arbitre
Active Member
Uefa backs VAR decision that gave Man Utd penalty against PSG
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/47495707
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/47495707
Uefa backs VAR decision that gave Man Utd penalty against PSG
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/47495707
I understand where you’re coming from, but this feels like we would have to give a penalty/free kick every time the ball hits a players arm when they are attempting to block a shot or cross because they are deliberately trying to do thatHandling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. Who doesn't agree with that?
The block was a deliberate act of a player. Agree or not?
During that block the ball made contact with the hand or arm. Once again true?
Looks like it matches the basic definition of handling the ball to me.
The next three bullet points are considerations.
For me, it is not ball towards hand nor is it unexpected ball.
Like it or not, there's a reasoning behind the decision which leads you to handball.
The majority appear to consider that the "deliberate act" is related to the act of handling the ball. That's a reasonable assumption as it comes in the definition of "Handling the ball". But what if the real meaning of a "deliberate act" is much wider than that? E.g. a block, a sliding tackle, a headed challenge (some examples, could be more). This broader scope of "deliberate act" could provide some explanation for a fair number of these handball decisions after VAR.I understand where you’re coming from, but this feels like we would have to give a penalty/free kick every time the ball hits a players arm when they are attempting to block a shot or cross because they are deliberately trying to do that
If a defender turns his/her back on a shot they are by definition not in a natural position. By jumping and making their body bigger they are also in an unnatural position. So for me it's a stonewall penalty. We have to remember that VAR is intolerant to subjective views and will enforce the laws.
Egg chasers have similar issues with grey area calls.... especially offside at a ruckI might turn to Rugby
That's because it's the ref's call and s/he is invariably too close to the ruck to see it.......Egg chasers have similar issues with grey area calls.... especially offside at a ruck
If a defender turns his/her back on a shot they are by definition not in a natural position. By jumping and making their body bigger they are also in an unnatural position. So for me it's a stonewall penalty. We have to remember that VAR is intolerant to subjective views and will enforce the laws.
What is a natural position when something is coming at you at 80mph?
You know, I think these players have only themselves to blame. No one made them play football, so perhaps the act of choosing to step onto a football pitch and engage in a game of football can be considered a deliberate act, such taht any hand-to-ball contact after that has to be handball?The majority appear to consider that the "deliberate act" is related to the act of handling the ball. That's a reasonable assumption as it comes in the definition of "Handling the ball". But what if the real meaning of a "deliberate act" is much wider than that? E.g. a block, a sliding tackle, a headed challenge (some examples, could be more). This broader scope of "deliberate act" could provide some explanation for a fair number of these handball decisions after VAR.
Can't say I agree with it but trying to put forward a reasoned explanation albeit a minority one.
A drum I have beaten on many an occasion on here. It is not the intent of the player i.e. their meaning to handball but a deliberate act that results in the ball being handled - that is how it is worded.It follows the logical argument that @McTavish was presenting. I think it makes sense.
I feel like the argument only goes round in circles as people are zoning in on 'deliberate handball', and not considering the deliberate action that results in a handball. The former is too narrow, the latter is more holistic (or too wide, if you want to argue that way.)
Still looking forward to the revised rules anyway though.
This is my understanding/interpretation too Again, albeit a minority.The majority appear to consider that the "deliberate act" is related to the act of handling the ball. That's a reasonable assumption as it comes in the definition of "Handling the ball". But what if the real meaning of a "deliberate act" is much wider than that? E.g. a block, a sliding tackle, a headed challenge (some examples, could be more). This broader scope of "deliberate act" could provide some explanation for a fair number of these handball decisions after VAR.
Can't say I agree with it but trying to put forward a reasoned explanation albeit a minority one.
I don't know why they can't test in a test environment i. e. Get 22 men or women to play a few games of footy in secret and see what works. Wording is great until you ask people to interpret it. When testing against interpretations can be done in the correct environment.
By jumping in front of the shot and at the same time turning your back to the ball you are deliberately moving your arm towards the ball...View attachment 3239
You've got to deliberately push your arm to the ball for it to be a deliberate action... The arm position is wholly natural...
The IFAB, UEFA, and the head of referees Roberto Rosetti all clearly state that it was a penalty, and Master Po agrees!View attachment 3243
Think long and hard about how that makes no sense whatsoever....