A Full Inquiry Into The Grooming Gang...
News0 min ago
Tottenham V Man City
The new Hand Ball rule, tried & practised in this game on Saturday. ... What a joke ??
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by CaptainS. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I don't follow professional football - it's never interested me - but I did spend many years refereeing the amateur game.
As see it, a player should only ever be penalised for an action that's either intentional (as in committing a foul) or negligent (as in 'dangerous play'). Disallowing a goal that's (apparently) been scored by a player is clearly penalising him, despite the fact that there's been neither 'intent' nor 'negligence'. So the new rule seems wrong to me.
A relevant link:
https:/
As see it, a player should only ever be penalised for an action that's either intentional (as in committing a foul) or negligent (as in 'dangerous play'). Disallowing a goal that's (apparently) been scored by a player is clearly penalising him, despite the fact that there's been neither 'intent' nor 'negligence'. So the new rule seems wrong to me.
A relevant link:
https:/
Right, I sort of get the picture now.
https:/
https:/
//
Avatar Image tonyav
//There are certainly ( as is this one ) going to be some vert controversial decisions, sometimes a player can do nothing about it ie Ball hand not hand ball//
Yup, Wolves suffered from a similar victory-costing decision last week against Leicester.
I think all teams are going to both suffer and benefit from this rule before the end of the season.
Avatar Image tonyav
//There are certainly ( as is this one ) going to be some vert controversial decisions, sometimes a player can do nothing about it ie Ball hand not hand ball//
Yup, Wolves suffered from a similar victory-costing decision last week against Leicester.
I think all teams are going to both suffer and benefit from this rule before the end of the season.
The thing that baffles me is that if the ball hits the attackers arm it is classed as hand ball and any goal that follows will be disallowed, but if the ball hits a defenders arm, a foul or penalty, is not awarded!
I was fully in favour of VAR, but it seems to be ruining the game, spectators don't know whats happening and some ref in a room miles away from the action, is looking for something that is not really there!
Football should take a leaf out of crickets book, if a decision is so close, as in this weeks so called handball, and last weeks offside given against Sterling by the slightest of margins, it should be the referees call. In cricket the ball can be hitting the wickets when showed on the tracking video, but if its only just hitting the wicket its given as umpires call, hope you understand what I'm trying to say.
I was fully in favour of VAR, but it seems to be ruining the game, spectators don't know whats happening and some ref in a room miles away from the action, is looking for something that is not really there!
Football should take a leaf out of crickets book, if a decision is so close, as in this weeks so called handball, and last weeks offside given against Sterling by the slightest of margins, it should be the referees call. In cricket the ball can be hitting the wickets when showed on the tracking video, but if its only just hitting the wicket its given as umpires call, hope you understand what I'm trying to say.
I get the impression attention seekers in the VAR room are trying to make themselves important and clever by looking for things no-one else can see. I'm amazed anyone noticed the ball flicking the City player's arm as it came across the area. No Tottenham players appealed - it was just one of those things that happens when players are jostling for position. It seemed to me to brush two players' arms (one from each team). What's more the Tottenham player may even have pushed him into the ball in the jostling.
I think the appeals system works well in cricket and tennis. It's good that the viewers and spectators can see and hear the review process. Maybe football should have something similar.
I think VAR is spoiling things for spectators- when someone scored in the past you looked briefly at the ref and linesman then celebrated within a second. Now I feel silly celebrating when you know there's going to be a minute's wait while VAR checks everything.
I think the appeals system works well in cricket and tennis. It's good that the viewers and spectators can see and hear the review process. Maybe football should have something similar.
I think VAR is spoiling things for spectators- when someone scored in the past you looked briefly at the ref and linesman then celebrated within a second. Now I feel silly celebrating when you know there's going to be a minute's wait while VAR checks everything.
I still reckon the rule should be that it's only handball if the referee is 'sure' that the player intended to use his/her hand. No matter that the referee may get it wrong sometimes (they don't make as many wrong decisions as footballers do in every match). I would wager that even the dimmest of footballers rarely use their hands intentionally on the football field. Sadly, this could only come to pass if footballers had total respect of referees - which will never happen.
>>> The new rule is quite simple: You cannot score a goal following a handball, whether deliberate or not
Unfortunately, Mozz, it's NOT that simple. The following circumstances DO result in a free kick, even if accidental:
(i) if the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand or arm ;
(ii) a player gains control/possession of the ball after it touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity ;
(iii) a ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger ; or
(iv) 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).
However the following circumstances DON'T result in a free kick (unless something above also applies):
(i) 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 ;
(ii) the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which is close to their body and has not made their body unnaturally bigger ; or
(iii) if a player is falling and the ball touches their hand/arm when it is between their body and the ground to support the body (but not extended to make the body bigger).
Even if a goal is to be disallowed under the new rule, I still can't see why a free kick should be awarded (as there was no deliberate foul). It would make more sense to me to adopt the same procedure as when the ball crosses the goal-line from a throw-in or from an indirect free kick. i.e. award a goal kick.
Unfortunately, Mozz, it's NOT that simple. The following circumstances DO result in a free kick, even if accidental:
(i) if the ball goes into the goal after touching an attacking player’s hand or arm ;
(ii) a player gains control/possession of the ball after it touches their hand/arm and then scores, or creates a goal-scoring opportunity ;
(iii) a ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger ; or
(iv) 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).
However the following circumstances DON'T result in a free kick (unless something above also applies):
(i) 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 ;
(ii) the ball touches a player’s hand/arm which is close to their body and has not made their body unnaturally bigger ; or
(iii) if a player is falling and the ball touches their hand/arm when it is between their body and the ground to support the body (but not extended to make the body bigger).
Even if a goal is to be disallowed under the new rule, I still can't see why a free kick should be awarded (as there was no deliberate foul). It would make more sense to me to adopt the same procedure as when the ball crosses the goal-line from a throw-in or from an indirect free kick. i.e. award a goal kick.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank1 min ago
Why Were The Edinburgh New Year...
News7 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
Crosswords13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles19 mins ago
