A&H

Burnley penalty v Wolves

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Referee Store
NO not me

However, to be fair to MD, he readily gives HB for any raised arm. Even when used in self-defence.... it seems.
No way a junior VAR is going anywhere near recommending OFR :rolleyes:

I don't like MD's (admittedly consistent) interpretation of HB in this case because it's not how I've ever read the Law, but also because I cling to some concept of fairness
 
Last edited:
I think this is an easy handling call. This is not a player defending himself from a ball coming at him--the defender is jumping into the play with his hands in front of him. That's deliberate handling without all the usually nonsense. (I'm all of the "self-defense" exemption--but that is a shield, not a sword. You can't jump towards the ball and claim self-defense.)
 
Absolutely clear penalty for me, can't really see an argument against it. In anywhere other than the UK that wouldn't even draw any debate.
 
So you think this ball was handled deliberately? It looked accidental when i first saw it. Can anybody clever get the clip on here?
 
RustyRef said:
Absolutely clear penalty for me, can't really see an argument against it. In anywhere other than the UK that wouldn't even draw any debate.
Click to expand...
There's a contradiction in there somewhere
OK, I'll take another look at it the incident later as I only glanced at it whilst watching tother game
At the very least, I'll be saying it's usually not a HB (for me in the UK, in a million years, until the Law is made clear)
 
Last edited:
socal lurker said:
I think this is an easy handling call. This is not a player defending himself from a ball coming at him--the defender is jumping into the play with his hands in front of him. That's deliberate handling without all the usually nonsense. (I'm all of the "self-defense" exemption--but that is a shield, not a sword. You can't jump towards the ball and claim self-defense.)
Click to expand...
I see what you're saying, but we have a result decided on an instinctive reaction of a movement. Not a good outcome for the game, regardless of the nonsense rulebook
 
Kent Ref said:
So you think this ball was handled deliberately? It looked accidental when i first saw it. Can anybody clever get the clip on here?
Click to expand...
The laws have changed. There are now non deliberate handball offences. Granted we are still on the usually, not usually but even that bits changing to pretty much is and is not.
 
The Wolves player is attempting to shield his head from an opponent's boot which is raised head height. The raised boot is preventing the Wolves player from playing the ball for fear of injury which is the very definition of playing in a dangerous manner as per law 12. This offence occurs before the handball offence therefore a defensive indirect free kick should have been awarded.
 
Mr Dean said:
The Wolves player is attempting to shield his head from an opponent's boot which is raised head height. The raised boot is preventing the Wolves player from playing the ball for fear of injury which is the very definition of playing in a dangerous manner as per law 12. This offence occurs before the handball offence therefore a defensive indirect free kick should have been awarded.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced.

I'm not saying he deliberately wanted to use his arm to stop/block the ball, but he jumped into with how arm sticking out, not really the actions of someone who is scared of playing the ball.
 
Mintyref said:
That is absolute bollox. Try jumping with hands by your side...not deliberate, not making yourself bigger....exactly what is wrong with the hand ball law
Click to expand...

He deliberately jumped towards the ball and deliberately stuck his arm out.

He gave the referee a decision to make.
 
The movement of his body and arm was pre-determined way before he realised there was an overhead kick close to him.

Under current laws there can only be one outcome and that is penalty. I agree that he didn't mean to do it, I agree that it is harsh, but that it totally irrelevant under the current laws. I find it more than a bit worrying that lots of active referees don't understand the current handball law. For clarity, I don't agree with it, but that is a different thing altogether and we can only apply the current laws.
 
zarathustra said:
He deliberately jumped towards the ball and deliberately stuck his arm out.

He gave the referee a decision to make.
Click to expand...
Sorry but I think you are talking out of the wrong end.....it was a perfectly acceptable challenge. Quite brave with that foot moving towards his head...atm was not on an unnatural position, not making himself bigger just not a handball
 
Mintyref said:
Sorry but I think you are talking out of the wrong end.....it was a perfectly acceptable challenge. Quite brave with that foot moving towards his head...atm was not on an unnatural position, not making himself bigger just not a handball
Click to expand...
He deliberately jumped towards the ball.
He deliberately stuck his elbow out.
He gave the referee a decision to make.
 
andy75 said:
Personally I'm giving defensive free kick for the high foot, looks to me like the defender is protecting himself from a possible boot.
Click to expand...
Big Cat said:
IFK for DP a very safe decision @andy75 ... one that get's my solid endorsemen
Click to expand...
I have to agree. I was watching the game and when I initially heard the whistle I’ll admit I thought this is what he blew for.
I’ve watched numerous replays now and still can’t be 100% certain it’s deliberate handball IMO. However I can certainly see how the striker’s foot height is defined as playing in a dangerous manner - the defender, IMO, puts his arm up to protect his head from the high foot.
 
Difficult decision as it’s almost like 2 offences occurring at the same time. Had it been me, I think it would have been a defensive free kick for dangerous play but I can see why handball would also be given.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top