The photo only tells half the story though, it looks bad but by his movement I really don't think it was intentional. Had that been Calde or Bennett getting caught on the arm in the same circumstances would you still say it would be a justified penalty?
Should it have been a penalty for handball?
- Thread starter Bozza
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The photo only tells half the story though, it looks bad but by his movement I really don't think it was intentional. Had that been Calde or Bennett getting caught on the arm in the same circumstances would you still say it would be a justified penalty?
Finchley Seagull
Well-known member
MotD were saying the same. Completely disagreed with them (although I know I'm biased). Bruno hit shoulder pretty much. Hands by his side so definitely no penalty in my view. My initial thought on Chambers was that it was too close for a penalty but his arms were stuck quite well away from his body so to me it probably should be a penalty, however near Colunga was when he kicked it. Can understand why the referee didn't give it though.
atfc village
Well-known member
Until all handballs are given in the box arguments will go on for ever.
He had his arms out wide on purpose to lessen the angle of crossing/shooting.
This ball to arm is nonsense if refs gave a penalty everytime for things like this that defender would of had arms behind back while trying to block, he knew what he was doing and the gamble paid off.
This ball to arm is nonsense if refs gave a penalty everytime for things like this that defender would of had arms behind back while trying to block, he knew what he was doing and the gamble paid off.
Last edited:
I saw it from behind. You can't stand with your arms taped to your sides or behind your back. They were not in an 'unnatural position'. Would I have liked the penalty? Yes. Do I think it should have been given? Absolutely not. It was no more a handball than Bruno's earlier.
luppers
New member
Unable to get to game so had it on radio 5. Both commentators thought it should have been a penalty
Captain Sensible
Well-known member
If you defend the box with your arms out, you are intentionally trying to block a cross or pass, therefore a penalty all day.
Captain Sensible
Well-known member
I haven't seen or heard anything of the Bruno incident, so I doubt it came close to this appeal. But looking at that picture, do you really think his left arm is in a natural position? Its clearly stretched out to block the cross. Penalty.
m20gull
Well-known member
I had not seen the photo. I was judging it from MOTD and I would have thought it was a penalty whichever side had done it. Stand blocking the pass with your hands away from the body can mean only one thing, you are expecting your arm to make the cross harder, therefore penalty.
Bruno was different. He was turning side on to block the ball, it was bound to be close to hitting his arm but the block was using the body.
I will admit that I have given up getting agitated about penalty decisions at the game (other than to join in with the pantomime of football fandom) as there is never a good enough view, and you do not see it from the ref's perspective. That makes NSC a good place for relatively calm discussion of "what makes it a foul".
Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 9,122
Clear penalty, his arm was extended away from his body and he prevented the ball getting into a dangerous position. He could have pulled out of the way but did not. I didn't agree with the MotD interpretation at all. As for the Bruno one it looked more shoulder to me and he was flying into the challenge so had less control over his movement, plus he plays for us so that was NEVER a penalty.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 17,355
No - clearly ball to hand, in my view.
Yes it was, but he stuck his hand there to narrow the angle of a cross/shot so clearly a penalty.
He knew what he was doing by having his arms in that position
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
No 
It's so easy to freeze frame something and, as an image, say "look, his hands are slightly up".
If people had their way all players would be running around like penguins with their arms tucked right in.
It's so easy to freeze frame something and, as an image, say "look, his hands are slightly up".
If people had their way all players would be running around like penguins with their arms tucked right in.
Also Walcotts goal shouldn't of stood as greer and dunk were in the middle of asking for his autograph.
Papa Lazarou
Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
No
It's so easy to freeze frame something and, as an image, say "look, his hands are slightly up".
If people had their way all players would be running around like penguins with their arms tucked right in.
And people would defend crosses with their arms tucked behind them.. oh, just like Calderon does when defending a cross.
Tricky Dicky
New member
No chance. Far too close and wasn't deliberate. He couldn't possibly have moved it out of the way.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I don't buy this ball to hand. I saw Marcos Painter get sent off, at Leicester, for a second yellow with his hand out at even less of an angle than Chambers. It was also on the halfway line so not preventing a goal threat.
I wish referees were more consistent.