[Albion] Premier League 10-12/1/20

[hans kraay fan club]

I don't know if it was that for 100 years, but certainly in recent years, the offence was 'deliberate handling' and had to include, 'in the opinion of the referee' intent. But pundits were never happy with that. Suarez scored a goal for Liverpool (I seem to remember it being against Sunderland) off his arm. People were up in arms (pun not intended, but left in there), couldn't understand why the ref allowed it (iirc, it was on the blindside of the ref, so no idea if he would have allowed it if he'd seen the contact). There was a Newcastle goal (again, I think against Sunderland, poor them), it was crossed in and the forward tried to head it. No one noticed, that he missed it with his head, and it went in off his arm. On goals on Sunday, Kammy was railing against the goal and how, despite the law saying it has to be intentional, it should be disallowed. Just as a couple of examples that spring to mind. (The Kammy one sticks in my mind because it came a week or two after he ranted about refs giving handball penalties for handballs that Kammy didn't think were deliberate and he made a big deal about how it has to be deliberate).

So no, we haven't been satisfied with it, up until now. There have always been calls that it can't just be about intent, they have to take into account how a team benefits from the handling.


This interview with Declan Rice - has a tone of someone dying. FFS, it's a game of football. He didn't think it would be disallowed? Has he been paying any attention this season? It was quite well publicised at the start of the season, all the rule changes with the introduction of VAR, there have been multiple instances of goals being disallowed for non-intentional handballs. Why are people acting like this is something special?

Quite. The Thierry Henry handball, in the World Cup play off against the RoI is the other big example repeatedly brought up.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

BuT It'S tHE rUUles NoW WItH VAr NOw IsN'T iT.

 

[Acker79]

That is correct yes. The handball rules for defenders and (goal scoring) attackers, are NOT the same. The former requires intent (or at least an unnatural arm position). The latter does not.

And let's be honest, there has always been disparity in the handball law - in the past deliberately handling the ball to prevent a goal was a red card offence, deliberately handling the ball to score a goal was only a yellow card offence. So a disparity in the handball law isn't exactly new.

As Rice pointed out in his interview, the Sheffield fans were cheering that VAR decision as if it was a goal. That is what football has come too, cheering a VAR decision rather than cheering a goal. I know its not what I go to games for.

But if we all put aside our VAR tinted glasses for a moment, how is cheering that misfortune different to cheering missed penalties/open goals, or when a team puts the ball in the net, the fans go wild, only to see the lino's flag up and a cheer goes up from the "conceding" team? Fans have always cheered opponent's misfortune.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I don't know if it was that for 100 years, but certainly in recent years, the offence was 'deliberate handling' and had to include, 'in the opinion of the referee' intent. But pundits were never happy with that. Suarez scored a goal for Liverpool (I seem to remember it being against Sunderland) off his arm. People were up in arms (pun not intended, but left in there), couldn't understand why the ref allowed it (iirc, it was on the blindside of the ref, so no idea if he would have allowed it if he'd seen the contact). There was a Newcastle goal (again, I think against Sunderland, poor them), it was crossed in and the forward tried to head it. No one noticed, that he missed it with his head, and it went in off his arm. On goals on Sunday, Kammy was railing against the goal and how, despite the law saying it has to be intentional, it should be disallowed. Just as a couple of examples that spring to mind. (The Kammy one sticks in my mind because it came a week or two after he ranted about refs giving handball penalties for handballs that Kammy didn't think were deliberate and he made a big deal about how it has to be deliberate).

So no, we haven't been satisfied with it, up until now. There have always been calls that it can't just be about intent, they have to take into account how a team benefits from the handling.


This interview with Declan Rice - has a tone of someone dying. FFS, it's a game of football. He didn't think it would be disallowed? Has he been paying any attention this season? It was quite well publicised at the start of the season, all the rule changes with the introduction of VAR, there have been multiple instances of goals being disallowed for non-intentional handballs. Why are people acting like this is something special?

I think we can all be happy with a goal being disallowed if it goes in off the arm. Thats a black and white decision there, lets have that, fine.

As for the rest, when a ball brushes an arm in a melee, or is hammered into a forwards arm by a defender at close range (as happened tonight), I think we can all be quite happy that its unintentional and LET THE ****ING FOOTBALL MATCH CONTINUE! We don't watch these games for these kind of micro-decisions to ruin the fun! jeez

Of course Rice is livid, they just scored a fantastic equaliser in injury time. That's what we live for as fans and players, that's the excitement and passion of football. Please don't compare it with life or death, Shankly put that argument to bed decades ago.

Its special because it was a special goal disallowed in a fashion that would have been laughable as recently as last season. V A effin' R

 

[hans kraay fan club]

That Man U goal against us at OT most definitely should have been rules out then as it does touch Maguires arm!?

Yes, it should have been.

 

[Sheebo]

That is correct yes. The handball rules for defenders and (goal scoring) attackers, are NOT the same. The former requires intent (or at least an unnatural arm position). The latter does not.

Having played football don’t you think that’s mental? I didn’t like the ‘official’ handball rule before either and it was never interpreted properly by many refs as it would have caused riots. Ie - ‘deliberate handball’ - very very few handballs are ‘deliberate’. I think it should just be it’s handball if your arm is in an unattractive position and plays the ball. That would be a slightly clearer rule...? Although it’s a very tough one and will never be a rule to please everyone. My head hurts.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I think we can all be happy with a goal being disallowed if it goes in off the arm. Thats a black and white decision there, lets have that, fine.

As for the rest, when a ball brushes an arm in a melee, or is hammered into a forwards arm by a defender at close range (as happened tonight), I think we can all be quite happy that its unintentional and LET THE ****ING FOOTBALL MATCH CONTINUE! We don't watch these games for these kind of micro-decisions to ruin the fun! jeez

Of course Rice is livid, they just scored a fantastic equaliser in injury time. That's what we live for as fans and players, that's the excitement and passion of football. Please don't compare it with life or death, Shankly put that argument to bed decades ago.

Its special because it was a special goal disallowed in a fashion that would have been laughable as recently as last season. V A effin' R

This.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Quite. The Thierry Henry handball, in the World Cup play off against the RoI is the other big example repeatedly brought up.

well that was blatant, VAR would have had no problem disallowing that under the old rules

 

[Sheebo]

And let's be honest, there has always been disparity in the handball law - in the past deliberately handling the ball to prevent a goal was a red card offence, deliberately handling the ball to score a goal was only a yellow card offence. So a disparity in the handball law isn't exactly new.



But if we all put aside our VAR tinted glasses for a moment, how is cheering that misfortune different to cheering missed penalties/open goals, or when a team puts the ball in the net, the fans go wild, only to see the lino's flag up and a cheer goes up from the "conceding" team? Fans have always cheered opponent's misfortune.

I think it’s impossible to get the rule right. It’s always going to be down to opinion in a way. As I said, very, very few handballs are ‘deliberate’ and pre meditated as such.

 

[Gotsmanov]

That is correct yes. The handball rules for defenders and (goal scoring) attackers, are NOT the same. The former requires intent (or at least an unnatural arm position). The latter does not.

It's more perverse than that. An accidental handball, by an attacker, that doesn't lead to a goal, is not a free kick. One that does, is.

IFAB:
Handball
Law 12
Changes
• Deliberate handball remains an offence
• The following ‘handball’ situations, even if accidental, will be a free kick:
• the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand/arm
• a player gains control/possession of the ball after it has touches their hand/arm
and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally
bigger
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm when it is above their shoulder (unless the
player has deliberately played the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

• The following will not usually be a free kick, unless they are one of the above
situations:
• the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from their own head/body/foot or
the head/body/foot of another player who is close/near

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk

 

[Weststander]

You’ll change your mind when you’ve seen it.

‘Clear and obvious’ is not relevant in this case at all. It’s an absolutely black and white rule. It’s really not down to interpretation nor is it subjective.

The ball hits your arm in scoring or setting up a goal = handball.

There’s literally no confusion whatsoever (apart from people who have not kept up with the rules).

This.

It’s been explained very clearly by ex-refs all season. With or without VAR, it’s simple.

Why are people fans refusing to listen, in their tunnel vision armchair campaign against VAR?

 

[TottonSeagull]

It was a clear handball. It didn’t just brush his hand - without stopping it with his hand, he never would have got that ball under control. Rice absolutely knew it as well, despite his ‘wtf’ reaction.

Are you watching another game. What a load of tosh! Rice knew nothing about it.

Have we had a few jars tonight?

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

This.

It’s been explained very clearly by ex-refs all season. With or without VAR, it’s simple.

Why are people fans refusing to listen, in their tunnel vision armchair campaign against VAR?

are you not reading the rest of the thread? This ridiculous rule only exists because of VAR.

 

[Sheebo]

Yes, it should have been.

So a professional referee, armed with 17 replays still broke the rules to give Man U a goal at old Trafford. Farcical. Just bin VAR off unless it’s painfully clear - over a yard offside and proper clear and obvious game changing decisions - ie violent conduct or obvious pens where the ball isn’t played. No subjective decisions. That Henry handball which was clear as day would have been ruled out. It needs to be used less. It’s ruining the game no doubt about it.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

So a professional referee, armed with 17 replays still broke the rules to give Man U a goal at old Trafford. Farcical. Just bin VAR off unless it’s painfully clear - over a yard offside and proper clear and obvious game changing decisions - ie violent conduct or obvious pens where the ball isn’t played. No subjective decisions. That Henry handball which was clear as day would have been ruled out. It needs to be used less. It’s ruining the game no doubt about it.

Agree completely. I hate it.

Just correcting people’s misunderstanding of the rules, as they stand - that’s all.

 

[Weststander]

are you not reading the rest of the thread? This ridiculous rule only exists because of VAR.

But many people, other than you, are simply not listening to the explanation of the rule or that it exists.

It takes away subjectivity in these instances. There are NSC’ers other than me who watched it tonight, and felt the West Ham player not only did it, but full well knew, with faux shock afterwards.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Are you watching another game. What a load of tosh! Rice knew nothing about it.

Have we had a few jars tonight?

Not at all. The ball was travelling at a good pace, and the contact with his arm changed its direction entirely. There’s not a chance he didn’t feel the contact. None whatsoever

In fact he’s even admitted that he knew he touched it (he just didn’t know the rules!)

 

[Acker79]

Declan Rice said the opposite of what you claim. He actually said he thought it would be disallowed. Early in the interview he said he hadn't realised it was handball as it was the heat of the moment and he was just running through.

This comment confuses me. "Early in the interview he said he hadn't realised it was handball" is how you show I'm wrong to claim he didn't think the goal would be disallowed?

Like you said, at the start of the interview he claimed he didn't think it would be disallowed for handball because there was no intent (the running through comment to explain his arm position). Which is what I said.

Later in the interview he admitted the SU players explained to him that any contact in the build up to the goal = handball, that's when he said he turned away and knew it would be disallowed. The change to the law is well publicised, there have been multiple goals disallowed for unintentional handball. He clearly knew it struck his arm, so he shouldn't have been surprised. He shouldn't have needed the united players to explain the rules of the game to him.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

But many people, other than you, are simply not listening to the explanation of the rule or that it exists.

It takes away subjectivity in these instances. There are NSC’ers other than me who watched it tonight, and felt the West Ham player not only did it, but full well knew, with faux shock afterwards.

You thought he handballed that on purpose

OK, discussion over I guess

 

[Gotsmanov]

are you not reading the rest of the thread? This ridiculous rule only exists because of VAR.

Actually, I don't believe that's correct, and the IFAB rules don't state that. If you're a ref, reffing a Championship game, where no VAR is available, and you spot an accidental handball in the build up to the goal, and you then allow the goal to stand, then you would be knowingly misapplying the new IFAB rules.

Sent from my GM1913 using Tapatalk