How is that Hudson-Odoi handball not a penalty?

pablo__p

Full Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2009
Messages
1,926
Location
Wrocław
“if I give the pen, it’s going to be a big talking point”

Yes, it would be talked about by Klopp.



Would hardly be controversial, if given.

What a stellar week for PL refs. :houllier:
 

Champ

Refuses to acknowledge existence of Ukraine
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
9,888
reddev3 said:
No, that's not how it works. If his arm is a natural position then it doesn't matter.

Roman Saiss cleared one off the line yesterday with his arm but because it was in a natural position it wasn't a pen and considered a brilliant clearance.
Click to expand...
You telling me that Odois arm was in a natural position?
He has actively bent his arm so it is closer to the ball, how anyone can claim otherwise is baffling.
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,111
Tuchel trying to say Greenwood handled it and wasn't worth checking.
Amazing.
 

mu4c_20le

Full Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2013
Messages
43,570
Ole ADAMANT it's a penalty. 100%. COuldn't understand why it was not given

he then dismisses Tuchel like he's a schoolboy
 

Irrational.

Full Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2011
Messages
32,911
Location
LVG's notebook
Azpilicueta moaning at the ref watching the monitor is also disgusting. He did the same in the reverse fixture too. Can’t stand the prick.
 

P-Ro

"Full Member"
Joined
Nov 21, 2014
Messages
11,325
Location
Salford
Supports
Chelsea and AFC Wimbledon
The referee was heard to have said after the game "I was just levelling it up after Chelsea weren't awarded a blatant penalty for Maguire's foul on Azpilicueta in the October fixture." Stuart Atwell finished his bizarre admission with "You'll Never Walk Alone, la".
 

Sandikan

aka sex on the beach
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
53,111
It was annoying, but you have to laugh how about 5 Chelsea players all appeal loudly for the handball when they think it's our man!

As a ref I'd tell them i'm bloody giving it after checking who did it, because they've called the handball!
 

anant

Correctly predicted Italy to win Euro 2020
Joined
Feb 28, 2015
Messages
8,259
If that's not a penalty, they may as well abolish the hand ball rule altogether.

Arm moved towards the ball - Check
Hand in unnatural position - Check
I'm pretty sure that if there is any other condition that the new laws look at, they would be satisfied as well

How can anyonelook at that and then say, that's not a pen. Hell, he had his eyes on the ball as well. It's not like he was competing with some player off a corner and it hit his arm, like how we got our pen vs BHA. He had enough time to react, he had his eyes on the ball. Penalty every single time
 

Flanders Devil

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 23, 2018
Messages
450
I think if this is game week 1 of a season, and the precedent is set - I’m happy with this as a ‘no penalty’.
But given its 28w in and these have been given all season, then it must be given.
 

Dirty Schwein

Has a 'Best of Britney Spears' album
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
32,020
Location
Miracle World
Supports
Luton Town
I gave refs the benefit of the doubt back before VAR but now there is no excuse. Their ineptitude is beyond belief, especially as it's no longer a split second decisions, they watch the incident on video and STILL manage to feck up. Then don't have to answer for their feck ups and most likely get promoted.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
lsd said:
Except it wasn't that clear and Greenwood is making contact with his arm so there's that
Click to expand...
Nope. Greenwood makes slight contact with CHO after his hand reaches the handball position. He even holds his hand there to match the flight of the ball. Him making contact with Greenwood is why they cant have their arms so high in unnatural positions. It matches every criteria for a pen.
West Brom gave away a pen yesterday when their defender reaches out through a crowd jumping for a pen, contact all over the place and that was given.
 

Bastian

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
18,563
Supports
Mejbri
It was a penalty all day long. It was just an absolutely spineless ref who decided to do the wrong thing when the right thing was staring him in the face. Should be sacked.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
49,917
Location
W.Yorks
Pogue Mahone said:
That’s insane. Since when was “moving the hand toward the ball” one of the criteria? Do actual referees not know the rules now?
Click to expand...
It is actually in the rules (first bullet point) however that is more so to do with low hands, and in this situation the last two bullet points clearly apply.

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including movingthe hand/arm towards the ball

• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

• after the ball has touched their or a team-mate’s hand/arm, even if
accidental, immediately:

• scores in the opponents’ goal

• creates a goal-scoring opportunity

touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player
deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is
close.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
Yo
Pogue Mahone said:
That’s insane. Since when was “moving the hand toward the ball” one of the criteria? Do actual referees not know the rules now?
Click to expand...
You would think Greenwood moved his hand from his hip the way some apologists are acting.
looking at the video, that point is the only time their arms make contact. His hands are already up in an unnatural position.
Its infuriating
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,837
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Annihilate Now! said:
It is actually in the rules (first bullet point) however that is more so to do with low hands, and in this situation the last two bullet points clearly apply.

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including movingthe hand/arm towards the ball

• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

• after the ball has touched their or a team-mate’s hand/arm, even if
accidental, immediately:

• scores in the opponents’ goal

• creates a goal-scoring opportunity

touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player
deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is
close.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think that’s part of the mind-reading required to know if the act is deliberate or not. If they move the hand towards the ball then it’s definitely deliberate. But they introduced all additional clauses so refs didn’t always have to be mind-readers.

Anyhoo. It’s a nailed on pen. We’ve been fecked over by VAR again.
 

James Peril

New Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2016
Messages
3,576
Not really that bothered, it’s a battle for the ball, arms are everywhere, it touches his hand... overall glad something like that doesn’t become a penalty, it’s not the game we want. In isolation crap, long run good stuff. It reminds me somewhat about the red card for Soucek the other day... yeah it’s an elbow to the face, but it’s not so to speak. And we’re obviously not in a position to moan given the objective disaster by not awarding them a penalty the last time around, although two wrongs don’t make a right and they are not to be compared six months later.

Saw OGS saying they robbed us out of two more points. Ah, okay understand, since they only had 75 minutes to get the equalizer... just like the ghost goal against Villa last year. Obviously Villa would have relegated, they never would have scored anyway with a full half remaining, should have just blown the whistle before half-time :rolleyes:.
 

Baneofthegame

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
3,009
VP89 said:
As I said, the referee could well have interpreted as being probably handball against Greenwood anyway, if the hand wasn't there, it hits Greenwood's arm.
Click to expand...
I don’t really understand this point of view, I mean, if CHO isn’t there, Greenwood controls the ball.
 

jderbyshire

Has anybody seen my fleshlight?
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
4,185
I didn't see any of the post-match Sky stuff.

What did Keane have to say about the hand-ball?
 

The Corinthian

I will not take Mad Winger's name in vain
Joined
Dec 10, 2020
Messages
11,792
It's a joke of a decision. It's a handball. How it got reviewed at the pitch side monitor and still wasn't given is ridiculous. The ref bottled it.

Also, isn't it a clear and obvious error if the ref doesn't give it?
 

VP89

Pogba's biggest fan
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
31,573
Baneofthegame said:
I don’t really understand this point of view, I mean, if CHO isn’t there, Greenwood controls the ball.
Click to expand...
If CHO wasn't putting his arm up first, it would have hit greenwood's. Both of them were raising their hands in unnatural positions in a tustle for the ball.

As I said I think it's a pen on balance but not as outrageous as what we've had against us recently. This one at least I can see where the ref came from even if I disagree overall. On the Sheffield United incidents, it was just bizzare. That's my original point.
 

Baneofthegame

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2019
Messages
3,009
VP89 said:
If CHO wasn't putting his arm up first, it would have hit greenwood's. Both of them were raising their hands in unnatural positions in a tustle for the ball.

As I said I think it's a pen on balance but not as outrageous as what we've had against us recently. This one at least I can see where the ref came from even if I disagree overall. On the Sheffield United incidents, it was just bizzare. That's my original point.
Click to expand...
I just don’t see how it’s a “tussle” considering they come from two different angles, nor do I see how “well it would of hit Greenwood’s” is a viable excuse.

Either way like many have said in the long run it wouldn’t be good for the game for these to be given, but to the rules we have now, it definitely should have been.
 

VP89

Pogba's biggest fan
Joined
Dec 6, 2015
Messages
31,573
Baneofthegame said:
I just don’t see how it’s a “tussle” considering they come from two different angles, nor do I see how “well it would of hit Greenwood’s” is a viable excuse.

Either way like many have said in the long run it wouldn’t be good for the game for these to be given, but to the rules we have now, it definitely should have been.
Click to expand...
What do you mean you don't get it was a tustle? They were both tustling over the ball?
 

Oranges038

Full Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2020
Messages
12,122
Baneofthegame said:
I just don’t see how it’s a “tussle” considering they come from two different angles, nor do I see how “well it would of hit Greenwood’s” is a viable excuse.

Either way like many have said in the long run it wouldn’t be good for the game for these to be given, but to the rules we have now, it definitely should have been.
Click to expand...
It might not of hit his hand, but it may have hit his hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.