Yesterday's game podcast was great and Marcotti was absolutely bang on the handball . He said that the application of the law is different in different countries and the people who speak in extremes like oh how is the defender supposed to jump without this or there will be 100's of penalties like this if you give it are just speaking total rubbish . It's ridiculous that these ex footballers who played years back come out and say stupid stuff without knowing the rules and then question the refs who are aware of the rules
Was it a pen?
- Thread starter ivaldo
- Start date
You see that's the problem for me and it's not just a country thing, the application is different from referee to referee and the same referee will also apply things differently. My problem with the entire thing is that the rule and the directive are stupid,they give too much place to inconsistency and in the box the consequences are massive due to the nature of the sanction.
For me it should only be a penalty if the handball is deemed intentional otherwise it should be a free kick.
That sounds great but is actually a terrible idea and that's why the word deliberate is soon going to be removed from the law . Ref can't decide deliberate anyway . If a player is making himself bigger then even without deliberately moving his hand to ball he is gaining an unfair advantage if the ball is stopped by the hand
The notion of making himself bigger is subjective though, by using the term "making" you insinuate that he takes a positive action. In reality humans don't move like penguins, our natural positions and motions are wider than the trunk of our body. That's the part I struggle with, I'm not bothered by mistakes or different interpretations but I can tell you that I won't always agree with the referee and that my interpretation won't necessarily be wrong or right because the all thing is subjective.
The good thing about the video posted earlier is that the man is honest, he says that the instructions follows the philosophy of attacking football and are meant to shrink the target that are on referees. I can get behind that if everyone follows it.
A free kick in the penalty area is called a penalty.
Not necessarily and you should know it since it happened a few weeks ago.A free kick in the penalty area is called a penalty.
watch the players reaction to the refs decision. He knows what he was doing, jumping up with leg and arm out making himself big to block as much as he could. That's why it's a peno, the intent to block with his arm is there and he knows it.
A ref can’t decide whether a handball is intentional or not. The only thing they can decide on is if a player made an action with their arm/hand towards the ball. In this case, he did, therefore it’s a handball. It’s a little harsh but the ref doesn’t have the time of a high court judge who can spent weeks deciding whether something is intentional or not.
For practical purposes, it has to be a bit more black and white.
If it's direct, if it's indirect then no. Weren't they rewriting the law about the arm being in an unnatural position? Which this was and I think it was a penalty.
I'm pretty sure that it's not what they used to determine the handball, the referee simply decided that Kimpembe took a risk by jumping and turning, based on the directive that's enough to award a penalty. I'm fine with it, if every referee have the same view about what is and isn't a risk but that's subjective and won't happen.
Yeah, there's always going to be some subjectivity and variance between officials though, the rules being more black and white minimises that somewhat - but it'll always be there.
This.
When you cowardly turn your back against a shot, you deserve whatever comes your way anyway.
By making himself bigger (extending his hands), you can actually argue that the intent is very clear even.
Sorry Mark Halsey was wrong. Handball rule has been revised, it has nothing to do with intention any more, it is more to do on whether you "enlarge" your silhouette by extending your arm. i.e. stick your dick out it is not a penalty, stick your finger out it is.
Funny thing is that the Porto VAR should be much more controversial, was it offside, did he touch his shirt, the striker was never going to score anyway....
That's right. The problem is that there are now so many versions of what constitutes a penalty that it is hardly surprising that people can be confused.
I just hope that they can settle on one clear statement of what is hand ball in the penalty area which is the same as outside the penalty area.
I don't understand why people get so hung up on the fairness of handball penalties? Sometimes penalties are unfortunate and weren't intended by the defender.
I played for a shipping league club in Cork a few years ago. I hadn't played in a while so it took me a few months of hard training to get my fitness up before the manager started including me in a few squads. Eventually I made my debut when he put me on at right back for the night last 20 minutes.
I'd never played full back and as a typically left side attacker, I was well out of my depth. Less than 2 minutes in, I got twisted inside out by one of their forwards, lost him completely and stepped backwards to find him only for the slippery bastard to go over my outstretched leg for a stonewall penalty.
It was unfortunate and certainly unintentional (I didn't know where the fecker was) but even my own mother couldn't have argued it wasn't a pen.
Kimpembe had time to see the shot coming, he had time to turn his body to block it, he had time to lift his arms from his sides to make himself a bigger obstacle between the ball and the goal. This argument that he didn't intend to handball it, or couldn't have know the ball was going to strike his arm is completely irrelevant - the onus is on him not to have his arm in a position away from his body where it could be struck. It's not on the referee to somehow prove his intent.
I played for a shipping league club in Cork a few years ago. I hadn't played in a while so it took me a few months of hard training to get my fitness up before the manager started including me in a few squads. Eventually I made my debut when he put me on at right back for the night last 20 minutes.
I'd never played full back and as a typically left side attacker, I was well out of my depth. Less than 2 minutes in, I got twisted inside out by one of their forwards, lost him completely and stepped backwards to find him only for the slippery bastard to go over my outstretched leg for a stonewall penalty.
It was unfortunate and certainly unintentional (I didn't know where the fecker was) but even my own mother couldn't have argued it wasn't a pen.
Kimpembe had time to see the shot coming, he had time to turn his body to block it, he had time to lift his arms from his sides to make himself a bigger obstacle between the ball and the goal. This argument that he didn't intend to handball it, or couldn't have know the ball was going to strike his arm is completely irrelevant - the onus is on him not to have his arm in a position away from his body where it could be struck. It's not on the referee to somehow prove his intent.