Handball

[fredm]

Haven't FIFA (or maybe UEFA) said that they want to see every contact between the ball and hand given as an infringement, discounting any thought of intent.  Or words along those lines. Think I have read this somewhere and the feeling is that refs in Champs League etc are complying with this so they remain in favour.  Noticeable that not one English ref is in charge of any of this round of matches.

[LeeB]

Haven't FIFA (or maybe UEFA) said that they want to see every contact between the ball and hand given as an infringement, discounting any thought of intent.  Or words along those lines. Think I have read this somewhere and the feeling is that refs in Champs League etc are complying with this so they remain in favour.  Noticeable that not one English ref is in charge of any of this round of matches.

It's a ridiculous premise, you already see players deliberately trying to flick the ball up onto the defenders arm in the box, it will just get worse.

[Risso]

Haven't FIFA (or maybe UEFA) said that they want to see every contact between the ball and hand given as an infringement, discounting any thought of intent.  Or words along those lines. Think I have read this somewhere and the feeling is that refs in Champs League etc are complying with this so they remain in favour.  Noticeable that not one English ref is in charge of any of this round of matches.

I don't think that's quite right.  They're trying to "simplify it" by saying that if it hits a player's arm when their body is showing a "natural silhouette" then it's not a penalty. If the arms are outstretched or in the air, then it's a penalty.  They want to stop the situation where defenders have to have their arms behind their back in a wall for example.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

It was an error. It was a penalty and the referee didn't give it. The decision would have cost Man United a spot in the quarter finals.

VAR vindicated.

Except it wasn't a penalty and the referee was right not to give it. The decision actually did cost PSG a spot in the quarter finals.

VAR hasn't helped at all, as evidenced by the polarised opinions. It's all still down to the interpretation of one man, as it always was.

[Brend'Watkins]

I haven't seen it but I am going to stick with my default position that they're jammy c***s.

My initial reaction were those last few words. My loathing of Man U had began to lessen over the last few seasons as they'd been (by their standards) going through a rough patch given the sort of results they were achieving.  Incidents such as this one brings it back in line. Not once did I hear any commentator, pundit or other say they were extremely lucky or more to the point cd's correct description. Now, the failed Cardiff manager is the messiah.  Please, please, please let him get the job so it all turns to shit.

[Andy_Lochhead_in_the_air]

You turn your back you get everything you deserve.

I'm sticking to Matthew 5:38-40.

And Isaac said unto Jacob, that thyne turn your back on the ball, then thyne turn your back on the Lord!
Blessed he who faces up to ball.

Remembering to cover thyne goolies.

[Ads]

It was an error. It was a penalty and the referee didn't give it. The decision would have cost Man United a spot in the quarter finals.

VAR vindicated.

Except it wasn't a penalty and the referee was right not to give it. The decision actually did cost PSG a spot in the quarter finals.

VAR hasn't helped at all, as evidenced by the polarised opinions. It's all still down to the interpretation of one man, as it always was.

I understand what you're trying to say, but it contradicts the rules. The referee ought to give consideration to a players silhouette for whether the hand was being used to make him bigger, while other factors such as distance from ball etc are considered.

He turns his back, the fanny, and leaps. As a consequence of trying to balance, his arm moves out towards the ball.

It's a soft penalty, but a penalty and he only has himself to blame for turning his back. Never dangle your foot and never turn your back.

[ChicagoLion]

There is a school of thought in refereeing circles where the interpretation is “ gaining an unfair advantage “.
Completely wrong in my opinion but you see this all the time.

Not trying to be pedantic C L but the terminology is 'seeking to gain an unfair advantage', there's a subtle difference.  Gaining an unfair advantage is benefiting from your actions, seeking to gain can be ignored.  Every foul in a game can be seen as seeking to gain an unfair advantage if the referee deems the action deliberate, it's only when the incident goes unpunished is it gaining.  I understand what you are saying though.

No problem mate, the point is that using this interpretation to handball particularly when ignoring the “ speaking” causes all sorts of problems.
The incident, I can not see how a ref can be sure that is deliberate.

[ROBBO]

Need to keep the arms in the natural position at the side of the body if the arms are away from the side it is deemed an unnatural position it doesn't matter whether you have your back to the play or not. Having said that we see players using their hands and arms unlawfully every week without penalty.

[cdbearsfan]

Haven't FIFA (or maybe UEFA) said that they want to see every contact between the ball and hand given as an infringement, discounting any thought of intent.  Or words along those lines. Think I have read this somewhere and the feeling is that refs in Champs League etc are complying with this so they remain in favour.  Noticeable that not one English ref is in charge of any of this round of matches.

It's a ridiculous premise, you already see players deliberately trying to flick the ball up onto the defenders arm in the box, it will just get worse.

They are only changing the rules with regards where teams score a goal because of a handball, not in any other instance.

[wittonwarrior]

Suppose it helps when Ferguson is the VAR man and Eric his assistant still will take AMA decision like that on Sunday

[frank black]

Real time , never a penalty. Ultra slo mo = penalty, as it looked like he had time to use his arms to block. In reality it was never a penalty and ultra slo mo gave the wrong impression. There was no deliberate intent to move his arm to the ball, it was blasted at him (high and wide it looked too).

Classic VAR error. Just like the slightest touch on strikers looking like they’ve been kicked in the air. It’s flawed, but I don’t know the answer.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

Real time , never a penalty. Ultra slo mo = penalty, as it looked like he had time to use his arms to block. In reality it was never a penalty and ultra slo mo gave the wrong impression. There was no deliberate intent to move his arm to the ball, it was blasted at him (high and wide it looked too).

Classic VAR error. Just like the slightest touch on strikers looking like they’ve been kicked in the air. It’s flawed, but I don’t know the answer.

That's nothing, watch it in ultra ultra slo mo and just behind the handball you can clearly make out Tyrone Mings deliberately stamping on a Reading player's face.

[dave shelley]

From Law 12 Fouls and misconduct.  This is specific to handball:

Handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within their own penalty area).[1]:36
In determining whether or not a player deliberately handled the ball, the referee has several considerations:

Movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
Distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
Position of the hand ('natural' position versus 'unnatural' position) does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement
Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement (considered an extension of the hand)
Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement (also considered an extension of the hand)[1]:119
If a player commits a direct free kick offence within their own penalty area, a penalty kick is awarded irrespective of the position of the ball, provided the ball is in play.

Hope it helps.

[Richard E]

Real time , never a penalty. Ultra slo mo = penalty, as it looked like he had time to use his arms to block. In reality it was never a penalty and ultra slo mo gave the wrong impression. There was no deliberate intent to move his arm to the ball, it was blasted at him (high and wide it looked too).

Classic VAR error. Just like the slightest touch on strikers looking like they’ve been kicked in the air. It’s flawed, but I don’t know the answer.

That's nothing, watch it in ultra ultra slo mo and just behind the handball you can clearly make out Tyrone Mings deliberately stamping on a Reading player's face.

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine Tyrone Mings deliberately stamping on a Reading player’s face forever” - George Orwell ‘1985.’