have to say in real time (I saw the highlights) it looked handball. But on the slow mo from behind the goal it looked like it was no where near his hand. Looked like his chest.

It looked like all chest/stomach to me from more than one angle 

[HalfTimePost]

10 hours ago, PaulC said:

I didn't see a handball but it's the var refs decision not the onfield ref who I thought was good overall and very likeable after hearing what he Said to the two captains before kickoff.

Where is this? I've not seen

[PaulC]

3 hours ago, HalfTimePost said:

Where is this? I've not seen

It was live on tnt. 

[KentVillan]

13 hours ago, juteface said:

I can't agree with it touching his hand after hitting his chest. Look at it from the far angle and close up, hits his chest and drops. IF it touches his hand, and I don't think it does, it has absolutely no bearing on the controlling of the ball because of how it is dropping from his chest.

In that position I *think* it doesn’t matter whether it’s deliberate / unnatural / or has any bearing on whether he controls it. Any touch in build up to goal is no goal, even if it’s just glancing a finger or something?

[Stevo985]

19 hours ago, Rightdm00 said:

Im all for a good ref beat down when it's warranted but it touches his left hand after coming off his chest. It's an obvious touch and therefore no need to send the ref to the monitor. The new law states an attacker can't use his hand, whether inadvertent or purposeful, prior to scoring a goal. If it hit Ollie's hand, which it did, doesn't matter the intent. No goal. 

The Onana hand ball was far more harsh, especially even on IFABs website they struggle to define "attacking phase of play". 

I don't agree that the Onana hand ball was far more harsh. The right decision was very obviously made.

But I do agree with why the ref was sent to the screen for that one and not the Watkins one.

 

With the way the rules are, if VAR sees the ball hit Watkins' hand then the goal is disallowed. There is no grey area. Ball hits hand, goal doesn't stand.

With Onana, some discretion can be used, hence the ref needs to look at it to make a decision. I still think it was overkill to send him to the screen as it was such an obvious handball, but that would be why