The Handball

[JimmyK]

Anytime that the ball strikes an arm (and lets forget about below/above the sleeve line) should be handball, even if accidental. The rule would be the same for everyone and it would help end the suspicions of favourtism. The only exception should be when, in the ref's opinion, an oppsotion player deliberately directed the ball on to a players arm. In this case it wouldn't be handball and the attemped cheat should result in an automatic yellow card (and ref's should be sanctioned when they tried to bottle out of giving it)

If anything it should be the total opposite the handball law was basically to stop people from picking the ball up it wasnt designed to be used for giving penalties when a ball bounces up onto someones arm without them realising.

 

[Mase]

I don’t know why I read skysports ref watch, I knew dreamt would agree “it was the right decision”. The fact it was the biggest decision of the day and it was towards the end of the article, should have been enough. I have never understood why any commentator uses the word deliberate, handballs and fouls are rarely deliberate. It’s just a word they use to make their opinion correct. It hit his arm, they scored, it was handball. Simple

 

[Moderatelywarmwater]

They referred him mate

In my defence, I was very very drunk by the second half

 

[RD2910]

I don’t know why I read skysports ref watch, I knew dreamt would agree “it was the right decision”. The fact it was the biggest decision of the day and it was towards the end of the article, should have been enough. I have never understood why any commentator uses the word deliberate, handballs and fouls are rarely deliberate. It’s just a word they use to make their opinion correct. It hit his arm, they scored, it was handball. Simple

If it wasn't deliberate, it wasn't a handball.

 

[wandyr79]

If there was no VAR it would easily be a case of hard done by but in real time with only one angle you could see why a ref wouldn't give it. I said it would be harsh after only seeing the view from the side, but then you see another angle and it clearly changes your mind. It was so obvious I would say that it was one of the worst decisions for a good few years.

 

[maccavennie]

If there was no VAR it would easily be a case of hard done by but in real time with only one angle you could see why a ref wouldn't give it. I said it would be harsh after only seeing the view from the side, but then you see another angle and it clearly changes your mind. It was so obvious I would say that it was one of the worst decisions for a good few years.

Yep, if there's no VAR and the ref missed it in real time, I'm like "Yep, fair enough". The fact VAR sees it, tells him to view it, he watches it about 7 times and still gives it is just a huge amount of absolute gobshytery.

 

[DuncanPatterson]

Referees should have total liability

Each team should have three issues they can request a full enquiry about post-match (like in tennis where they can dispute bad calls)

If the referee is found to have made an obvious error (as is 100% definitely the case here) then a suspension should be put in place with the financial implications that could incur

It's a dereliction of duties at best, potentially even corruption in some cases

I appreciate this may seem a bit extreme but right now there's seemingly very little accountability

Refs can make extremely controversial calls (even going against VAR) with zero consequences

That seems pretty bizarre

 

[Mase]

If it wasn't deliberate, it wasn't a handball.

I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic? Assuming you are.

 

[Caolam]

I have watched it a number of times, he leans into the path of the bal and plays it with his arm. I gains an advantage from playing the ball with his arm, it is a free kick. Unfortunately it is not a surprise that it isn’t given as such.

 

[RD2910]

I’m not sure if you’re being sarcastic? Assuming you are.

No, I'm not. You said 'it hit his arm, they scored, it was handball. Simple.' That's not how handball works. The reason the commentators mention deliberate is because the part of the law that would have to apply in the Jesus incident mentions deliberately touching the ball with the arm. It was a handball and should have been disallowed, but not just because it hit him.

 

[Timinenfield]

Imagine if arsenal had actually won the league with that goal

 

[blue61]

It doesn't matter if it was deliberate or not. His arm controlled the ball, gave him an unfair advantage, took it into his path, leading to a goal. That's handball.

 

[Lob]

Simple fact is that if it had of been us it would have been disallowed, no doubt about it. Premier league football is completely unwatchable in its current state, unless you are one of the top clubs and then you can just do whatever you want and spend whatever you want so you stay at the top.

 

[Magus]

I don’t know why I read skysports ref watch, I knew dreamt would agree “it was the right decision”. The fact it was the biggest decision of the day and it was towards the end of the article, should have been enough. I have never understood why any commentator uses the word deliberate, handballs and fouls are rarely deliberate. It’s just a word they use to make their opinion correct. It hit his arm, they scored, it was handball. Simple

I don't know why anyone watches Sky Sports at all, reading about it in here is bad enough.

I binned Sky years ago, but I was in a mate's (RS) house on Saturday and of course he had it on. The thing that struck me was that it hasn't changed at all, ihe presenters all deliver identikit Sky speak, it is a definite style coached into them, and just as irritating and phoney as ever.

 

[RD2910]

It doesn't matter if it was deliberate or not. His arm controlled the ball, gave him an unfair advantage, took it into his path, leading to a goal. That's handball.

Not how the law works mate.