QPR v Sunderland

[socal lurker]

Thanks everyone.

The timing of the flag is the big mystery here.

Its late if it is for Austin (Most likely), very very late if its for Adomah and really not at all credible if its for Dykes - the last one would also be wrong in law as he hasn't played the ball or prevented an opponent....etc etc

Agreed. The timing suggests to me either (1) the AR had an (incorrect) "oh $%#$$#" moment realizing (incorrectly) that he should have flagged and hadn't, or (2) there was some communication between the AR and R over the coms that caused the flag to come when it did. It's just really hard to figure out where the mistake came from.

 

[PinnerPaul]

Agreed. The timing suggests to me either (1) the AR had an (incorrect) "oh $%#$$#" moment realizing (incorrectly) that he should have flagged and hadn't, or (2) there was some communication between the AR and R over the coms that caused the flag to come when it did. It's just really hard to figure out where the mistake came from.

To add to the mystery, the referee actually signalled the goal, which doesn't look like there was any desire from him to disallow it.

 

[RustyRef]

Think people are reading too much into what might have happened. If it was in the Premier League where they delay the flag I could understand thinking it might have been for an earlier offence, but there's absolutely no reason to delay without VAR, which can only really mean it was for the final action.

 

[PinnerPaul]

Think people are reading too much into what might have happened. If it was in the Premier League where they delay the flag I could understand thinking it might have been for an earlier offence, but there's absolutely no reason to delay without VAR, which can only really mean it was for the final action.

Sure that's right, but still doesn't explain the delay - long enough for Keith Stroud to signal for the goal - as SL says probably just human error x 2 - it happens.

QPR then took 3 of the worse penalties you will see ( 2 miles over the bar) in the shoot out - human error once more - most of my fellow fans obviously don't see it that way of course!

 

[one]

This can only be one of these

1. Handball - penalty and send off
2. Advantage from 1. and a goal
3. A referee (AR) error

If it's not 1 or 2 then it must be 3.

 

[JamesL]

This can only be one of these

1. Handball - penalty and send off
2. Advantage from 1. and a goal
3. A referee (AR) error

View attachment 5272


If it's not 1 or 2 then it must be 3.

That's not the point of contact though...
I still think handball is very debatable.

 

[one]

That's not the point of contact though...
I still think handball is very debatable.

View attachment 5273

Draw a line from the shooting foot to the location of the ball in my pic and then to the location of the ball to your pick for the flight path of the ball. You'd see the almost right angle it has to travel to get there. It may have hit him on the shoulder, but it was rebound from his forearm.

It makes it easier to see my point on flight path if you watch the YouTube clip in high def and at 0.25 speed. Not sure if this is geo blocked. The incident is at 5:30.

 

[Trip]

Draw a line from the shooting foot to the location of the ball in my pic

The foot will have moved much too far since striking the ball for that technique to be useful.

Given the still in James's post I suspect the ball makes contact with an area of the arm that straddles both the part below and above the line level with the armpit. But I would not be certain enough to award a penalty.

 

[Big Cat]

That's not the point of contact though...
I still think handball is very debatable.

View attachment 5273

With the defender's overall action resembling that of an expert goalkeeper, resulting in what would otherwise be described as a 'great save', I'd like to see the consequences of failing to identify a DOGSO-HB and PK in a Contrib Game. Rather you than me... with the on-field, armpit, shirtsleeve debate

Not to mention, it's a 'dirty mackem' doing the De Gea impersonation

 

[JamesL]

With the defender's overall action resembling that of an expert goalkeeper, resulting in what would otherwise be described as a 'great save', I'd like to see the consequences of failing to identify a DOGSO-HB and PK in a Contrib Game. Rather you than me... with the on-field, armpit, shirtsleeve debate

Not to mention, it's a 'dirty mackem' doing the De Gea impersonation

I'm not saying it is or it isn't, I'm leaning towards not, because the best guess I have is that this is in the no HB zone. But the truthful answer is I don't know and nothing I have seen has truly convinced me otherwise.
But to say its clear is not true because its about as clear as the images that anyone has provided to say it is or isn't. Note the fuzziness of said pictures.

Any referee awarding this, in real time, is guessing. And I'd reverse your comment regarding consequences of awarding this as a dogso hb in a Contrib game. Rather you than me. Because I'm telling you now the other 11 players will be even more unhappy than the ones that didn't get the decision.

1 things that's striking here, and it could be as a result of what follows, but not one appeal for handball. At this level, irrespective of what follows, that is as unusual as the decision to call offside.

 

[PinnerPaul]

I'm not saying it is or it isn't, I'm leaning towards not, because the best guess I have is that this is in the no HB zone. But the truthful answer is I don't know and nothing I have seen has truly convinced me otherwise.
But to say its clear is not true because its about as clear as the images that anyone has provided to say it is or isn't. Note the fuzziness of said pictures.

Any referee awarding this, in real time, is guessing. And I'd reverse your comment regarding consequences of awarding this as a dogso hb in a Contrib game. Rather you than me. Because I'm telling you now the other 11 players will be even more unhappy than the ones that didn't get the decision.

1 things that's striking here, and it could be as a result of what follows, but not one appeal for handball. At this level, irrespective of what follows, that is as unusual as the decision to call offside.

Adomah (the guy who took the shot) DID appeal.

 

[JamesL]

Adomah (the guy who took the shot) DID appeal.

Missed that lol

 

[PinnerPaul]

I think that 30 seconds will be ingrained in me for a long time!

 

[one]

The foot will have moved much too far since striking the ball for that technique to be useful.

Given the still in James's post I suspect the ball makes contact with an area of the arm that straddles both the part below and above the line level with the armpit. But I would not be certain enough to award a penalty.

Don't want sound persistent on this but I give it one more try.

It's not just that technique, I can look at it a number of ways and it all points to ball striking the forearm first. Forget about the foot, just connect the ball in the two images on a straight line and extend the line. The line would end up just in front of the defender (almost vertical).

As I said looking at super slow Mo (quarter speed in youtube of an already slowed down replay) also shows a short almost vertical movement of the ball.

There is also just the two still images by themselves. Fast moving objects in still images of a video have directional blur. I am not an SME in this but I know it is due to a rendering technique used in video rendering. Zoom into the two images at the ball. If you look at my still image the direction of blur is from the attacker to the defender (direction of shot towards goal). If you look at James' image the direction blur is almost vertical as if it is rebound from forearm to shoulder.

 

[Big Cat]

Because I'm telling you now the other 11 players will be even more unhappy than the ones that didn't get the decision

And... I'm telling you... 'you're wrong!'
Wronger than wrong. Really, quite wrong

 

[JamesL]

And... I'm telling you... 'you're wrong!'
Wronger than wrong. Really, quite wrong

Honestly? You reckon a team that didn't get a very marginal handball decision are going to be unhappier than a team that are now playing a man down and conceding a penalty?

I reckon I have a better shot of selling this struck the shoulder than I do of being certain that this is a HB offence, On a contrib game.

Don't want sound persistent on this but I give it one more try.

It's not just that technique, I can look at it a number of ways and it all points to ball striking the forearm first. Forget about the foot, just connect the ball in the two images on a straight line and extend the line. The line would end up just in front of the defender (almost vertical).

As I said looking at super slow Mo (quarter speed in youtube of an already slowed down replay) also shows a short almost vertical movement of the ball.

There is also just the two still images by themselves. Fast moving objects in still images of a video have directional blur. I am not an SME in this but I know it is due to a rendering technique used in video rendering. Zoom into the two images at the ball. If you look at my still image the direction of blur is from the attacker to the defender (direction of shot towards goal). If you look at James' image the direction blur is almost vertical as if it is rebound from forearm to shoulder.

This entire post sums up my point exactly.
We're having to dissect this to very minute detail, detail we simply don't have to conclude something that's just not very clear.
It's great we can slow this down and maybe decipher what happens, but full speed, real time, no chance. Its a guess.
I don't even believe VAR would have much interest to get involved. The technology needed to determine conclusively the exact point of contact isn't in use.
As I have said I am leaning towards no HB. I'm not saying it is or it isn't because really none of us know but from what I see it looks more like the no HB zone.

 

[one]

This entire post sums up my point exactly.
We're having to dissect this to very minute detail, detail we simply don't have to conclude something that's just not very clear.
It's great we can slow this down and maybe decipher what happens, but full speed, real time, no chance. Its a guess.
I don't even believe VAR would have much interest to get involved. The technology needed to determine conclusively the exact point of contact isn't in use.
As I have said I am leaning towards no HB. I'm not saying it is or it isn't because really none of us know but from what I see it looks more like the no HB zone.

And this sums up my original post Referee error. No handball call can be justifies as you explained. Offside call, maybe not.

 

[RustyRef]

The offside is a clear error, regardless of whichever attacking player he has given it against.

The handball is impossible to call real time, they had one look and there was no VAR. We are dissecting it will stills and slow mos and we still can't all agree, so how can we expect the referee to get it right real time?

 

[socal lurker]

IMO, some of these handball calls got harder with the "bottom of armpit" definition of the line between the shoulder (permissible) and arm (impermissible). At least in the US, it was long taught that the line was the edge of the top of the shoulder--top is OK, side is not. That is a much easier line to discern than the "bottom of arm pit," especially when the arm is horizontal to the body.