LaLiga 2023-2024 (First Division)

[rpo.castro]

Agreed, some CRs would not have called it a PK. I even stated “Could the CR gone with a no call? Possibly”. I think that the majority of CR would call a PK in such a case, but for sure some wouldn’t, it’s all ITOOTR.

My objection was to “absurd decision” and “dive”, neither of these is true in this case.

As I said previously, in real time it looked a clear penalty for me so I can understand why the ref and most refs would call it penalty. Watching the images, I have no doubt that the referee (or CR) should be alerted to revert or at least watch the images. It would be better for the game and for the referees themselves.

The standard is “clear and obvious error”, you said “or at least watch the images” this leaves room that it wasn’t an error, for sure short of “clear and obvious”. Again while I agree that some CRs might not call it a PK, the majority would call it a PK even after watching the video in slow motion. To make it clear, the purpose of VAR is not to replace “ITOOTR”, the purpose of VAR is to correct “clear and obvious errors”.

What I said was the PK would have been reverted just on VAR worlds or if the ref didn't take credit on it, it would watch the images and revert it. Watching the images and keeping the decision is bad faith.
As for your point if "watching the images" is a signal of not being "clear and obvious" Watching the images shouldn't be in protocol. Tv on the field shouldn't be there. If its "clear and obvious" the ref just takes the words upon VAR. And if "clear and obvious" why when referees go watch images they ask for this angle, that angle and so, and somes times disagrees with VAR? If its "clear and obvious" 2 people shouldn't have different understandings.

And this was one of most clearest situations. It wasn't a fault, it wasn't a PK and I am a Real Madrid supporter.

[AlanK]

Six games to go; here are the top and the drop after Jonada 32 is complete

1. Real Madrid-------------81
2. Barça------------------70
3. Girona-----------------68
4. Atlético----------------61
---------------------------------
5. Athletic----------------58
6. Real Sociedad-----------51
---------------------------------
7. Betis------------------48
--------------------------------
--------------------------------
18. Cádiz----------------25
19. Granada-------------18
20. Almería--------------14

[AlanK]

Jornada 33 begins

Fri. 26 April 2100 Real Sociedad 0, Real Madrid 1 At 29', Guler gives el Real the lead--0-1. Halftime. I may have to miss the second half. Indeed, I had to miss the second half . . . but I didn't miss any goals--0-1 the final.

Sat. 27 April

1400 Las Palmas 0, Girona 2 At 7', penalty in favor of Las Palmas. Taken by Sandro at 8'; saved by Gazzaniga. At 26', penalty in favor of Girona; goalie saves, but David López puts in the rebound--0-1. And that is the score at halftime. 18,734 on hand. At 53', yet another penalty awarded to Girona; converted by Dovbyk at 57'--0-2. That's the final score; for the moment, Girona has climbed past Barça into second place.

1615 Almería 1, Getafe 3 At 27', Greenwood gives Geta the lead--0-1. At 41', Lozano ties for Almería--1-1. Halftime. Greenwood strikes again for Geta at 47'; now it's 1-2. At 61', Jaime Mata makes it 1-3, assisted by Greenwood. And that's the final, which condemns Almería to the Second Division for next season.

1830 Alavés 3, Celta 0 Scoreless first half in Mendizorroza. 18,039 reported on hand. At 48', Simeone breaks the ice and it's 1-0 for the home team. And at 54', Guridi makes it 2-0 for Alavés. At 86', Benavídez ices the win for Alavés--3-0. . . . and that's the final.

2100 Atlético 3, Athletic 1 Probably the best game of the week A win would lift Athletic into fourth place ahead of Atleti . . . on H2H. At 15', Rodrigo de Paul scores from just beyond the balcony of the area--1-0. At 45', Atleti gives the ball away and Nico Williams scores to tie it 1-1 at the half. This as a final result would leave Atleti fourth, three points ahead of Athletic. 64,612 reported on hand. At 52', Angel Correa scores to put Atleti ahead once more--2-1. At 80', Lino fires a bullet that goes off Unai Simón, rebounds off the post, hits the goalie again and goes in--3-1. Hugely important win for Atleti; painful loss for Athleti.

Sun, 28 April

1400 Cádiz 1, Mallorca 1 Can Cádiz beat The Drop At 12', Muriqui heads in to give Mallorca the lead--0-1. Halftime. At 59', Chris Ramos heads in the tying goal for Cádiz--1-1. (futbolme attributes the goal as an own goal by Mascarell) Game ends in a tie--not what either of them wanted.

1615 Granada 3, Osasuna 0 At 29', Pellistri scores for Granada--1-0. Halftime. At 48', Uzuni makes it 2-0. At 94', Boyé makes the final 3-0.

1830 Villarreal 3, Rayo 0 At 18', Baena assists Sorloth, who makes it 1-0 for the home team. No change by halftime. 17,869 on hand. At 70', Mosquera scores with a header--2-0. At 75', Sorloth makes it 3-0. And that's the final score.

2100 Betis 1, Sevilla 1 Derby of the Week, for sure At 36', handball penalty awarded in favor of Betis. Isco converts at 38'--1-0. Halftime. 55,770 on hand in the Benito Villamarín. At 56', Salas heads in a corner to tie it--1-1. And that turns out to be the final score.

Mon. 29 April 2100 Barça 4, Valencia 2 Valencia is currently below the last European spot . . . Whatta first half At 22', Fermín López heads in to give Barça the lead--1-0. But at 27', Hugo Duro ties it after a giveaway--1-1. At 37', Araújo commits a penalty, which is converted by Pepelu at 38'--1-2. In the five minutes of added time, Valencia's goalie sees a red card resulting from his handling the ball outside the area, Halftime. Well . . . whatta second half . . . by Lewandowski He scored at 49' (was he offside ), 82', and 93'; the last with a free kick. Barça reclaims second place.

[Sagy]

As I said previously, in real time it looked a clear penalty for me so I can understand why the ref and most refs would call it penalty. Watching the images, I have no doubt that the referee (or CR) should be alerted to revert or at least watch the images. It would be better for the game and for the referees themselves.

The standard is “clear and obvious error”, you said “or at least watch the images” this leaves room that it wasn’t an error, for sure short of “clear and obvious”. Again while I agree that some CRs might not call it a PK, the majority would call it a PK even after watching the video in slow motion. To make it clear, the purpose of VAR is not to replace “ITOOTR”, the purpose of VAR is to correct “clear and obvious errors”.

What I said was the PK would have been reverted just on VAR worlds or if the ref didn't take credit on it, it would watch the images and revert it. Watching the images and keeping the decision is bad faith.
As for your point if "watching the images" is a signal of not being "clear and obvious" Watching the images shouldn't be in protocol. Tv on the field shouldn't be there. If its "clear and obvious" the ref just takes the words upon VAR. And if "clear and obvious" why when referees go watch images they ask for this angle, that angle and so, and somes times disagrees with VAR? If its "clear and obvious" 2 people shouldn't have different understandings.

And this was one of most clearest situations. It wasn't a fault, it wasn't a PK and I am a Real Madrid supporter.

The current rule, not what we want it to be or what it should be, is that VAR has to determine that it was a “clear and obvious error” (simple translation, not something that will be considered ITOOTR) AND “The final decision is always taken by the referee”.

This means that if VAR only wants the CR to “watch the images” it has no authority to initiate an official review by the CR. For an official review to take place, VAR has to decide that a clear and obvious error has a occurred. When that happens, the CR is called to review and make a decision if they made an error or not. This is the reason they sometimes ask for different angles or different speeds. They can’t take the VAR word that a clear and obvious error has been made, the CR must make the decision if an error was made or not on their own.

As to the specific incident, even if it wasn’t a “fault” (open to discussion), it can still be a PK since the defender put themselves at risk by stretching their leg and missing the ball (“careless”). On the other side, if the defender does touch the ball before they touch the attacker (even if they trip the attacker immediately afterwards) in most cases (violent or dangerous play are exceptions) it will not be a PK.

Think of the following situation, two players are running down the field and enter the box, the attacker is in control of the ball. The lead player stops/slowdown and as a result the second player slams into the body of lead player (not enough time to change direction) and they both fall to the ground.

Clearly, the lead player initiated the contact by stopping the run. Does that mean that the call is always against the lead player? The answer is absolutely not, unless there is an obvious reason otherwise, the call will be against the defender. The attacker (the player with the ball) will get the call when they are the lead player and hit from behind (even when they are they are the one that stopped) or if the lead player was the defender and they stopped to block the attacker.

[mspm89]

Why do some Cheaters fans feel the need to engage in obvious sophistry to defend glaring errors by referees? One of two things they can't seem to comprehend: that they cheat, and how they win against better rivals sometimes even without cheating, as in the City tie.

No further comment.

[Bulgarian]

Seems like xavi is staying at barka for the next season. Our prayers have been answered after all. All hail Lord xavi may he long coach this rotting circus!!!

[mspm89]

Some forget that Xavi has the same amounts of Liga titles as Ancelotti currently, with considerably fewer seasons as coach in Spain (he's just going to get his 2nd now).

[rpo.castro]

The standard is “clear and obvious error”, you said “or at least watch the images” this leaves room that it wasn’t an error, for sure short of “clear and obvious”. Again while I agree that some CRs might not call it a PK, the majority would call it a PK even after watching the video in slow motion. To make it clear, the purpose of VAR is not to replace “ITOOTR”, the purpose of VAR is to correct “clear and obvious errors”.

What I said was the PK would have been reverted just on VAR worlds or if the ref didn't take credit on it, it would watch the images and revert it. Watching the images and keeping the decision is bad faith.
As for your point if "watching the images" is a signal of not being "clear and obvious" Watching the images shouldn't be in protocol. Tv on the field shouldn't be there. If its "clear and obvious" the ref just takes the words upon VAR. And if "clear and obvious" why when referees go watch images they ask for this angle, that angle and so, and somes times disagrees with VAR? If its "clear and obvious" 2 people shouldn't have different understandings.

And this was one of most clearest situations. It wasn't a fault, it wasn't a PK and I am a Real Madrid supporter.

The current rule, not what we want it to be or what it should be, is that VAR has to determine that it was a “clear and obvious error” (simple translation, not something that will be considered ITOOTR) AND “The final decision is always taken by the referee”.

This means that if VAR only wants the CR to “watch the images” it has no authority to initiate an official review by the CR. For an official review to take place, VAR has to decide that a clear and obvious error has a occurred. When that happens, the CR is called to review and make a decision if they made an error or not. This is the reason they sometimes ask for different angles or different speeds. They can’t take the VAR word that a clear and obvious error has been made, the CR must make the decision if an error was made or not on their own.

As to the specific incident, even if it wasn’t a “fault” (open to discussion), it can still be a PK since the defender put themselves at risk by stretching their leg and missing the ball (“careless”). On the other side, if the defender does touch the ball before they touch the attacker (even if they trip the attacker immediately afterwards) in most cases (violent or dangerous play are exceptions) it will not be a PK.

Think of the following situation, two players are running down the field and enter the box, the attacker is in control of the ball. The lead player stops/slowdown and as a result the second player slams into the body of lead player (not enough time to change direction) and they both fall to the ground.

Clearly, the lead player initiated the contact by stopping the run. Does that mean that the call is always against the lead player? The answer is absolutely not, unless there is an obvious reason otherwise, the call will be against the defender. The attacker (the player with the ball) will get the call when they are the lead player and hit from behind (even when they are they are the one that stopped) or if the lead player was the defender and they stopped to block the attacker.

A) I never said the VAR should have called "hey ref watch the images. This is a case of clear and obvious mistake. From your words, "clear and obvious mistake" isn't clear and obvious since it can be for one person and not for another. For me this is clear,and more clear error from VAR.

B) defend is not in the path, thats why the attacker moved his leg. Thats a big difference.

C) in your hypothetical scenario defender starts the contact. The attacker stopping to run or slowing down doesn't create any contact per se. You need another one not reacting fast enough. This is who creates the contact. Like vasquez moving against a sitting duck oustide his path

[Sagy]

What I said was the PK would have been reverted just on VAR worlds or if the ref didn't take credit on it, it would watch the images and revert it. Watching the images and keeping the decision is bad faith.
As for your point if "watching the images" is a signal of not being "clear and obvious" Watching the images shouldn't be in protocol. Tv on the field shouldn't be there. If its "clear and obvious" the ref just takes the words upon VAR. And if "clear and obvious" why when referees go watch images they ask for this angle, that angle and so, and somes times disagrees with VAR? If its "clear and obvious" 2 people shouldn't have different understandings.

And this was one of most clearest situations. It wasn't a fault, it wasn't a PK and I am a Real Madrid supporter.

The current rule, not what we want it to be or what it should be, is that VAR has to determine that it was a “clear and obvious error” (simple translation, not something that will be considered ITOOTR) AND “The final decision is always taken by the referee”.

This means that if VAR only wants the CR to “watch the images” it has no authority to initiate an official review by the CR. For an official review to take place, VAR has to decide that a clear and obvious error has a occurred. When that happens, the CR is called to review and make a decision if they made an error or not. This is the reason they sometimes ask for different angles or different speeds. They can’t take the VAR word that a clear and obvious error has been made, the CR must make the decision if an error was made or not on their own.

As to the specific incident, even if it wasn’t a “fault” (open to discussion), it can still be a PK since the defender put themselves at risk by stretching their leg and missing the ball (“careless”). On the other side, if the defender does touch the ball before they touch the attacker (even if they trip the attacker immediately afterwards) in most cases (violent or dangerous play are exceptions) it will not be a PK.

Think of the following situation, two players are running down the field and enter the box, the attacker is in control of the ball. The lead player stops/slowdown and as a result the second player slams into the body of lead player (not enough time to change direction) and they both fall to the ground.

Clearly, the lead player initiated the contact by stopping the run. Does that mean that the call is always against the lead player? The answer is absolutely not, unless there is an obvious reason otherwise, the call will be against the defender. The attacker (the player with the ball) will get the call when they are the lead player and hit from behind (even when they are they are the one that stopped) or if the lead player was the defender and they stopped to block the attacker.

A) I never said the VAR should have called "hey ref watch the images. This is a case of clear and obvious mistake. From your words, "clear and obvious mistake" isn't clear and obvious since it can be for one person and not for another. For me this is clear,and more clear error from VAR.

B) defend is not in the path, thats why the attacker moved his leg. Thats a big difference.

C) in your hypothetical scenario defender starts the contact. The attacker stopping to run or slowing down doesn't create any contact per se. You need another one not reacting fast enough. This is who creates the contact. Like vasquez moving against a sitting duck oustide his path

I think that A sums it all. Your view or my view makes no difference. There is a defined standard and based on it, it sounds like we both agree that VAR not telling the CR to review was error.

B is a clear case of ITOOTR, from the start I stated that different CRs can have different opinions on this case. If you claim that majority of CRs would view this as “not in the path”, I would disagree, but I would agree that a meaningful minority of CR will not call a PK. I really doubt that if a PK is called (again an ITOOTR type call) that VAR will call for a review in more than 10% of the cases.

In C you are ignoring the case in which the defender is the lead player and the one that stop the run (in hypothetical without touching or attempting to play the ball) and the attacker runs into him since he can’t avoid contact. In both cases (the one you described and this one) the lead player stops, but in both cases the call goes to the player with the ball (regardless of if the player with the ball is the lead player or not).

[AlanK]

With Jornada 33 complete--five jornadas to go--The Top and The Drop haven't changed much

1. Real Madrid------------84
2. Barça------------------73
3. Giirona----------------71
4. Atlético----------------64
-----------------------------
5. Athletic----------------58
6. Real Sociedad-----------51
-----------------------------
7. Betis------------------49
-----------------------------
-----------------------------
18. Cádiz----------------26
19. Granada--------------21
20. Almería--------------14 Mathematically dropped

[AlanK]

Jornada 34 starts

Fri. 3 May 2100 Getafe 0, Athletic 2 If Athletic doesn' t win this one, their chances of a CL spot for next season will be about gone. At 27', Iñaki Williams scores from just outside the area--0-1 and Athletic is in good shape Halftime. At 51', Nico Williams assists . . . who else--Iñaki --0-2. At 59', Yeray of Athletic sees a red card--can Getafe get back into the game At 79', Athletic is down to nine men, as Paredes sees a second yellow. At 84', pk awarded to Getafe, as Raúl García gets his elbow in the way of a shot. Greenwood takes the pk at 88', saved by Unai Simón. And Athletic holds on through about 9 minutes added time--0-2 the final.

Sat. 4 May

1400 Real Sociedad 2, Las Palmas 0 La Real could end up missing out on European fútbol next season. Las Palmas is probably safe from the drop. At 33', Suárez of Las Palmas scores an own goal--1-0. At 45'+1', Becker scores a wonderful goal to make it 2-0 at the half. 29,330 on hand. And the game ends 2-0.

1615 Real Madrid 3, Cádiz 0 Can Cádiz get something here against el Real, the latter having a near lock on first place Scoreless first half. At 51', Brahim breaks the ice for el Real--1-0. 72,654 on hand. At 68', Bellingham, on ass a sub, makes it 2-0. At 94', Joselu has a tap-in to make the final score 3-0.

1830 Girona 4, Barça 2 A win for Girona would leave them ahead of Barça in second place. Whatta start At 3', Christensen gives Barça the lead--0-1; but at 4', Dovbyk ties for Girona--1-1. At 45', VAR review says pk in favor of Barça. At 45'+1' , Lewandowski converts the pk, and it's 1-2 at the half. 14,090 in Montilivi. At 65', Sergi Roberto gives the ball away; this ends up with Portu scoring--2-2. At 67', another giveaway by Barça, and Miguel scores with the help of a friendly deflection--3-2. And at 75', Portu scores another with a volley from the corner of the area, and it's 4-2, as Barça gives away three goals in about ten minutes. And 4-2 is the final. This clinches the league title for Real Madrid and drops Barça to third place, while Girona is now league runnerup.

2100 Mallorca 0, Atlético 1 The former is six points above the drop; the latter is six points ahead of Athletic in the struggle for the last CL spot. At 5', Riquelme scores for Atleti from the balcony of the area--0-1. And that's still the score at halftime. 20,519 reported in Son Moix, Atleti holds on to win and remain six points ahead of Athletic in the struggle for the last CL spot for next season.

Sun. 5 May

1400 Osasuna-Betis The latter needs points in the quest for European fútbol next season.

1615 Celta-Villarreal Celta is six points above the drop.

1830 Valencia-Alavés Valencia is out of Europe for next season unless they come to life. Alavés is going neither up nor down.

2100 Rayo-Almería Can Rayo nearly guarantee safety from the drop with a win over already relegated Almería

2100 Sevilla-Granada Sevilla is almost safe from the drop; Granada is all but relegated.

[bugylibicska]

Girona are not fucking kidding!!! Bravo!

[amenina]

[Bulgarian]

Not even the best team from Catalunia lmao.

The title is back where it belongs.

[angel_87]

Girona are not fucking kidding!!! Bravo!

Girona is beautiful in the UCL, but there is always that question to resolve... when will we have certain news about the conflict with Manchester City regarding the same ownership??