Rossy Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) As long as it's not deliberate then it's not a foul. It's the only law in football where it has to be intentional. You should look at the rules - it matters not where the ball is going, or how unfair it would be. That's the rules. You'll always be given it in the modern game though as very few people appreciate the clarity of the handball law - as you have demonstrated. Unfortunately, the word 'intentional' is still one that is open to interpretation......the only arbiter of the action being deliberate or not isn't the player himself, but the referee. I've no doubt that pretty much every player that's been penalised for handball in the box will say that he didn't do it 'deliberately'. For me, as with every law in football, common sense has to be used in deciding what was 'deliberate' or not. Yesterday, Dixon dived in front of the ball with his arm up at head height.....I'm absolutely certain he would say that he didn't deliberately mean to handle the ball, but the fact is that he was determined to stop it going into the net (quite rightly) and he took the risk that he would be using an arm to block the shot. Common sense dictates that in a case like this, the action can be considered 'deliberate' by the referee. I don't see how he had any other choice yesterday....not to give a penalty would have been, well, wrong. Edit : I saw just saw your comments about clarity. Pretty much the only laws of the game with real clarity are things like the offside law, or the ball going out of play, size of the goalposts etc. Anything that actually happens during play such as free-kicks etc, is pretty much interpretational. Edited March 9, 2015 by Rossy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Unfortunately, the word 'intentional' is still one that is open to interpretation......the only arbiter of the action being deliberate or not isn't the player himself, but the referee. I've no doubt that pretty much every player that's been penalised for handball in the box will say that he didn't do it 'deliberately'. For me, as with every law in football, common sense has to be used in deciding what was 'deliberate' or not. Yesterday, Dixon dived in front of the ball with his arm up at head height.....I'm absolutely certain he would say that he didn't deliberately mean to handle the ball, but the fact is that he was determined to stop it going into the net (quite rightly) and he took the risk that he would be using an arm to block the shot. Common sense dictates that in a case like this, the action can be considered 'deliberate' by the referee. I don't see how he had any other choice yesterday....not to give a penalty would have been, well, wrong. Edit : I saw just saw your comments about clarity. Pretty much the only laws of the game with real clarity are things like the offside law, or the ball going out of play, size of the goalposts etc. Anything that actually happens during play such as free-kicks etc, is pretty much interpretational. Therein lies the problem. I've been saying on this thread I thought it was the wrong call, but I'm inclined to agree with you on a lot of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Unfortunately, the word 'intentional' is still one that is open to interpretation......the only arbiter of the action being deliberate or not isn't the player himself, but the referee. I've no doubt that pretty much every player that's been penalised for handball in the box will say that he didn't do it 'deliberately'. For me, as with every law in football, common sense has to be used in deciding what was 'deliberate' or not. Yesterday, Dixon dived in front of the ball with his arm up at head height.....I'm absolutely certain he would say that he didn't deliberately mean to handle the ball, but the fact is that he was determined to stop it going into the net (quite rightly) and he took the risk that he would be using an arm to block the shot. Common sense dictates that in a case like this, the action can be considered 'deliberate' by the referee. I don't see how he had any other choice yesterday....not to give a penalty would have been, well, wrong. Edit : I saw just saw your comments about clarity. Pretty much the only laws of the game with real clarity are things like the offside law, or the ball going out of play, size of the goalposts etc. Anything that actually happens during play such as free-kicks etc, is pretty much interpretational. Yes, the interpretation of intent is of course subjective. However, the law is very clear that there has to be intent. But you're right enough, penalty and red card was the just outcome yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted March 9, 2015 Author Share Posted March 9, 2015 John Collins v Netherlands euro 96.... I don't think he meant that did he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossy Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Therein lies the problem. I've been saying on this thread I thought it was the wrong call, but I'm inclined to agree with you on a lot of that. It's the wording of the law that leads to confusion. How do you know if someone did something deliberately ? You don't....you interpret it according to the circumstances in front of you. It's a really poorly worded law. But the only real alternative is to take away the word 'deliberate' and make all instances of handball a foul. Would that be better ? I don't know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoonTheSlope Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 The Celtic fans are hilarious The united player raised his hand just like Henrik Larrson raised his to protect his face against Villareal(??) in 2004 which ended up in the net. Yet back then they cried it was a goal as it wasn't intentional Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinetartan Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Suarez v Ghana. J big Joe against the welsh at annfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan cake Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Handball is a bizarre law. How many 100% deliberate handballs can you recall? Faddy v Norway, Gough v sprinkler?... some cheating French whank against Eire twice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 It's the wording of the law that leads to confusion. How do you know if someone did something deliberately ? You don't....you interpret it according to the circumstances in front of you. It's a really poorly worded law. But the only real alternative is to take away the word 'deliberate' and make all instances of handball a foul. Would that be better ? I don't know... I don't think it would be no. In a perverse way, I actually quite like it the way it is. It's for the same reason I wouldn't like to see a video ref introduced for big decisions. I know it frustrates the hell out of us all but it all adds to the excitement IMO. that said I'm sure we would find something to argue about regardless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Gills Mcginty Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Handball is a bizarre law. How many 100% deliberate handballs can you recall? Faddy v Norway, Gough v sprinkler?... Ian Murray, Fraserburgh v Clyde, Scottish Cup 1997. Brian Rice missed the resultant penalty. I might be the only one that remembers that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan cake Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Ian Murray, Fraserburgh v Clyde, Scottish Cup 1997. Brian Rice missed the resultant penalty. I might be the only one that remembers that though. Wonder if rice ever got out of his Qatar jail sentence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fish Gills Mcginty Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I dunno, he smashed his heed against the dyke at the Bellslea that game though, looked sare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 It's the wording of the law that leads to confusion. How do you know if someone did something deliberately ? You don't....you interpret it according to the circumstances in front of you. It's a really poorly worded law. But the only real alternative is to take away the word 'deliberate' and make all instances of handball a foul. Would that be better ? I don't know... Don't think that would work either as you would have people just kicking the ball at opponent's arms at point blank range to try and get a penalty. The problem with the word deliberate is that people understandably interpret that as being "he meant to handle the ball" and of course that's not what the official meaning is supposed to be and what referees apply. When you add in your arm being in an unnatural position, that is just even more confusing. Was the old wording for these sorts of deliberate or intentional offences not something like "Seeking to gain an advantage" which while not ideal does convey a bit better what the law is trying to do. I don't think that is a great description but it conveys better than deliberate or intentional what the law is trying to achieve. I don't actually think that there's too much wrong with the law or the interpretation as it stands, a bit more consistency from referees and fans - and more especially pundits - having a bit more understanding of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Don't think that would work either as you would have people just kicking the ball at opponent's arms at point blank range to try and get a penalty. The problem with the word deliberate is that people understandably interpret that as being "he meant to handle the ball" and of course that's not what the official meaning is supposed to be and what referees apply. When you add in your arm being in an unnatural position, that is just even more confusing. Was the old wording for these sorts of deliberate or intentional offences not something like "Seeking to gain an advantage" which while not ideal does convey a bit better what the law is trying to do. I don't think that is a great description but it conveys better than deliberate or intentional what the law is trying to achieve. I don't actually think that there's too much wrong with the law or the interpretation as it stands, a bit more consistency from referees and fans - and more especially pundits - having a bit more understanding of the law. I think you're thinking of offside. The law is difficult to judge. Do you think Dixon deliberately - or even recklessly - played the ball with his hand yesterday? I would say not but I wouldn't want to wager any of my children's lives on it. There's no right answer here, short of refs developing ESP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 (edited) Don't think that would work either as you would have people just kicking the ball at opponent's arms at point blank range to try and get a penalty. The problem with the word deliberate is that people understandably interpret that as being "he meant to handle the ball" and of course that's not what the official meaning is supposed to be and what referees apply. When you add in your arm being in an unnatural position, that is just even more confusing. Was the old wording for these sorts of deliberate or intentional offences not something like "Seeking to gain an advantage" which while not ideal does convey a bit better what the law is trying to do. I don't think that is a great description but it conveys better than deliberate or intentional what the law is trying to achieve. I don't actually think that there's too much wrong with the law or the interpretation as it stands, a bit more consistency from referees and fans - and more especially pundits - having a bit more understanding of the law. Agree with most of this mate but your last statement is where it will always be a talking point. I'm an Amateur referee and I've changed my mind already on this particular incident after seeing replays. I bet when I go to training tomorrow there will be debate on the merits of it being an incorrect/correct decision. You can have as much understanding of the law as possible but, when it comes down to YOUR interpretation, you are always going to have inconsistency with decisions like this. As I said already, the ref deservedly got pelters yesterday, but for that incident he would be getting abuse no matter what way he went. Edited March 9, 2015 by Angus_Young Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Agree with most of this mate but your last statement is where it will always be a talking point. I'm an Amateur referee and I've changed my mind already on this particular incident after seeing replays. I bet when I go to training tomorrow there will be debate on the merits of it being an incorrect/correct decision. You can have as much understanding of the law as possible but, when it comes down to YOUR interpretation, you are always going to have inconsistency with decisions like this. As I said already, the ref deservedly got pelters yesterday, but for that incident he would be getting abuse no matter what way he went. So what have you changed your mind to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted March 9, 2015 Author Share Posted March 9, 2015 Don't think that would work either as you would have people just kicking the ball at opponent's arms at point blank range to try and get a penalty. Reminds me of that terrible decision (in our favour) v Belgium in 2000. Shot is blasted straight at defenders goolies, he protects himself with his hands, ref decides penalty and red card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 So what have you changed your mind to? No penalty. To me it wasn't deliberate and his arm wasn't in an unnatural position, so therefor can't be given. I have sympathy with the ref on that on though as it obviously happened within the blink of an eye. As I say though, I can very much see the case for it being given. Rossy made a few points about it a page or two ago that I find it difficult to disagree with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoonTheSlope Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I'm just playing devils advocate here but if the handball incident had happened anywhere else on the pitch other than both goalines would a foul have been given? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus_Young Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I'm just playing devils advocate here but if the handball incident had happened anywhere else on the pitch other than both goalines would a foul have been given? If it was the same ref then I would say yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaid Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I think you're thinking of offside. The law is difficult to judge. Do you think Dixon deliberately - or even recklessly - played the ball with his hand yesterday? I would say not but I wouldn't want to wager any of my children's lives on it. There's no right answer here, short of refs developing ESP. I think he moves to block the ball and as Griffiths is shooting he brings his arm up - probably to protect his face - and the ball hits his arm. So for me its a stonewall penalty. The clincher for me- and I've had to watch replays to see this - is that its not a case of his arm being static and it hitting him, he brings his arm up to where the ball hits it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
giblet Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 All I know is, Hibees are back at Hampden, third time lucky in 4 years??????? GGTTH Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenAngus Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I think he moves to block the ball and as Griffiths is shooting he brings his arm up - probably to protect his face - and the ball hits his arm. So for me its a stonewall penalty. The clincher for me- and I've had to watch replays to see this - is that its not a case of his arm being static and it hitting him, he brings his arm up to where the ball hits it. I agree. In instances like this ask yourself 2 questions: 1. Would I expect a penalty for my team in the same scenario 2. Would I expect the opposition to get a penalty for the same Looking at yesterday's match I'd say yes to both. I still think that the triple sanction is wrong though. Would anyone be in favour of a 'penalty goal' being awarded and a yellow card issued? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamntg Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 I agree. In instances like this ask yourself 2 questions: 1. Would I expect a penalty for my team in the same scenario 2. Would I expect the opposition to get a penalty for the same Looking at yesterday's match I'd say yes to both. I still think that the triple sanction is wrong though. Would anyone be in favour of a 'penalty goal' being awarded and a yellow card issued? In instances like this you only have to ask one question - was it deliberate? Difficult to judge - I'd say 60/40 no, but I'm not screaming and shouting about it. Happy to accept the ref judged it intentional. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedTA Posted March 9, 2015 Share Posted March 9, 2015 Reading the BBC brown is at it now too. Trying to get connolly and ciftci cited. Whether they should be or not I don't know but that thug brown sticking his oar in is a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.