Aberdeen v St Mirren

[Big Cat]

Most interesting decision from the weekend IMO
HB on 2:30
Second Yellow to rub salt into the wounds

Except for the above offences, it is not an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:
when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body
Edit: No real clue what this snippet of contradiction means, so no real clue as to whether HB is correct

Caution is contentious too. Training days I've had, coaches have been adamant there's no such thing as HB-SPA for blocking a shot
All I do know, is the defender was guilty of nothing more than being very unlucky. No intent, pure accident, etc. etc.....

 

[one]

Aren't you quoting old law?

Nonetheless I wouldn't have given handball.

 

[socal lurker]

I’d like a different look at it. The R may have seen arm towards ball, rather than just the ball hitting an arm that was supporting. I really can’t tell from this view.

 

[Big Cat]

Aren't you quoting old law?

You're too good
They took that chunk out a year ago and didn't replace it with any clarification
Except for an 'explanation', 'Referees must judge the validity of the hand/arm position in relation to what the player is doing'

Anyway, I don't think it's a HB and I don't think the vast majority of R's have the minerals to turn this kinda shout down. Which is why the game expects a PK. Pro Refs tend to make our lives more difficult with many such intepretations/failures
I think it's also a stretch to say C1 is supported in Law

 

[george.g]

It is an offence if a player: ... is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation - LOTG 22/23

For me his arm is down as he's trying to hold his body up and move to stand up. As he sees the ball come towards it, from this angle it looks as he almost tries to move his arm away from it too. For me, his arm is in a position that is justifiable by the player's body movement for this specific situation, and is there not a handball offence.

Once the referee has given the PK for HB, I can kind of see where he's coming from with the caution, but I just think it's harsh.

 

[Anubis]

Need a better=diff angle, the referee certainly has a good view
am going to suggest the referees view will be very different to this clip

am good with a pk here


edit based on the now added screenshots, if the player was heading to the floor and used his arms to support him, then, no pk
however he is on the ground by now and has blocked the shot by use of the arm

 

[cwyeary]

Moment the shot it taken

Moment it hits his right hand

His arm is supporting his body the entire time. The shot is hit towards him at speed. He has made no movement of his arm towards the ball. He has no time to react. This isn't a handball offense IMO.

What gets him is that after the ball hits his hand, his arm comes off the ground as he's attempting to make his body bigger. In real time, it's easy to see how the ref thinks his arm moved into the path of the ball, but the movement is after he blocks it.

 

[Viridis1886]

Screenshot from the moment of contact. Pretty unlucky I'd say.

 

[Big Cat]

I believe he's awarded the PK because it's the easy option
It's the easy option because Professional Referees have set the expectation and continue to do so
HB has never been policed et the top of the game as per the wording in the book

@Russell Jones assures me that most Referees on the Pyramid try to apply the HB Law correctly, but their/our lives are made difficult in so many ways by what happens on TV. I must admit to taking the easy option on occasion myself, because it helps with Match Control
That said, when MC starts to waver, it opens the door to higher workload and higher Assessment Marks, so I'm gonna try to do things right going forward (and just hope to God the Observer hasn't been watching too many televised games)