- Jan 23, 2006
- 27,010
- 45,321
I didn't pass an opinion on the var controversy before as I hadn't actually seen it but had got the impression that the ball had brushed a stationary Laporte on its way to Jesus but having seen it that wasn't the case at all. Laporte was moving forward leaning forward in an attempt to make contact with the ball with his arm slightly in front of him and he did make contact with the ball.
I don't know that he intentionally handballed it but he was in that position intentionally.
As for it brushing his arm that wasn't the case, his arm struck the ball with enough force to prevent it continuing it's course to the edge of the box and directed it to Jesus.
I appreciate that it was missed by the officials and would have been a goal in previous years and it's a shame for City but I genuinely don't see how anyone can say it wasn't handball. On MotD last night they were adament that it wouldn't have been given if it had hit the defender's arm but I am pretty sure they would have shown it again a few times and argued it was a penalty but City would have appealed for it anyway and var would have given it. All in all a lot of bluster about this but ultimately var got it right.
I don't know that he intentionally handballed it but he was in that position intentionally.
As for it brushing his arm that wasn't the case, his arm struck the ball with enough force to prevent it continuing it's course to the edge of the box and directed it to Jesus.
I appreciate that it was missed by the officials and would have been a goal in previous years and it's a shame for City but I genuinely don't see how anyone can say it wasn't handball. On MotD last night they were adament that it wouldn't have been given if it had hit the defender's arm but I am pretty sure they would have shown it again a few times and argued it was a penalty but City would have appealed for it anyway and var would have given it. All in all a lot of bluster about this but ultimately var got it right.