deusex
RefChat Addict
Speaking of narratives...
I can't believe how hard you've had to work to justify some simple, inconsistent refereeing.
I'd struggle to find an Arsenal fan with this take.
Ars v Liv
- Thread starter GraemeS
- Start date
Speaking of narratives...
I can't believe how hard you've had to work to justify some simple, inconsistent refereeing.
I'd struggle to find an Arsenal fan with this take.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
You've clearly never seen AFTV
Again, and at serious risk of repeating myself, I am not saying that Jorginho and Odegaard shouldn't have been cautioned. What I am saying is that the action Elliot made was a far more obvious throwing of the arm towards the referee, we've seen multiple players cautioned for that action, including Dalot twice, so I am simply suggesting that PGMOL may have issued a directive that this action must result in a caution.
And I'm simply suggesting that the ref has messed up here on multiple occasions, by ignoring persistent dissent and clear OFFINABUS.
My suggestion is that the ref did a bad job and is based on the LOTG. Yours is that he did a good job based on a fictional PGMOL directive that you're asserting must exist and that demands he punish an arm throw and ignore persistent dissent and clear OFFINABUS.
My suggestion is that the ref did a bad job and is based on the LOTG. Yours is that he did a good job based on a fictional PGMOL directive that you're asserting must exist and that demands he punish an arm throw and ignore persistent dissent and clear OFFINABUS.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
So it was a handball. And VAR is rubbish. And missed a penalty in the biggest match of the season.
Surely that was city!
I still don't like it being handball though, especially when Webb mentioned the advantage gained by the handball which is irrelevant in law obviously
I picked up on Webb mentioning that as well. It backs up my general thoughts that "what football expects" with HB is for it to be punished when players gain an advantage from it - which is something the current HB law doesn't address well at all.
This specific HB being missed is a VAR failing. But the fact there's arguably still a case in law for it not being a HB when football clearly expects it to be so (to such an extent that the head of refereeing is willing to go on TV and condemn his own officials decisions) is a law failing.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
I agree. The vast majority of what is said on the programme is really clear, helpful and should lead to greater law insight. But the occasional 'slip' like this can be severely damaging, especially when it reinforces the current mis-perception that gaining an advantage from an accidental handball is an issue.
@GraemeS, I still don't see it as a law failing in the slightest. The concept that (so long as your arms are in a natural position for the body movement being undertaken and a goal is not scored) the ball hitting the arm is NOT an offence is actually a (relatively) simple one. Were we to introduce the idea that gaining an advantage from an accidental handball is an offence (rather than just the 'rub of the green') then a) we'd see way more free kicks / penalties for HB and b) referees would have yet another consideration to factor in. IMO we would quickly end up in a situation where the majority of defensive accidental handballs in penalty areas led to penalties ... cue outrage that it's 'not fair' on the defenders, calls for further law changes and the vicious cycle of tinkering with this law would continue ....
Is that a "mis-perception" or is that actually what most naturally "feels" like handball to any experienced football fan? I don't think we need to completely get rid of all the current considerations in favour of looking only at the outcome, but I think it's pretty clear that the outcome is absolutely part of what makes any particular incident "feel" like handball to the majority of fans. And I think a lot of the current considerations are poorly-thought-through attempts to replicate that, and could easily be binned off if the actual correct issue was identified and built into the laws.
Are the laws prescriptive or descriptive? For me, the correct answer is that they need to be prescriptive when it comes to safety, but based on 100+ years of football history, should probably be descriptive when it comes to defining what counts as "fair play". I don't want the lawmakers to sit in a board room somewhere and try to tell the footballing world what they think handball should be - I want to them to listen to what the football world thinks handball is and try to do a better job of codifying that in a way that it can be applied consistently.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Totally understand where you are coming from. And I agree that the majority of fans (and players) believe that gaining an advantage from accidental handball is unfair ... when it is the opposition that gain the advantage! If it's their own defender throwing themselves to block a shot and inadvertently stopping a goalbound shot with their arm then those same fans would be outraged at a penalty being given 
.
And whilst you talk about 'codifying in a way that can be applied consistently' you haven't answered the point that when everyone realises that we are ending up getting copious penalties from totally accidental handling, they'll soon be crying out for further change / a change back
. And whilst you talk about 'codifying in a way that can be applied consistently' you haven't answered the point that when everyone realises that we are ending up getting copious penalties from totally accidental handling, they'll soon be crying out for further change / a change back
We get a lot of penalties from completely accidental handball currently, I don't think that's a fair framing!Totally understand where you are coming from. And I agree that the majority of fans (and players) believe that gaining an advantage from accidental handball is unfair ... when it is the opposition that gain the advantage! If it's their own defender throwing themselves to block a shot and inadvertently stopping a goalbound shot with their arm then those same fans would be outraged at a penalty being given
And whilst you talk about 'codifying in a way that can be applied consistently' you haven't answered the point that when everyone realises that we are ending up getting copious penalties from totally accidental handling, they'll soon be crying out for further change / a change back
I think you'll get rid of a lot of current penalties as well with a change along these lines. If we allow for no penalty in some cases when the ball is otherwise going directly out of play or to the GK, or is actually blocking a clearance or would have hit the players body anyway if they had no arms, there are potentially quite a few of what are currently seen as "soft" penalties that could go away.
I'm not saying I've totally thought it through and I definitely don't have a full and complete new law wording in my back pocket! But I am confident that this disconnect and the fact law doesn't care about outcomes is the reason for a lot of why people are unhappy with HB as it is.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Got it - understand better what you're thinking. As @es1 says, would need careful framing. One suggestion would be to penalise any contact with hand / arm that either created or stopped a promising attack or OGSO .. at least that wouldn't add to the existing contextual thinking that officials already have to do. We'd have to avoid the double whammy of also sanctioning (YC/RC) these impactful accidental HBs.
Overall though, I remain firm in my view that the current wording is as simple / fair as it can be. We penalise players who put their arms in unnatural positions and we don't penalise those who play in a natural fashion. Simples
. Sure, this allows BOTH teams to potentially benefit from the 'rub of the green' but trying to remove this element from the game, for me loses some of it's charm.I honestly think that whatever they do with handball wording will just move the issue from one area and put it somewhere else. Unless they just say if it hits the hand or arm it is an offence, which would see attackers trying to kick the ball at defenders' arms, it is always going to be the most subjective and in the opinion of the referee decision in football. There's a lot more words in the law now, but this has led to handling incidents being penalised when they almost certainly wouldn't have been back when the law just left it down to the referee to determine if any handling was intentional or accidental.
bester
RefChat Addict
99% of grassroots referees I see give handball any time someone gains an advantage from an accidental handball outside the penalty area. This forum is a massive outlier and/or posters don't necessarily practice what they type.
Even when an advantage isn't gained the majority of referees give handball any time the ball hits the hand.
Even when an advantage isn't gained the majority of referees give handball any time the ball hits the hand.