A&H

Hamilton V Celtic -Handball not Given

RustyRef said:
In your opinion. In other's, including an ex-FIFA referee, it isn't. That is why the handball law is a mess that needs sorting out.
Click to expand...
I've used that argument before, but it's a massively flawed one. How many times have ex-referees said the most outrageously wrong things as pundits? How many times have current FIFA referees made outrageous mistakes?
 
The Referee Store
JH said:
I've used that argument before, but it's a massively flawed one. How many times have ex-referees said the most outrageously wrong things as pundits? How many times have current FIFA referees made outrageous mistakes?
Click to expand...

A bit different here as Dermot is a senior observer and is employed to make comments specifically on law decisions.

To answer Big Cat's comment, I gave very few handball decisions when I was a senior referee, I can think of only one penalty for handling over a ten year period, and that was so obvious there wasn't a whimper of protest. But I was consistent with it, I had to be 100% sure that the handling was deliberate and if I didn't think it was I wouldn't give it. Over the past two supply league observations I have backed the referees for not giving penalties for handling on three occasions, they didn't believe it was intentional and I agreed with them.

If FIFA change the law I will change my views accordingly, but at the moment it clearly says it has to be deliberate, which means it has to be intentional, which means if it accidentally strikes the arms or hands that should not be penalised. If the hands are above the head, or otherwise in a position I wouldn't expect, I get that you can say they have intentionally handled, but I agree with Dermot here that the player was just trying to get back up.
 
I'm am with @JH on this. I don't believe anyone not considering this a deliberate handball. Old law, new law, current law, future law... Reverse angle, front angle, side angle... This is deliberate. Even the player knows it's deliberate. He dives and moves his hand forward. What else do you need?

I am beginning to understand how the world cup statisticians came up with 99.7% VAR accuracy :)
 
As much as Dermot can have his say and as glittering as career as he had, Ellery could be sitting in his house watching it going, pen
So whilst due respect is given to someone's view on it, we only know his view because he is asked for it. If 10 ex FIFA refs tell me that's not a pk then I would be listening, but, one, no, does not sway me in any way that this is not a pk
 
On the referee's angle which is obviously blocked, it actually is not too bad of a position given that the next phase of play is in the centre of PA or far post.

You can be in the best theoretical position but right at the critical moment a player blocks your view. It's just sheer bad luck. Yes he could have been a few yards to the left but that's just hindsight because the blocking player could have also been a few yards to the left. And the left position would have meant a poorer vision on any incidents after a cross to the far post which was about to happen.
 
one said:
On the referee's angle which is obviously blocked, it actually is not too bad of a position given that the next phase of play is in the centre of PA or far post.

You can be in the best theoretical position but right at the critical moment a player blocks your view. It's just sheer bad luck. Yes he could have been a few yards to the left but that's just hindsight because the blocking player could have also been a few yards to the left. And the left position would have meant a poorer vision on any incidents after a cross to the far post which was about to happen.
Click to expand...


I disagree. Whilst of course its great to be ready for the next phase of play, you need to deal with the current one first !!!!!
Chronological order.....
 
RustyRef said:
but at the moment it clearly says it has to be deliberate, which means it has to be intentional.
Click to expand...

I've said this on many occasions but the current wording does not ask you to judge intent. It asks you to judge whether the player made a deliberate act that made contact with the ball with the hand or arm.

There is a real difference between intent to handball, and the actual wording in the lotg.

There are plenty of handball offences where the player can say they did not intend to handball but they have committed a handball offence.
 
So, some are saying the ball was just kicked into him while he was trying to get up, others are saying he clearly lunged with his arm towards the ball (I agree on that one).

HOWEVER - don't forget that the top tier referees have been receiving instructions that if the defenders slides to block, there's no such thing as accidental handling.

So I guess that means that one's interpretation of the actions are somewhat irrelevant...
 
The Law is daft. It's based on deliberate, but the clarifications don't really reflect intent
@RustyRef , I also give few HB decisions based on the deliberate criteria. However, in this case the motion of the arm is mighty dubious, so I'm giving it without doubt on that basis
 
Have actually watched the video now and I am struggling to see how people are arguing for no handball. Even in realtime the double movement Minty spots in slow mo is clear to see.
 
Having just spent the morning in the company of someone close to the club, the defender fully expected a pk to be given and was in fact attempting to hold his face in a desperate attempt to make it look like the ball hit his face.

So, from the defender himself, he handled it
 
Mintyref said:
...if football really does expect then correct the law......quite simple really any hand ball is an offence, solves everything.
Click to expand...
Actually it does not. It would end up with constant blasting of balls into the PA in hopes of the merest accidental flick off a defender's arm. The phrase deliberate has hung around the Laws for a very long time for a good reason. What we have is not perfect but a blanket "hits an arm it's a handball offence" would lead to chaos.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
I still like, handles and gains an advantage

Deliberate or not, folk would expect the game to be stopped if someone used a hand to gain an advantage.
Click to expand...
That still falls flat when someone pastes a ball at a player from behind, they have no idea it's coming, it hits their arm, and falls perfectly to their feet...
 
AlexF said:
That still falls flat when someone pastes a ball at a player from behind, they have no idea it's coming, it hits their arm, and falls perfectly to their feet...
Click to expand...


Agreed. I just feel though it would be an improvement on second guessing a players actions.
 
Penalty for me, player intentionally dives infront of the ball.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bs21jr/sportscene-25112018

Skip to 49:50 for various camera angles. 50:08 is the best to see how the player intentionally dives infront of the ball - he does not just attempt to get up. For me, 50:15 also shows the referee had a perfectly clear view of the incident. You don't need an angle from there (and can see 1) from the angle of the camera behind the ref and 2) the players reaction) that he deliberately handled the ball.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top