₦airaland Forum

TheGoodJoe:

Did Lampard say they said they had conclusive evidence to rule?

No.

So the apology is baseless.

CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE IS THE MAIN TOPIC.

Did lampard say they made an error not giving the pen?
Yes or no?
Did PGMOL deny the claims? YES or NO?

TheGoodJoe:

That is not off-topic. That is a definition of what Conclusive Evidence is. Look at it and understand why they could not rule.

stick to the topic oga....we are talking about a pen not goal line tech!

TheGoodJoe:
That is the problem with people like you. Now you want to run from the real point.

NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE.

The VAR team did not have conclusive evidence to rule.

Its was handball but we have people here with eye problem!

TheGoodJoe:

You do not know the details. They could apologize for Lampard's daugher crying. Or Lampard feeling bad. A public statement and apology with details would have been better because the matchday team made the reason behind their decision public. And no one has countered it with evidence of how they should go about it.

Just the same way you do not also know the details too!
Lampard say dem say sorry because dem nor see say na pen but since then none of them don talk say lampard dey lie

TheGoodJoe:

VAR is not eye but evidence. Look at the image below. That is VAR working with evidence. They do not have evidence for the sleeve rule. That is why they did not call for handball.

This one don come with another off topic!
Stick to the topic of handball and stop the prevarication!

TheGoodJoe:

You are now going in circles. I have said that they have never told us the details of the apology. Are they saying that the referee hand conclusive evidence to rule? No.

So that is just gymnastics.

The matchday officiating team made a public statement and they are yet to have an official countering.

on the contrary i am focused,you are the one going in spheres!
Did they apologise because a member had an affair with an evertonian babe? Yeye

TheGoodJoe:

VAR has passed it was said. VAR works with evidence. They do not have conclusive evidence. Simple. Lampard was talking off point.

Is VAR not controlled by humans?
dont humans make mistakes?
Did they not apologise?
SMH

TheGoodJoe:

I do not want na handball.

No one is denying that. The problem is with respect to the rule. Get it. The new sleeve rule is not clear with conclusive evidence. Makes it difficult to rule.

Once again eye problem!
Visit an optometrist before looking at images either close or far!

TheGoodJoe:

That has been the debate from start. No conclusive evidence to rule.

Nothing like that...what is obvious is what is seen!
And they apologised!

TheGoodJoe:

Understand.

Lampard said the ball handball. The referee said the ball is handball but due to the new rules, they can not rule. There is a chance some of the ball is in the green area.

Lampard did not know anything about that. So what do you want them to do? Lampard is talking off-point. You do not need anyone to explain his ignorance.

Premier League clarify that the VAR team didn't think there was conclusive evidence that the ball hit Rodri more in the red area of the arm than the green. Nothing to do with offside pic.twitter.com/h6QhS6SEaW

— Simon Bajkowski (@spbajko) February 26, 2022

---

This is all there is to discuss and Lampard was not talking about this.

Lampard said it was handball and he was right!
You just dont know the meaning of arm!
So you believe a journalist writeup but U refused to believe what skysports said!
Incredible

TheGoodJoe:

Funny man. Are you saying that no part of the ball was in the green area?

Oga na handball
U are just prolonging talk!
Admit your club escaped without being punished with a pen!

TheGoodJoe:

There is no clear evidence to show all the ball is in the red area. Simple.

So U finally admit it was handball abi...I knew you would finally adjust those failing glasses of yours to see properly!
Yeye!

TheGoodJoe:

Another display of ignorance. If nothing, learn this now. When reviewing an incident, you look for the best angle, not all the angles. You check all angles to get the best and work with the best angle.

Nooh you have both ignorance and eye problem combo
There is a top view,back view,side view and front view....All views agree that it was handball and the best view is the one behind!
Argue with your keyboard!

TheGoodJoe:

There was no need for PGMOL to do any disputing when Lampard was talking off point.

Which one is no need for PGMOL to dispute....are you their attorney?

They refused to say anything because they knew they were guilty! Simple!

TheGoodJoe:

You can not use the picture from behind. Unless you want to guess. You have to rule from where you can see directly.

That is what the officials explained and you guys did not pay attention.

A pen is viewed from all sides and this one is too perfect to ignore but you dont want to do ur magic on this!
Wahala for who get eye problem

TheGoodJoe:
There is nothing to prove. Lampard spoke off-topic.

Lampard said the ball struck Rodri's arm... The ref and VAR officials never said it did not touch Rodri's arm.

Lampard said the ref should have ruled handball... The ref and VAR officials said they can not rule because no clear evidence. So how does Lampard want them to rule?

He said his three-year-old daughter would have seen it...Even a grown man like him didn't even understand the rule, let alone his daughter.

So Lampard was just plain ignorant. No one needs to prove his ignorance. He already displayed it.

Lampard is right because you dont even know the meaning of an arm despite your age!
Lampard made claims and PGMOL did not dispute his claims because they knew he was right and they made a dubious mistake that could have brought the entire VAR to a huge controversy!
Lampard claimed his daughter would see it and he is also right...Unfortunately,some folks here with eye problem will never agree because they only want to believe what they want!
Oga put ur magic on the other pic nah

TheGoodJoe:
You can not use the picture from behind because you can not tell exactly the marking off the ball. It has to show direct contact. That is why the Match Day referee and VAR Officials released a public statement stating they did not have conclusive evidence to rule offside.

If you were paying attention, I have said this repeatedly. You can not use back picture. It has to be a clear evidence to rule.

Oga use it on the pic nah....or are you afraid of admitting the truth?
Yeye!
You want to choose what to believe

TheGoodJoe:

The claims by Lampard were nonsense and off-topic. You do not need PGMOL to deny his ignorance.

If Lampard said what they did not say,its up to them to prove otherwise!
You assuming his claims were nonsense is irrelevant and witless!

TheGoodJoe:

No technology to show if all the ball has crossed the green area to the red area.

That side you are marking is not part of the discussion.

Haa. No wonder you people were arguing anyhow.

Now do the same for the pic below
Yeye

TheGoodJoe:

Lampard just made a careless statement that was devoid of logic. I doubt he had even seen the statement released by the officials when he made the statement. He was talking that the ball struck Rodri on his arm when the match officials never said the ball did not touch Rodri on his arm.

He also did not talk about the red or green area for ruling, which shows Lampard had zero ideas of what he was talking about.

So after Lampard showed so much ignorance, you still want referees to explain his ignorance to you. Haa.

Did PGMOL come out publicly to deny his claims...Yes or No?

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.

I can only understand one thing MR,U have eye problem!

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.

Once again you need an eye doc!
I just showed this pic below to three people and they confirmed the entire ball touched the red zone!
You nor well i swear

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.

There is video and picture evidence to prove the contrary but you and VAR switched off your eyes in that moment!

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.

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:

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.

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:


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?

Was there an apology? Yes or No?
Was the apology made to Everton Yes or No?
Maybe the apology was because one of their members had a brawl with a fan
I thought U had an issue with eye sight but it seems its far worse than that! Sorry ohh!

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.

Even if i zoom the area,you will still have difficulty seeing!
Like i said....U need to book an appointment with optometrist urgently!

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.

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:

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

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?

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.

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!

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.

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

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.

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