It's a shame Champions League isn't on cable this season in Canada, because some fans don't know what they're missing: they would be so thrilled to watch these games!
While I focused on the Porto vs Liverpool game due to Portuguese connections, it's become apparent that I was clearly watching the second best game of the afternoon. I only caught the last five minutes of the Man City-Tottenham match, and what a match it was! There were 7 goals that counted on the day, and Tottenham moves onto the Champions League semi-final to face Ajax. Yes, either Ajax or Tottenham will be in the Champions League final! Who had that?
But the game today raised a few questions that I believe are to be the key factors coming out of this match: were the right calls made by VAR? I watched the highlights, and for me that Tottenham goal number 3 appeared to not be a handball. The arm was glued to the body, I can't look at that and say it shouldn't be counted as a goal. I've heard the argument that because of the length of the preceding kick (a corner) the player had time to react and hide the arm. But my question is hide the arm where? It's an arm, you can't just detach it from your body for free kicks and penalty area calls. Plus, for me even if it touched the elbow/arm I thought it deflected off Llorente's leg and in. It was the right call.
As for the 93rd minute VAR decision to call no goal, you have to look at various angles. I hate to say it, but it's the right call to say no goal. Aguero is a foot ahead of the final defender. The great thing with Champions League is the stadiums of these teams are equipped with the best positions to place the technology. VAR is here to make black and white plays black and white. It helps remove a bit of the grey area. For me, when it's a high technology stadium with well-positioned lines, 10 times out of 10 the VAR decision on offsides needs to be the ultimate decision. There should be ZERO grey area on these calls. It's either offside or it's not. When it comes to calling penalties, that's where the line is a bit more difficult. The rules on handballs in the area are being revised, but they need to be revised in a way that is easy for fans to understand.
I'm going to put it in very simple terms: we need VAR because fans have been questioning the grey area. So if you're going to use VAR, you need to have the rules explained to the fans so that they can understand why the call was made. I don't understand why referees don't do this in the first place. When a referee makes a decision, we should be able to understand their thinking process behind the decision based on their interpretation of a rule. The same way we hear coaches, we should hear referees.
Now back to the football aspect of all this. In the first leg of the Liverpool vs Porto match, there was a potential red card for Salah when he fouled. Nothing was called on the field by the ref. This means that based on the rules, VAR must rule that this is a red-card offence. If you go to the FIFA Rules Book from page 108 in the section Serious Foul Play, it states:
"A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play."
This is very open ended. First question I have is: what defines excessive force? Second part is a challenge for the ball from the front, side or behind using excessive force is a serious foul play. Serious foul play is a sending-off offence. As far as I understood the instructions, VAR should have intervened and advised the referee of a potential red card situation. Then, the referee had to see on his monitor and determine this was a red card. Possible reasons it wasn't a red card according to the referee: the term excessive force. I think the referee determined Salah was going for the ball and didn't use excessive force. But I go back to the old NHL debate: if a player lays down injured on the field, you're more likely to call it. I'm not talking a fake injury, I'm talking a real 'I'm gonna be out' injury.
It's been an ongoing debate about the severity of an injury should play into the ultimate decision of what the referee decides. I'll relate it to our court system: If someone uses a gun and shoots someone in the chest. If the person dies, they're more likely to be tried differently than if that person lives healthily. The truth is this will be an issue for years and years to come. But I really do think VAR is a step in the right direction.
The four teams in the semi-finals deserve to be here, congrats to them.
Next: Stanley Cup Playoffs. What happened to the Lightning and Penguins?
There is no clear-cut answer as to what happened to the most dominant Eastern Conference team of the 2010s and to what was being called the most dominant regular season team ever. Let's start with the Lightning. Every year, we hear that teams must go through adversity in order to learn how to win the Cup. There is one fact about the Lightning I could never overlook and led me to pick the Jackets: the Lightning didn't have a single Cup winner on the team. It's great that you have so much talent, and it's great that you had a dominant regular season. But the Blue Jackets, even though they were the last team in from the East, had just acquired some valuable pieces at the deadline and at one point last season won a historic 13 straight games. They've been a playoff team, this didn't come out of nowhere. This is going to be the end of Bobrovsky and Panarin, who are UFA's and are playing for new contracts. John Tortorella is a Stanley Cup winning coach. He's done it all and seems to be the right fit in a place with not so much media for him to get into trouble.
So getting to the Tampa vs Jackets series. Tampa has known for about 3 months they'll be the 1 seed in the playoffs. They've been saving players and getting ready for a long playoff run. Columbus didn't know they'd be there until two games left in the season, when Montreal was officially eliminated. Columbus had to work hard and play playoff hockey to make it. When one team is battling hard and the other team is coasting, it's going to take the other team some time to get up to speed. Columbus had UFA players with mediocre seasons (especially Bobrovsky) who want to get paid and have something to prove. Before the series, it was discussed that the only way Columbus beats Tampa is by riding a hot goalie. Columbus took this one, Tampa assumed they would get past Columbus and took their foot off of the accelerator. They probably would have been more up to playing Toronto or Boston, the two teams that they've known about for the entire season as their main rivals in the East. Tampa clearly didn't play to their potential, and went home early.
The Islanders, on the other hand, deserve tonnes of credit for the incredible team they've put together. Similar to Columbus, they have UFAs that want to get paid and have something to prove. Lehner, Lee and Eberle are players that are going to get PAID this summer. When you have something extra to play for, you put more on the line. Barry Trotz has faced Mike Sullivan's team four straight years in the playoffs. He knows the Penguins forward and back. But I think something I certainly didn't take into account, but needs to be discussed, is stagnation. If I'm doing the same job for years, I do it without thinking and get into habits. I see a Penguins team that are so used to each other that they've become stagnant. There's no improvement, it's just repetition. That plays into Trotz's hands. He's aware they're playing the exact same way, he can prepare a game plan for it. Should be interesting to see how both these teams deal with a long layoff waiting for their playoff opponents.
As for the Bruins and Leafs series, it's been a back and forth battle. We are now tied 2-2 in the series, and what I've noted is the intelligence of the two Leafs losses. The narratives placed by Leaf fans with their social media presence created two stories on their losses that hid their weaker performances. Game 2 they used Kadri and his cross-check to the face to try to mask the struggles of that game. Game 4 they used Drake's curse to mask the issues of allowing 5.
There are two Leafs teams: the ones that come out early and take control of the game, and the ones who don't. It's that simple. Most games this season you knew by the first period if the Leafs were going to win the game. In fact, the Leafs are 38-0-1 all season when leading after 2. They're not so good when their opponent takes a lead. Boston knew they had to get to the Leafs early. Things aren't all that bad with this team, but I look at them and find that Babcock at times is stubborn and will not change things up. He trusts his veterans at the last minute of the game when he should be putting the most skill out there to win it. Even in the games they win, I disagree with Zaitsev out there with a minute left. Zaitsev has so many issues clearing the puck from his own end. This could be a deciding point in the series.
The NBA playoffs are a whole different story. Look at the Raptors and their game 1 loss. What happened? They pulled a Tampa in my opinion, they overlooked the opponent and prepared for a long term run. The Raptors game 2 could be a representation of what is to come when this team is on it. I expect more efforts like this, and I don't see any reason the Raptors can't still take this. Stealing a game in Orlando is a necessity so expect the same intensity game 3. Don't let them get any momentum back!
This is the best time of year! Let's enjoy the ride!
Comments