Handball by Onana

[pfim]

Not really. He's openly saying the one last night is a "modern handball" penalty where weeks ago for pretty much the same incident he's saying they player is "too close" for it to be given.

Gallagher isn't even a ref anymore or on any official panal of referees, so he just gets wheeled out on shows to defend his mates. You can't have 2 separate opposite decisions be 'valid' for the same thing.

VAR has made the whole thing even worse as they've basically spent millions not to improve the game or add consistency but to re-enforce the opinion of 1 official (mainly the one at Stockley Park). And his opinion is going to differ from another opinion each week as the rules are open to interpretation.

It's probably the mentality us fans need to take. That every single official is going to have a different opinion to decisions each game. So the exact same incident one week won't be judged the same the next.

VAR was apparently supposed to change that.

That has always been the case, from the first match ever played. And I don't think VAR was meant to change that? It was meant to fix incidents not seen or not seen correctly, obvious errors.

The handball rule itself is stupid that tries to eliminate the subjectivity, but that creates obvious unfairness in its application.

This is not to absolve anyone in this, his arm is in a natural position and the referee needs to take that into consideration and not give the penalty.

If it is not given on the field, I highly doubt VAR gives it. By that same token, you can't say that giving it was egregious enough to overturn it, by rule.

Common sense needs to prevail and the referee cannot give it, no matter what his assistant says or how much those whiners complain.

 

[riddick]

Commentator said when the pen was given that it will be unlikely that VAR will overturn the refs on field decision. VAR loathe to disagree with a ref when a decision as crucial as that is made so protected ref. Now if the ref didn't give a pen then VAR would probably attempt to agree with the ref unless totally obvious. Think we would have got away it.

I know this is ages ago but isn't that the problem? The ONFIELD ref didn't call for a pen, the linesman did?

 

[riddick]

Dunno if been posted

"its that the hand is above the shoulder and/or head"

Its in line with the shoulder. What the absolute crap is Gallagher talking? Oh, nevermind, I answered my question thinking Gallagher had anything to say worth listening to.

 

[matty1878]

we’re just laughed at by Ll
officials

 

[Bedfordblue]

Dunno if been posted

Really shouldn’t be surprised that baldy bell contradicts himself but great post.
Absolute perfect example of what is wrong with referees now.
If he can’t even have a consistent position on it, how are different refs supposed to.

 

[matty1878]

Really shouldn’t be surprised that baldy bell contradicts himself but great post.
Absolute perfect example of what is wrong with referees now.
If he can’t even have a consistent position on it, how are different refs supposed to.

if it’s the top 6 oh it’s not a pen

anyone else it is

 

[ClausThomsen]

"its that the hand is above the shoulder and/or head"

Its in line with the shoulder. What the absolute crap is Gallagher talking? Oh, nevermind, I answered my question thinking Gallagher had anything to say worth listening to.

View attachment 239859

But the same incident there are pictures showing his hand above the head. But does the ball need to strike the part of his arm/hand above the shoulder or is the hand above the head in itself enough of an 'unnatural position' whatever that means?

I think you're going in a bit much on Gallagher there. He's trying to explain why we're seeing these ridiculous looking decisions. It's not about him defending a refs decision at all costs but he's illustrating that the ridiculous degree of micro-management within the wording of the laws now means a case can be made for a decision to go either way and both be correct, or more accurately not necessarily wrong, within the wording of the laws.

For me refs are being put into an impossible situation by those in charge of the rules.

 

[kenada_blue]

I agree with your points, but there can't ever be exactly the same incident twice. It makes sense that similar incidents might in one case be illegal and one case legal if both borderline. I don't think you can avoid it.

As @ToffeeTim says above though, there certainly is a big club bias. There is definitely pressure on the refs and the VARs to go with the decisions which benefit those sides, because if they don't they get absolutely hammered. They probably don't even know they're doing it a lot of the time.

Ball is kicked from 2 yards away and hits a hand/arm in questionable positions. One is given a penalty. One isn't. Then there's multiple examples where players have used it to gain an advantage.

I've mentioned months ago that when it's an attacking player in a questionable handball situation, he usually given the benefit of accidental. When it's a defensive situation, it tends to be looked at differently.

The overall picture is...the refs all have different opinions on what most of the rules are in the modern game. We see it every week

 

[kenada_blue]

That has always been the case, from the first match ever played. And I don't think VAR was meant to change that? It was meant to fix incidents not seen or not seen correctly, obvious errors.

The handball rule itself is stupid that tries to eliminate the subjectivity, but that creates obvious unfairness in its application.

This is not to absolve anyone in this, his arm is in a natural position and the referee needs to take that into consideration and not give the penalty.

If it is not given on the field, I highly doubt VAR gives it. By that same token, you can't say that giving it was egregious enough to overturn it, by rule.

Common sense needs to prevail and the referee cannot give it, no matter what his assistant says or how much those whiners complain.

But surely it is though as VAR overrules on field decisions by the referee. See the DCL goal against Spurs for example. You're basically having 2 officials running a game now because not once in the years in the PL it's been used as a referee overruled a VAR decision. They have in Europe.

If VAR is fixing "errors" it should also lead to consistency they don't happen again. But again that's not happening.

And I don't think people are questioning the handball rule. It's the usual "give one week and not the next" inconsistencies that cause the grief.

 

[Keablue]

Moura was sent off against us in April this year

to be fair we were already down to ten in that match, the Premier League's secret manifesto allows Everton to play against ten only when we are already reduced in numbers

 

[riddick]

But the same incident there are pictures showing his hand above the head. But does the ball need to strike the part of his arm/hand above the shoulder or is the hand above the head in itself enough of an 'unnatural position' whatever that means?

I think you're going in a bit much on Gallagher there. He's trying to explain why we're seeing these ridiculous looking decisions. It's not about him defending a refs decision at all costs but he's illustrating that the ridiculous degree of micro-management within the wording of the laws now means a case can be made for a decision to go either way and both be correct, or more accurately not necessarily wrong, within the wording of the laws.

For me refs are being put into an impossible situation by those in charge of the rules.

I mean, even your picture shows the ball NOT hitting his arm above his head. Ergo: stupid fn decision by all involved.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

Spot on - it’s a pen as the current interpretation of the rules are but should never be a pen as the rules need changing- you can’t chop ur own arm off when trying to legitimately block a shot from one yard away and city are just lucky that ake’s shot was heading for row z. On target it would have hit onana’s body

The issue with the rules is that they refer to a "natural position" but they are not interpreted in that way. Anyone who plays football will tell you that Onana's arm were in a completely natural position for a player making a slide tackle to block a shot. He wasn't trying to make himself bigger a la John Terry. Your arms basically have to be in that position otherwise you have no control/balance and risk an injury. Also, once in that position the ball was so close to him that he had no time to move his arm out of the way. The natural position wording is essentially made up and means that the arms need to be next to the side or behind the back which is the opposite of a natural possession unless you are standing to attention.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

Dunno if been posted

It's absolutely insane that someone can argue the Onana one is a penalty but the Romero one not a pen. Onana is closer to the ball, his arm is below the shoulder and his arm is a normal position for someone sliding. The Romero one is more of a penalty in every way yet Dermot reaches completely the opposite conclusion. It completely inexplicable.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

For me it is completely unintentional and incredibly unfortunate, but it is a penalty. His arm undeniably stopped the ball. I do wish there was more consistency from officials on these rulings, but I’d struggle not to give it if I was an official.

I can only assume you have never played the game because most people who have don't want that to be given as handball.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

I agree with your points, but there can't ever be exactly the same incident twice. It makes sense that similar incidents might in one case be illegal and one case legal if both borderline. I don't think you can avoid it.

As @ToffeeTim says above though, there certainly is a big club bias. There is definitely pressure on the refs and the VARs to go with the decisions which benefit those sides, because if they don't they get absolutely hammered. They probably don't even know they're doing it a lot of the time.

I can accept that referees will make different decisions in different game but Gallagher is literally looking at two identical incidents and saying one is a pen and one isn't.