-
The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
Please read this thread for more details.
New user registrations are currently disabled.
PGMOL apologise to Forest
- Thread starter DonaldDownTheWing
- Start date
WanderedFar
Winger
As this rate, might as well hand VAR over to AI completely. It'll get more of the controversial decisions right, plus will be a hell of a lot quicker in making the decision.
Billy Batts
Striker
Absolute incompetence.
Unlucky Black Cat
Winger
You're forgetting Bournemouth away as well!
You're forgetting Bournemouth away as well!
We await the appearance of Cloughie's green jumper.
The point that's often missed is that handball will always be subjective. Not in every case but there will always be debate around whether an incident of ball hitting arm is worthy of penalising. It's extremely naive to think that there will ever be a handball rule that will have everyone nodding in agreement on every incident
I actually think the attempts to objectify handball have made it worse. Handball incidents are all different and it's pointless trying to legislate 'types of offence' I'm pretty sure the ref felt he couldn't give it because people have been trying to put all incidents where it's hit the body and then followed on to the arm as not worthy of a offence whereas like with all incidents this should've been seen as an exception.
I actually think the attempts to objectify handball have made it worse. Handball incidents are all different and it's pointless trying to legislate 'types of offence' I'm pretty sure the ref felt he couldn't give it because people have been trying to put all incidents where it's hit the body and then followed on to the arm as not worthy of a offence whereas like with all incidents this should've been seen as an exception.
Coeus
Striker
Just so bad.
I'd have it as if it hits the arm below the shoulder, its hand ball, im sure loads wouldn't agree, but it's easily officiated.
I'd have it as if it hits the arm below the shoulder, its hand ball, im sure loads wouldn't agree, but it's easily officiated.
Last edited:
Well it's dodgy plain and simple.
Man Utd get a crazy amount of decisions go their way.
AC Mack
Striker
Then you run the risk of opponents deliberately trying to get hand balls by smashing it at their opponent from close range, as well as defenders feeling like they need to have their arms behind their backs when they go in for blocks and the like.
I think the VAR review, (while the game carried on) for the push in the back on Enzo, in the box at Bournemouth, lasted mere seconds, before the VAR officials decided in their infinite wisdom, that one of the most clear & blatant fouls I've seen, warranted no further action, and was deemed to be a fair challenge, even though a free kick was awarded to us, outside the box, moments later, when Xhaka suffered a carbon copy of Enzo's push in the back, around 20 yards from goal.
So you'd be applying an awful rule that goes against the spirit of the game for the sake of objectivity. I'm not knocking you, in fact it's pretty prescient as I reckon we'll end up there.
One simple question for the ref....
Do you think the player was deliberately trying to gain an advantage by using their arm?
Let them make the judgement without daft legislative checklists like 'arm away from body', ' distance from the ball', 'bigger silhouette etc. I genuinely think they'd make fairer decisions if they weren't restricted by daft attempts to satisfy a misguided idea of being consistent. People need to realise that two fairly similar incidents can deserve different judgements.
Last edited:
AC Mack
Striker
Refs are looking for a higher threshold in the box so there's no point comparing the two really.
It was just a foul on its own merit.
Coeus
Striker
It works for me, we've already run the period of defenders putting their hands behind their backs.
It's not ideal, but it allows for no interpretation. Seems ridiculous to expect consistency when we can't make rules anywhere near straightforward.
ATTACK ATTACK ATTACK
Winger
This! It's not the laws of the game at fault, it's the ref but then he's at a screen under so much pressure unlike someone who is in VAR that can look at it in closer detail in a less hostile environment.
When you see this angle (zoomed in on MOTD), he's got his arm out wide initially and as it hits him, his arm comes down and back as he brings it in towards his body and he basically traps the ball and the ball drops to the deck.
Logon or register to see this image
Coeus
Striker
Im not sure it does go against the spirit. If you're a defender stretching for a cross, your arms out, and it deflects off it for a corner, I don't really feel as if intent is the determining factor. A part of the body that isn't allowed to be used has come into play, so for me it's a foul or penalty.
It's like that rule that saw Ballard's goal disallowed because Nordi carried on sliding. I saw that happen at least twice at Everton, and no free kicks were given. I can't stand the arbitrary nature of it all, and it feels unfair to state it as the ref's fault when the rules are written to encourage it.
I kind of get your point re strict liability for handball but a ricochet that pops up off another player close range and hits an arm mid running motion seems unfair. I'd definitely scrap penalties for incidents that don't amount to dogso.
