A&H

Wolves v Citee

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Referee Store
If this happens at grassroots and is spotted by players, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. However, I'd be giving the goal. Pet hate of mine, players arguing for handball because 'they gained an advantage'. And?
 
QuaverRef said:
If this happens at grassroots and is spotted by players, you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. However, I'd be giving the goal. Pet hate of mine, players arguing for handball because 'they gained an advantage'. And?
Click to expand...
Had it last night in build up to a goal. Totally unintentional. Cue moans and groans from the side that conceded the goal. Problem is if it changes players still wont have a clue...
 
Can we have a new Law. Maybe we can call it Elleray's Law to save renumbering the other laws

Elleray's Law - If football expects a certain outcome ignore the other 17 laws and go with the expected outcome.

This isn't a new phenomenon. IFAB have had multiple opportunities to change this law. Stop hiding behind spirit of the law, someone ask him the question why IFAB expects referees to sacrifice their integrity to pander to 'what football expects'.

I'm sure any law change, if it does com, will be called 'a clarification' even though it will fundamentally change the actual meaning of the law.
 
bester said:
Stop hiding behind spirit of the law, someone ask him the question why IFAB expects referees to sacrifice their integrity to pander to 'what football expects'.
Click to expand...

Well, in his defence, the spirit clause has always been there in some form as far as I know.

Personally, I agree with the spirit clause, laws can be unintentionally rigid in its thinking and application and I feel that this example absolutely proves this. Lots of people jumping to say "The law says this and damned with anything else", which is fine if you're black and white about things like that, but it misses the point of the fairness of the game at it's heart. Which in football is, you really shouldn't be scoring with your hand. :p
 
No officials saw it. No defenders appealed for it. I missed it in real time and I was looking for it. If it had been seen that isn't deliberate. He headed it it hit his arm it went in. Goal
 
RobOda said:
Which in football is, you really shouldn't be scoring with your hand. :p
Click to expand...
this in itself is as rigid as law as you put it though, because there are many scenarios where the ball might go in via a hand that are perfectly legitimate, forgetting the difference of opinion here.
 
I look forward to my weekend games now, everytime I hear a loud shout from the crowd for something (afterall, they are the paying customers and I now have instructions to do as they expect), am just going to give it, or, same with players, if there is a tackle I dont deem a foul yet the players stop playing because they think its a foul, then fine, a foul it shall be because thats what football expects

There is nothing on page 102 of the good book itself which can make this incident an offence and given Mr Ellery has a part to play in constructing the book, its disappointing and confusing to read him say otherwise

Sheer nonsense and a smoke screen, either construct a law book that we can follow, or dont, simply give refs free range.
 
Last edited:
I knew that at the professional level (based on evidence referenced earlier), a referee would have been expected/guided to disallow this goal
I'm yet to see a response from Elleray, which doesn't reference 'spirit of the game' or 'football expects'
This philosophy is fine, except that we rely upon it to often because the Laws are arguably unclear and frequently subject to unofficial interpretations; which may or may not be disseminated down the chain through FIFA's Member Associations. Many of these spontaneous and transient interpretations don't make it into Law, leaving the media, fans and grass roots referees confused and squabbling
I think the best policy is (based on everyone's input to this thread), 'if it's not in the book, ignore it'
 
Big Cat said:
I think the best policy is (based on everyone's input to this thread), 'if it's not in the book, ignore it'
Click to expand...

Well it is kind of in the book.

I'm a bit amused that the answer has been given and isn't being accepted. :dead:

JamesL said:
this in itself is as rigid as law as you put it though, because there are many scenarios where the ball might go in via a hand that are perfectly legitimate, forgetting the difference of opinion here.
Click to expand...

Obviously, you can score via a hand, particularly if you punch it into your own net, but I thought it was obvious what I meant? :p
 
As usual IFAB hand out a totally incorrect answer that cannot be supported in Law and will steer referees into incorrect decisions.

Ignore the IFAB answer, it’s worthless.
 
Mintyref said:
What utter nonsense is posted about handball on here, not deliberate even within the so called guidance issued by the powers that be......if they are so intent on realigning our interpretation of handball the solution is simple, change the f%$÷×ng law!
Click to expand...
They have changed it. They just haven't put it in the book or made it clear to all.
 
Big Cat said:
I knew that at the professional level (based on evidence referenced earlier), a referee would have been expected/guided to disallow this goal
I'm yet to see a response from Elleray, which doesn't reference 'spirit of the game' or 'football expects'
This philosophy is fine, except that we rely upon it to often because the Laws are arguably unclear and frequently subject to unofficial interpretations; which may or may not be disseminated down the chain through FIFA's Member Associations. Many of these spontaneous and transient interpretations don't make it into Law, leaving the media, fans and grass roots referees confused and squabbling
I think the best policy is (based on everyone's input to this thread), 'if it's not in the book, ignore it'
Click to expand...
I agree with pretty much every point @Big Cat has made in this whole thread.

And this is also a sound observation. I think that IFAB always answer "us" with the "spirit" because we ask the questions about the holes in the laws;)

And this is one!

I am very surprised at the right honourable member for @Padfoot west, who seems to have slept through the world cup of bizarre handballs.

I think there's a common thread here. We know the handball law is SNAFU, IFAB have confessed, players and fans are confused, pundits are clueless (about everything of course!)... and we need the handball law updating poste haste.

The "careless" idea from the @CapnBloodbeard is a good one.
Clarification about what handball offences should get YC would be good - we got briefed about "blatant" holding before this season - I like the idea of "blatant" handball earning YC, rather than stopping the opponent gaining possession etc. It would make it easy to YC a forward for an obvious attempt to control a high ball with the hand - gamesmanship/borderline USB-type stuff.
Use of arms in blocking shots and crosses should be clarified, use of arms when jumping/sliding should also be covered... we don't need details, but enough pointers... deliberate or not just isn't working.

(Oh yeah, and at the coal face, I gave a "world cup" handball after 5 mins of this season;))
 
Deliberate is a very easy word to work with.......

The only reason that confusion reigns is because of baby ass players who whine and moan at decisions they don’t like and the referees who haven’t got enough backbone to stand by unpopular decisions applying the laws as written.

‘Spirit of the game’ is the hiding place of the weak and the inept.
 
Padfoot said:
Deliberate is a very easy word to work with.......

The only reason that confusion reigns is because of baby ass players who whine and moan at decisions they don’t like and the referees who haven’t got enough backbone to stand by unpopular decisions applying the laws as written.

‘Spirit of the game’ is the hiding place of the weak and the inept.
Click to expand...
I'm not disagreeing with you here. My argument earlier in the thread was more to do with HB exepectations from professional referees and I don't give many HB decisions myself if they don't match the criteria for deliberate. The problem with the term deliberate, is it infers a need to be mind readers to determine intent. I think words like careless, avoidable and unsporting are easier to interpret and judge
 
Ciley Myrus said:
There is nothing on page 102 of the good book itself which can make this incident an offence .
Click to expand...
I disagree with this - and as I said before, even before these top--secret directives, I would have called it DHB (personally, I don't think some of the DHB offences in the WC have been all that radical).

The following must be considered:
• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
•  the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence

So, the hand was moved into the path of the ball, satisfying point 1
There was plenty of distance and visibility, so it wasn't unexpected.

Now, these are only 2 guidelines (I notice that most of the guidelines have been removed from the LOTG).

What's tricky is that the LOTG really provide buggar-all guidance. Was it deliberate? Well, wtf does that mean?
It meets 2 of those considerations. (of course, the 'slide tackle/ block = automatic DHB no matter where the hand is' directive doesn't meet ANY of the criteria, but the LOTG don't explicitly state any of those must be met - simply they need to be considered). Given how little information is actually included in DHB now, I disagree that Law 12 in isolation of any additional directives doesn't permit a foul here.

I think in many other scenarios, if the player simply misjudged a predictable ball and missed it, and handled it instead, we'd be calling a foul. And I do believe that's in line with the spirit of the law.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top