A&H

Champions League Final

Sheffields Finest said:
I was thinking of any scenarios where this could be given as HB 247365... and I failed....
Intentional - No
Deflected - Yes
Arm position - He’s pointing not deliberately attempting to HB
Unexpected - Yes
Proximity - Too close
Actual Handball - No

Peter Walton should retire today and go assessing County FA boot cleanliness parades! Complete yes man!
Click to expand...
My statement was based on whether i'd expect a penalty (UEFA ref etc), not on whether it should be a penalty. I was also handing out my telephone number in case anyone wished to discuss it further ;)
 
The Referee Store
Big Cat said:
My statement was based on whether i'd expect a penalty (UEFA ref etc), not on whether it should be a penalty. I was also handing out my telephone number in case anyone wished to discuss it further ;)
Click to expand...
You come up as 666 on my phone @Big Cat, have you upgraded to a bigger network 🤔
 
RustyRef said:
There's nothing underneath it. Don't know why they do it, but I've seen loads of occasions where they peel it off as they are being subbed at the end of the game and there is nothing underneath. Also had it with players when I have been refereeing and they don't have anything under it.
Click to expand...
Yeah some of them don't have anything under. More do at the higher levels. But many of them do.
 
Tealeaf said:
In real time it looked nailed on. On the image posted not so. On the reverse angle again it looked nailed on.

As for the Son handball it looked similar so the approach was consistent throughout.
Click to expand...
It will only be seen to be consistent when it's the same for both sides.
 
It's a European competition with a European ref and a European VAR - in that context, 100% penalty.
 
IMHO, the problem is a lack of clarity it what a HB is supposed to be. And then the rewrite this year talks about what is “usually” a HB offense. That to me is a fundamental failure in drafting, as it is descriptive rather than proscriptive, and fails to give clear guidance. While I have opinions on what the Laws should make a handling offense, I would more like to see clarity. A HB in England should be a handball in Italy should be a HB in Nigeria should be a HB in the US.
 
IFAB seem stuck between pandering to commercial influences, a dated descriptive form of the rules and way too many contributors [edited out]

unless you are providing evidential proof of such an allegation or will willingly defend yourself in court - don’t go there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
socal lurker said:
IMHO, the problem is a lack of clarity it what a HB is supposed to be. And then the rewrite this year talks about what is “usually” a HB offense. That to me is a fundamental failure in drafting, as it is descriptive rather than proscriptive, and fails to give clear guidance. While I have opinions on what the Laws should make a handling offense, I would more like to see clarity. A HB in England should be a handball in Italy should be a HB in Nigeria should be a HB in the US.
Click to expand...
I'd suggest the rewrite this year does exactly that - it takes what's currently being given as HB in Europe and writes the law to match. Only time will tell how clear this rewrite is, how well it is adopted by countries who have to adapt and how much standardisation it actually leads to, but the intent seems to me to be pretty much as you describe?
 
Consistency will be the key. If they don't show the match referee the angle that shows the "handball" (or other angles) it will not stop the controversies (let alone the conspiracies!).
 
GraemeS said:
I'd suggest the rewrite this year does exactly that - it takes what's currently being given as HB in Europe and writes the law to match. Only time will tell how clear this rewrite is, how well it is adopted by countries who have to adapt and how much standardisation it actually leads to, but the intent seems to me to be pretty much as you describe?
Click to expand...

I don't think it does at all. It talks about what is "usually" a handball. Some are going to think "usually" means "always." Some (methinks especially in England . . .)are going to take it as "more often than not but I still decide what is deliberate." None of the "usually" stuff is offered as an exception to "deliberate"--the exceptions are only for the attacker and goal scoring/opportunity. So the "usually" stuff is saying when that stuff happens, it is usually deliberate. I just don't see it as express enough to lead to the consistency that we hope for.
 
socal lurker said:
I don't think it does at all. It talks about what is "usually" a handball. Some are going to think "usually" means "always." Some (methinks especially in England . . .)are going to take it as "more often than not but I still decide what is deliberate." None of the "usually" stuff is offered as an exception to "deliberate"--the exceptions are only for the attacker and goal scoring/opportunity. So the "usually" stuff is saying when that stuff happens, it is usually deliberate. I just don't see it as express enough to lead to the consistency that we hope for.
Click to expand...
Yes....just more fudge......
 
Big Cat said:
IFAB seem stuck between pandering to commercial influences, a dated descriptive form of the rules and way too many contributors [edited out]

unless you are providing evidential proof of such an allegation or will willingly defend yourself in court - don’t go there.
Click to expand...
'Seem' being the operative word
I'll try to juggle opinions and fact with a touch more tact :bag:
 
socal lurker said:
I don't think it does at all. It talks about what is "usually" a handball. Some are going to think "usually" means "always." Some (methinks especially in England . . .)are going to take it as "more often than not but I still decide what is deliberate." None of the "usually" stuff is offered as an exception to "deliberate"--the exceptions are only for the attacker and goal scoring/opportunity. So the "usually" stuff is saying when that stuff happens, it is usually deliberate. I just don't see it as express enough to lead to the consistency that we hope for.
Click to expand...
As I said, I'm perfectly open to the idea that the rewrite might not work, but I don't think that changes the intention/thinking behind it?
 
What does it matter the position of his arm in this instance ?

Even if his arm is by his side the ball hits the place on the arm that it would hit no matter what position the arm.

If his arms are out and it hits his hand then thats ok penalty but it didn't and it shouldn't have been given for me.
 
spuddy1878 said:
What does it matter the position of his arm in this instance ?

Even if his arm is by his side the ball hits the place on the arm that it would hit no matter what position the arm.

If his arms are out and it hits his hand then thats ok penalty but it didn't and it shouldn't have been given for me.
Click to expand...
Disagree. This is not the way you should determine deliberate handball. It's like saying, a handball was deliberate but I did not give it because even if it was not deliberate the ball would have hit hand anyway.

What if it would have hit the arm/hand anyway (even if not deliberate) but he uses his arm, in its natural position, to deliberately pass the ball to a team mate. Too many issues with that logic for me.
 
one said:
Disagree. This is not the way you should determine deliberate handball. It's like saying, a handball was deliberate but I did not give it because even if it was not deliberate the ball would have hit hand anyway.

What if it would have hit the arm/hand anyway (even if not deliberate) but he uses his arm, in its natural position, to deliberately pass the ball to a team mate. Too many issues with that logic for me.
Click to expand...
What does tha law say though, it fails on virtually every facet
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top