I give up...
@Ross , any chance of you helping out by adding a dinosaur emoji for us to use on relevant occasions ....Play on, accidental.... Too close and fast
One of the best refs in Prem history and the VAR said NO handball, so I’m in good prehistoric company!@Ross , any chance of you helping out by adding a dinosaur emoji for us to use on relevant occasions ....
Easy cobberBut I'd prefer pre historic fossil.
Agree. In other words nothing the player does can make it a clear deliberate handball (or not). Which means VAR should never review for deliberate handball because no decision can ever be a clear and obvious error.Reading the Laws of the Game this is usually handball and I would have expected VAR to give it.
Personally I now think IFAB should issue clarifications as to what is and isn't handball (including distance from kick to arm, proximity to attacking goal etc).
All this is doing is portraying handball as whatever the referee thinks rather than based upon the circumstances.
DFK physical found are also subjective decisions but we have proper definitions (even though they have grey areas). None of this 'usually / usually not' stuff.
I think we have a Law that's the product of an unresolved dispute between the IFAB board members. But there is a direction of travelHmm. How clearly defined the fouls are is a matter of debate, I suppose. But it might suggest a path that, while far from perfect, would align handling with the other offenses--make it an offense to carelessly handle the ball. If you think about it, that's what we have really been doing over the past number of years, with making oneself bigger, taking a risk, arm above the shoulder, etc. This would be aligning handling with the change that was made in the first great re-write when we stopped pretending that fouls were "intentional" and put into the laws what was really being called anyway--offenses that were careless, reckless, or involved excessive force. A lot of the guidance that exists would make a lot more sense.
(I'm a traditionalist and would prefer that handling really was deliberate--but with the path we're on, wouldn't it be better to admit what that path is, rather than to muck it up with all this noise?)
I think that's an outstanding suggestionHmm. How clearly defined the fouls are is a matter of debate, I suppose. But it might suggest a path that, while far from perfect, would align handling with the other offenses--make it an offense to carelessly handle the ball. If you think about it, that's what we have really been doing over the past number of years, with making oneself bigger, taking a risk, arm above the shoulder, etc. This would be aligning handling with the change that was made in the first great re-write when we stopped pretending that fouls were "intentional" and put into the laws what was really being called anyway--offenses that were careless, reckless, or involved excessive force. A lot of the guidance that exists would make a lot more sense.
(I'm a traditionalist and would prefer that handling really was deliberate--but with the path we're on, wouldn't it be better to admit what that path is, rather than to muck it up with all this noise?)
Great idea. I wonder if some 'one' had thought of it beforeHmm. How clearly defined the fouls are is a matter of debate, I suppose. But it might suggest a path that, while far from perfect, would align handling with the other offenses--make it an offense to carelessly handle the ball. If you think about it, that's what we have really been doing over the past number of years, with making oneself bigger, taking a risk, arm above the shoulder, etc. This would be aligning handling with the change that was made in the first great re-write when we stopped pretending that fouls were "intentional" and put into the laws what was really being called anyway--offenses that were careless, reckless, or involved excessive force. A lot of the guidance that exists would make a lot more sense.
(I'm a traditionalist and would prefer that handling really was deliberate--but with the path we're on, wouldn't it be better to admit what that path is, rather than to muck it up with all this noise?)
So the application of the law hasn't changed, yet people are still complaining about it.All this is doing is portraying handball as whatever the referee thinks rather than based upon the circumstances.