Other Games 2025-26

[Somniloquism]

Wanted them to win as don't want to play the twats.

We could be playing both divides from there (although I expect Celtic will win this round).

[Drummond]

the first rule of defending according to H&V

If an opposition player takes a shot at goal, the job of the defender is to try and move out the way of the balls trajectory in no way should he try and block it or move towards it fuck me no, it might hit his arm and it’ll be a penalty even if the arm is in no way protruding, it would obviously be a lot better if the main defenders had no arms

honestly, my balls are rolling down the street I’ve laughed so hard at some of your explanations

Literally no one has said anything about him or any other player having to move out of the way of the ball. He leaned his body in with the intention of blocking the ball. Unfortunately it struck his arm instead when it was goalbound. Thats a penalty. Imagine we had a shot on target and its heading straight into the net. Tarkowsky is on the goal line and does the same thing. He leans in to try to block the ball and it strikes his arm and they clear the ball. Do you think you would want a penalty for that or would you be ok with it?

🤷

John would be far too busy worrying about running down the street chasing his balls to care.

[lovejoy]

I think there’s a lot of handball posts above from people applying the law ftom about 10 years ago, it has moved on, simply hitting the hand isn’t enough for handball. That’s a fact.

The guidance by refs for years has been don’t make you body bigger than it’s natural shape and defenders were applauded for putting their arms by their sides. Unless a player deliberately moves his hand towards the ball it’s not a pen per the laws. The player was clearly trying to block the ball with his body (that’s his job), his arm tucked as instructed.

The ticking of the arm, not moving hand towards the ball deliberately and the late deflection are all reasons it’s not a penalty.

Astonishing decision.

The only reason I can think of that it was given is referee error on the pitch and VAR yet again not wanting to undermine him when they saw the footage.

[The Edge]

I think there’s a lot of handball posts above from people applying the law ftom about 10 years ago, it has moved on, simply hitting the hand isn’t enough for handball. That’s a fact.

The guidance by refs for years has been don’t make you body bigger than it’s natural shape and defenders were applauded for putting their arms by their sides. Unless a player deliberately moves his hand towards the ball it’s not a pen per the laws. The player was clearly trying to block the ball with his body (that’s his job), his arm tucked as instructed.

The ticking of the arm, not moving hand towards the ball deliberately and the late deflection are all reasons it’s not a penalty.

Astonishing decision.

The only reason I can think of that it was given is referee error on the pitch and VAR yet again not wanting to undermine him when they saw the footage.

I think the bone of contention here is whether or not he did it on purpose and that is something we will never know. He leans towards the path of the ball and although his arm is tucked in the ball strikes the arm. For me i think he knew there was a good chance that the ball would strike his arm so it's a legitimate penalty.

[Drummond]

I think there’s a lot of handball posts above from people applying the law ftom about 10 years ago, it has moved on, simply hitting the hand isn’t enough for handball. That’s a fact.

The guidance by refs for years has been don’t make you body bigger than it’s natural shape and defenders were applauded for putting their arms by their sides. Unless a player deliberately moves his hand towards the ball it’s not a pen per the laws. The player was clearly trying to block the ball with his body (that’s his job), his arm tucked as instructed.

The ticking of the arm, not moving hand towards the ball deliberately and the late deflection are all reasons it’s not a penalty.

Astonishing decision.

The only reason I can think of that it was given is referee error on the pitch and VAR yet again not wanting to undermine him when they saw the footage.

I think the bone of contention here is whether or not he did it on purpose and that is something we will never know. He leans towards the path of the ball and although his arm is tucked in the ball strikes the arm. For me i think he knew there was a good chance that the ball would strike his arm so it's a legitimate penalty.

That's the key bit.

[cdbearsfan]

He was leaning before the deflection. People don't tend to defend by standing exactly still.

[Somniloquism]

I think there’s a lot of handball posts above from people applying the law ftom about 10 years ago, it has moved on, simply hitting the hand isn’t enough for handball. That’s a fact.

The guidance by refs for years has been don’t make you body bigger than it’s natural shape and defenders were applauded for putting their arms by their sides. Unless a player deliberately moves his hand towards the ball it’s not a pen per the laws. The player was clearly trying to block the ball with his body (that’s his job), his arm tucked as instructed.

The ticking of the arm, not moving hand towards the ball deliberately and the late deflection are all reasons it’s not a penalty.

Astonishing decision.

The only reason I can think of that it was given is referee error on the pitch and VAR yet again not wanting to undermine him when they saw the footage.

For someone who didn't even know of a rule change made 6 years ago, it is ironic trying to state the hand ball rule now with stating people are using out of date "laws". The key line is the first one.

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised

The ref believed it was deliberate. The rules helpfully give an example of what might be called deliberate but that is what it is, an example, not an only reason. In this case the ref felt the player moved to block the ball and the movement was deliberate and as it hit his arm, the handball was deliberate. Next week a ref will probably see a similar incident differently.

As you will also notice, the guidance you seem to believe is the only way it could be handball is seperately shown and was included more because people were jumping to block with arms up and or out wide and were being struck from a yard away and handballs weren't being given as deemed "can't move the arm out of the way". And even that has a line stating it isn't definitive, just subjective to the refs decision on the day.

[cdbearsfan]

BBC to show live Bundesliga games on Friday nights - https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/cgjyzgj3xjwo

[lovejoy]

I think the point is if you read the laws it is no way a penalty (arm topic,ed and his body not his arm moved to the ball the deliberately touch it, I think that much in indisputable) but if you invoke “in the opinion of the ref” he might decide to give it because of subjective assumptions he is making.

I think the laws should be such that two identical incidents have the same outcome. Or in other words if we see the same incident again say 5 times I’m confident the ref won’t give it.