TheGoodJoe:


We do not know what the apology is about because it was a personal discussion. If they wanted to apologize, they should have made the apology public and let us know if the referee and VAR officials had conclusive evidence to rule handball.

We do not know if he even apologized. We just know what the journalist told us.

openmine:

Ofcourse they apologised!
whether secretly or publicly is irrelevant!
Or are you insinuating that Skysports is lying?
And if they are,why havent PGMOL come out publicly to debunk such apology?

openmine:

and did their association apologise to Everton and Lampard?
If they did,then for what reason or what offence?

openmine:

Nooooh not us but you because you seem to be the one having eye problem

Is hitting the upper arm considered as handball?
If the ball hits anywhere on your arm which is below your armpit, it will be considered as a handball offence. This is because the armpit is defined to be the upper boundary of your arm.

Is elbow a handball?
The elbow is considered to be part of your arm. This is because your elbow is below your armpit, which is the upper boundary of your arm. A handball offence will be called in this situation.

If after showing you these pics,you still dont see that its handball,then you seriously need to book an appointment with your ophthalmologist!

openmine:

Ofcourse they apologised!
whether secretly or publicly is irrelevant!
Or are you insinuating that Skysports is lying?
And if they are,why havent PGMOL come out publicly to debunk such apology?

ComradeShegs:



Against Mancity or Liverpool?

TheGoodJoe:


Look at the top of the ball you posted. Not the down. Look at the sleeve area. Is all the ball below the sleeve area? You can not tell because the picture is captured from the back. If you look at the front picture, you will see the top of the ball in the sleeve area. Different club jerseys have different sleeve lengths. So what is the ideal spot to show all the ball is below the sleeve area?

The VAR official says there is no conclusive evidence to rule that. It is clear as daylight.

TheGoodJoe:


As I said before. That is just a stunt. An appropriate action is a public apology with clear details of what went wrong. The on duty ref and the VAR officials released a public statement why they could not rule and it was clear as daylight.

An apology means countering the public statement of the referee. However, the apology from PGMOL, never said if they are countering the points raised by the infield match officials and VAR.

Samiah33:

story, the white angels are always on guard in the holy ground called Santiago Bernabeu

TheGoodJoe:


I did not say sky sports is lying but there are no details. What is the apology about? Is it that the referee and VAR officials had enough evidence to rule handball and they did not?

Based on the evidence on the table, I understand why the var officials could not rule. Even you looking at the picture can not rule.

By the way, Sky Sports like every other media regurgitated the first report from the journalist. It was just crafted to make Lampard look good. No details of the discussion.

We do not know what they discussed.

What would have been appropriate is a public apology with the details where the referee and VAR went wrong instead of this undercover joke.

TheGoodJoe:


The point still remains, did the referee and VAR official have conclusive evidence to rule handball? If they did, please show us.

openmine:

Their conclusive evidence as it appears is still a mystery and heavily subjective because one wonders how they could not explain how they could not have given a pen with some much evidence on display!
If they had given a conclusive evidence to rule handball, would we be having this argument?

openmine:

Oga you are not making any sense with your latest ramblings!
You initially said in one of your mentions agreeing they apologised and now you are assuming they did not!
Haba stay one place and stop confusing my thunder nah
Like i said before,Skysports and other veritable online tabloids confirmed an apology made to everton and lampard!
Objective analysts know the reason for the apology whether private or public was connected to the controversial penalty decision involving the obvious handball by Rodri!
If an apology was not made by PGMOL like you are alluding,they would have publicly denied it! Its that simple!
If someone said i apologised to him privately when i did not,dont you think i would have come openly to debunk such apology?
Indeed common sense is not common!

openmine:

Another hapless attempt to delve into wild assumptions with zero facts!
The PGMOL apologised and we all know why except you!

openmine:


Na wa ohhh
I provided body parts like forearm and hand which were explicitly illustrated in the diagram....
I even pointed rules that qualify as handball esp the one that indicates a handball if the ball strikes below the armpit!
Like i said before,most of you either have eye problem(no pun intended) or have issues with comprehension!
Its well with you

openmine:

Another hapless attempt to delve into wild assumptions with zero facts!
The PGMOL apologised and we all know why except you!

TheGoodJoe:


Forget all those pictures haters posted. If you are true, it was only one angle of the clips that showed when Rodri contacted the ball. All those other ones can not show you exactly when the contact was made. The only clear one when you saw the ball strike Rodri, was not clear.

NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE.

However, people cannot learn and will keep riding on what they have not taken effort to understand.

openmine:


You are a serious joker!
Even the one You showed proves my point that the ball touched the handball region!
Na eye dey pain U

openmine:


You are a serious joker!
Even the one You showed proves my point that the ball touched the handball region!
Na eye dey pain U

TheGoodJoe:


As I have told you before, the decision has nothing to do with other parts but the red and green area division line. In your highly comprehensive statement, you are yet to show me how you brilliantly know that all the ball is in the red area and no part of the ball is in the green area.

Mr. Sharp Eyes, explain how you are sure all the ball is in the red area and no part in the green area. I am waiting.

TheGoodJoe:


Tell us the details of the apology. Did the PGMOL say the statement released by the matchday officials was wrong? Did they explain that there was no need for conclusive evidence?

TheGoodJoe:


I wonder how else I will explain something so simple.

The referee head said they apologized, but they did not tell us the details.

Do you know if they apologized saying that the VAR official had enough evidence to rule?

We have no details on that. As I said, the matchday officials made a public statement about why they did not rule and showed the image.

We hear they apologized but what are the details. Did they say the Match officials' public statement is wrong and explain how it is? No.

So I consider that a publicity stunt because Lampard should have been suspended for such unprofessional behavior.

TheGoodJoe:


They could not rule because of the new rule. The new rule says all the ball should be in the red zone and there is no conclusive technology to prove that, so they let it go.

Even as a City fan, as soon as they ruled no penalty, I exclaimed, "What the f***?" How can they say no penalty?

Then I decided to wait and LEARN what happened. That is the problem with many people. They just want it to happen as they expect. They leave out the benefit of learning.

When they showed the image and said no conclusive evidence to rule, I understood. That is what I am explaining. It is clear as daylight. You can not tell if all the ball is conclusively in the red zone. So they let it go.

openmine:

You are calling a barefaced assumption simple?
They apologised and Lampard gave us the details of the apology which was based on their error in giving a pen to everton!
The same association had since not come out to deny any of the statements made by lampard....in such instance, silence is admittance!
However,you are here making hilarious and benighted assumptions about what you think transpired...Like i said earlier,aside Eye problem,you seem to have a bigger problem upsides!

TheGoodJoe:


There is not evidence to show completely that all the ball was in the red area, so the officials could not call for a penalty.

openmine:

Let me see if i can put this in pidgin.....the ball touch rodri for him elbow and him forearm
If you no sabi wetin be forearm go make google teach U
There is nothing to explain because it was clear and obvious handball!
Even you as a mancity fan heaved a sigh of relief when the pen wasnt given...so stop sounding clever by half!
You are not even close!

TheGoodJoe:


Na wa for you. No one on earth has said the ball did not touch the handball region.

The question is, was all the ball in the red zone?

No one can ascertain that, even you. So, the VAR officials could not rule.

I hope you understand it now.

TheGoodJoe:


Please look at the graphic. Tell me if all the ball was in the red area. Tell me elbow, arm, knees and toe is not the point of discussion. If you like speak in Abriba, or itsekiri. It does not change that you are off point.

Look at the image. Is all the ball in the red area. That is, is there no part of the ball in the green area? Think of offside. If any part of the ball is in the green area, then it is not handball based on the rule. There is no technology to tell that.

Understand, Mr. Multiple Languages.