The Ref Stop

City v Wolves

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Josh the referee said:
It's probably more of a handball than the one given in the Palace Chelsea game today....
Click to expand...
Probably? Palace defender would have have had to have his arm amputated to avoid that.

www.skysports.com

Chelsea vs Crystal Palace: Jaydee Canvot's accidental handball yellow card discussed

Jamie Carragher and Gary Cahill discuss Crystal Palace defender Jaydee Canvots accidental handball which led to a yellow card and a penalty for Chelsea.
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com

If Darren England and the VAR today thought that was handball, the outlier is "yesterday's referee" who's being praised for sticking to his decision.
 
The Ref Stop
socal lurker said:
If the R was right to not award a PK, then the VAR was wrong to send it down. The protocol does not provide for VAR”s to send things down for “ the Referee to have a look again.” If it’s not a C&O error, then the VAR should not have sent this down. (FWIW, I think this considered a HB in the modern game everywhere in the world except the UK, and would be a good VAR intervention everywhere else. The PL seems to have moving standards too often, but I would expect the PL to say this should not have been sent down—and likewise should not have been sent down if it had been called.)
Click to expand...
Totally agree. In England (correctly IMO and in accordance with actual law) this is absolutely not a C&O error. It's an extremely marginal HB decision (as evidenced by the debate both here and elsewhere in the media) where the on field referee's call should stand whichever way it is given.

Overall, it continues the trend where, in England, the 'benefit of the doubt' is increasingly given to the player whose arm has been hit by the ball (accepting that there is a wide range of completely natural arm positions for players moving naturally). Rather than penalising them because they 'didn't try hard enough' to keep their arms close to their body.

And the Palace / Chelsea one is just a bad call
 
Russell Jones said:
Totally agree. In England (correctly IMO and in accordance with actual law) this is absolutely not a C&O error. It's an extremely marginal HB decision (as evidenced by the debate both here and elsewhere in the media) where the on field referee's call should stand whichever way it is given.

Overall, it continues the trend where, in England, the 'benefit of the doubt' is increasingly given to the player whose arm has been hit by the ball (accepting that there is a wide range of completely natural arm positions for players moving naturally). Rather than penalising them because they 'didn't try hard enough' to keep their arms close to their body.

And the Palace / Chelsea one is just a bad call
Click to expand...
That's really not good enough.

If Darren England as VAR thought the handball in City v Wolves was "unnatural" but the onfield ref didn't (even on review), but DE in the middle a day later in Palace v Chelsea agreed with VAR that a much less clear handling was "unnatural position" - then either the onfield ref got it wrong, or PGMOL needs to get a grip of their "trend" and get some consistency.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: es1
This is the only one of the many handball decisions this weekend I've actually seen, and I think I'm an outlier here, but I do think it's a penalty.
I don't see how the way his arms flap out sideways (almost like a bird trying to fly) can be described as natural for the footballing action being undertaken.

What I will say, is fair play to Farai for having the balls to stick with his decision on debut. Would love to hear the comms (and be a fly on the wall next time him and Darren England meet)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
The ball brushes the underside of his tricep, and close to his chest. I need convincing on a penalty for that. It’s passing between his body and arm and I can see that as natural, possibly trying too late to evade the ball?

Ball to tricep for a penalty, needs to be doing the YMCA dance or similar - I think in fact Wolves had one given against them for this sort of thing against Luton a while back?

Now had the ball struck his forearm I’d be leaning a different way as it would be further away from the body, less natural and far more often used by players to knock a ball away than the underside of the upper arm.
 
RefereeX said:
This is the only one of the many handball decisions this weekend I've actually seen, and I think I'm an outlier here, but I do think it's a penalty.
I don't see how the way his arms flap out sideways (almost like a bird trying to fly) can be described as natural for the footballing action being undertaken.

What I will say, is fair play to Farai for having the balls to stick with his decision on debut. Would love to hear the comms (and be a fly on the wall next time him and Darren England meet)
Click to expand...

I see arms out like this is natural, twisting/ changing direction at speed you do use your arms.

Interesting the BBC Poll is 90% for No penalty so must confirm it is not a clear an obvious error.
 
Tealeaf said:
The ball brushes the underside of his tricep, and close to his chest. I need convincing on a penalty for that. It’s passing between his body and arm and I can see that as natural, possibly trying too late to evade the ball?

Ball to tricep for a penalty, needs to be doing the YMCA dance or similar - I think in fact Wolves had one given against them for this sort of thing against Luton a while back?

Now had the ball struck his forearm I’d be leaning a different way as it would be further away from the body, less natural and far more often used by players to knock a ball away than the underside of the upper arm.
Click to expand...
That's almost a philosophical question, if a player is spreading arms wide but the ball hits the arm near the shoulder. Does it matter that it's near the shoulder if the extended arm has made their body unnaturally bigger?
 
RefereeX said:
This is the only one of the many handball decisions this weekend I've actually seen, and I think I'm an outlier here, but I do think it's a penalty.
I don't see how the way his arms flap out sideways (almost like a bird trying to fly) can be described as natural for the footballing action being undertaken.
Click to expand...
As per my previous post I would have been willing to give the benefit of doubt had it not been for the motion and the shape of the hand/fingers. It shapes to make it as big as possible. Compare it to the other hand/fingers or the hand/fingers of the city player which are more relaxed and semi-closed.

1769473657263.png
 
one said:
As per my previous post I would have been willing to give the benefit of doubt had it not been for the motion and the shape of the hand/fingers. It shapes to make it as big as possible. Compare it to the other hand/fingers or the hand/fingers of the city player which are more relaxed and semi-closed.

View attachment 8515
Click to expand...

I can't see that much difference. It's irrelevant anyway. If the City player had accidentally kicked the ball onto his own hand in that position, wouldn't it have been penalised as a handball? (A Wolves attacker did just that in another incident, and a FK was awarded. But that wasn't in the penalty area.)

I think the fundamental problem is that the law starts with a sort of assumption that it's just unfortunate - "the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation" - but then implies that there might be a bit of intent behind it - "By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised".

"I couldn't avoid it" is not a defence under the law, as written.
 
one said:
As per my previous post I would have been willing to give the benefit of doubt had it not been for the motion and the shape of the hand/fingers. It shapes to make it as big as possible. Compare it to the other hand/fingers or the hand/fingers of the city player which are more relaxed and semi-closed.

View attachment 8515
Click to expand...

We have to remember a players arms need to be somewhere.

Is Man C player making his body unnaturally bigger or extending his arm for balance the same way the Wolves player is?
 
DJIC said:
We have to remember a players arms need to be somewhere.

Is Man C player making his body unnaturally bigger or extending his arm for balance the same way the Wolves player is?
Click to expand...
That is a fair point and it is why I am willing to give the benefit of doubt. I am not penalising for "unnaturally bigger" because of the shape of the arm. I am penalising for "deliberate" because of the shape of the hand (palm and fingers).
 
I think we've exhausted this, but.... Sorry if this seems like a fan post - everyone remembers the bad decisions against their team, and I'll go out on a limb and say City have been involved in several decisions which led to clarification of laws, or new ones - like heading the ball off the golkeeper's palm! (Goal allowed, IFAB issued a direction that it was allowed, then a direction that it wasn't, till now we have that the GK has control if a finger is on the ball.)

But this was one of the incidents that went into the pressure for VAR. Mr Clattenburg gave a penalty when Sterling turned his back on a cross and the ball hit him on the arm (or maybe not). This was Spurs v City in February 2016 before the "unnatural position" law.

1769595548431.png

But it was this missed offside (in City v Spurs earlier in the season) that led to a lot of the pressure for VAR:

1769596427673.png
 

Attachments

  • 1769503992069.png
    1769503992069.png
    561.6 KB · Views: 1
bloovee said:
I think we've exhausted this, but.... Sorry if this seems like a fan post - everyone remembers the bad decisions against their team, and I'll go out on a limb and say City have been involved in several decisions which led to clarification of laws, or new ones - like heading the ball off the golkeeper's palm! (Goal allowed, IFAB issued a direction that it was allowed, then a direction that it wasn't, till now we have that the GK has control if a finger is on the ball.)

But this was one of the incidents that went into the pressure for VAR. Mr Clattenburg gave a penalty when Sterling turned his back on a cross and the ball hit him on the arm (or maybe not). This was Spurs v City in February 2016 before the "unnatural position" law.

View attachment 8525

But it was this missed offside (in City v Spurs earlier in the season) that led to a lot of the pressure for VAR:

View attachment 8526
Click to expand...
You are bringing up an incident involving a referee that retired 9 years ago. Seriously? 😂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top