The Ref Stop

Forrest vs United

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

O

Ori

Well-Known Member
just watched MOTD.

United score from a corner that wasn’t never a corner as the ball didn’t go out of play. I actually don’t have an issue with the AR getting it wrong, but if he wasn’t sired surely let it run?

I’m sure ref got it right, but I’m not sure why on the amad handball! Arm was out. Rolled from shoulder all down the arm. Why is that not a penalty?
Maybe it clipped his head on the way down?
 
The Ref Stop
Ori said:
just watched MOTD.

United score from a corner that wasn’t never a corner as the ball didn’t go out of play. I actually don’t have an issue with the AR getting it wrong, but if he wasn’t sired surely let it run?
Click to expand...
He obviously was sure.
Ori said:
I’m sure ref got it right, but I’m not sure why on the amad handball! Arm was out. Rolled from shoulder all down the arm. Why is that not a penalty?
Maybe it clipped his head on the way down?
Click to expand...
Arm is in a justifiable position for the movement in that situation.
 
I have a lot of time for Sean Dyche but not when he criticises officials. His argument is that from his position at the T/A he can see that the ball has not crossed the goal line, but criticises the AR saying how can he see from the distance he was. So he can see from an unaligned position 50 yards that the ball has overhung the goaline, but criticises the aligned AR 70 yards away (his use of distance measurement). As to use of VAR for corner kicks, that would be overkill. Most of the time he doesn’t even like VAR. I get it that he is frustrated etc, but he should be bigger than to criticise.
 
I think there might be an element of depth perception here. The camera clearly isn't level with the line, if it was it would look much, much closer to being fully over the line. I was shown an exercise years ago where the instructor put the ball so that it was out of play by around a millimetre, he got us to look at it from around 5m beyond the line and we all agreed it was still in play. We then all moved a few steps to the left to be in line and could then see it was definitely out. In this case I think it was probably just about still in play, but it is far from a clanger. Akil Howson also has the benefit of being behind the corner flag and therefore looking through the goal posts, if he thinks he can see all of the ball it must be out of play otherwise the posts would obscure part of it.

1762079498482.png
 
RustyRef said:
I think there might be an element of depth perception here. The camera clearly isn't level with the line, if it was it would look much, much closer to being fully over the line. I was shown an exercise years ago where the instructor put the ball so that it was out of play by around a millimetre, he got us to look at it from around 5m beyond the line and we all agreed it was still in play. We then all moved a few steps to the left to be in line and could then see it was definitely out. In this case I think it was probably just about still in play, but it is far from a clanger. Akil Howson also has the benefit of being behind the corner flag and therefore looking through the goal posts, if he thinks he can see all of the ball it must be out of play otherwise the posts would obscure part of it.

View attachment 8432
Click to expand...
And it wasn’t that long ago when a similar incident happened at Newcastle and to his credit for once Gary Neville proved that the ball crossed the goal line
 
RustyRef said:
I think there might be an element of depth perception here. The camera clearly isn't level with the line, if it was it would look much, much closer to being fully over the line. I was shown an exercise years ago where the instructor put the ball so that it was out of play by around a millimetre, he got us to look at it from around 5m beyond the line and we all agreed it was still in play. We then all moved a few steps to the left to be in line and could then see it was definitely out. In this case I think it was probably just about still in play, but it is far from a clanger. Akil Howson also has the benefit of being behind the corner flag and therefore looking through the goal posts, if he thinks he can see all of the ball it must be out of play otherwise the posts would obscure part of it.

View attachment 8432
Click to expand...
Howson was actually to the left of the corner flag when he made the call and that is the reason I suspect he made the call. I would say it was between 0.5 to 1 yard out of line. MOTD showed this quite well and complements the AR masterclass recently put on by the FA for lev 3 and 4 official who operate on the line who that misalignment can change what you see.

I recall a similar exercise from my training. Had he been bang on line the he might have made a different decision.
 
I think the AR was not quite in line, but it’s a tough call and he made it. Right or wrong it stands and has to be respected. Forrest has a chance to defend the corner and didn’t.

I’m no convinced that the handball wasn’t handball though.
 
Regardless of natural position, it’s not coming at him at pace. That can’t always be an excuse.
My only thought is it may have clipped his head first?
 
Ori said:
Regardless of natural position, it’s not coming at him at pace. That can’t always be an excuse.
My only thought is it may have clipped his head first?
Click to expand...
Yes but if it's a natural position then it is justifiable or a consequence of the movement of the player in that specific situation ergo not a handball offence.
 
JamesL said:
Yes but if it's a natural position then it is justifiable or a consequence of the movement of the player in that specific situation ergo not a handball offence.
Click to expand...
Only if it touched his head on the way. Otherwise a slow moving ball like that would be an excuse for handball.
 
Ori said:
Only if it touched his head on the way. Otherwise a slow moving ball like that would be an excuse for handball.
Click to expand...
Where is that in law?

And why are we looking for an excuse to give handball? FA are asking us to move focus away from solely on position of the hand/arm and more on the action of the player i.e. is it justifiable or consequence of movement
 
JamesL said:
Where is that in law?

And why are we looking for an excuse to give handball? FA are asking us to move focus away from solely on position of the hand/arm and more on the action of the player i.e. is it justifiable or consequence of movement
Click to expand...
I don’t see how it’s not. Arm is outstretched ball comes down from a height and lands on his arm. It’s quite foreseeable that he will handle the ball.

I’m not saying it should be handball. I’m asking for clarification on why it isn’t under law/guidance.
 
I haven't seen this incident but the debate leaves me with a question. Let's say you don't handle the ball in the classic sense of deliberate, hand to ball etc. Your hand is in a natural position/movement for a footballing action you are taking. The ball is coming at you with reasonable pace but you do have the opportunity to avoid ball/hand contact by moving your hand away from it's natural position. If you don't take that opportunity, leave your hand in its natural position and ball/hand contact is made, where does that leave the referee? It is deliberate or no offence?
 
one said:
I haven't seen this incident but the debate leaves me with a question. Let's say you don't handle the ball in the classic sense of deliberate, hand to ball etc. Your hand is in a natural position/movement for a footballing action you are taking. The ball is coming at you with reasonable pace but you do have the opportunity to avoid ball/hand contact by moving your hand away from it's natural position. If you don't take that opportunity, leave your hand in its natural position and ball/hand contact is made, where does that leave the referee? It is deliberate or no offence?
Click to expand...
Deliberate. And a very tough sell. In a nutshell, deliberately allowing the ball to hit your hand / arm is a deliberate action. But I’d suggest being 110% sure and then selling it with a phrase like ‘he’s deliberately controlled it with his hand’
 
Russell Jones said:
Deliberate. And a very tough sell. In a nutshell, deliberately allowing the ball to hit your hand / arm is a deliberate action. But I’d suggest being 110% sure and then selling it with a phrase like ‘he’s deliberately controlled it with his hand’
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this. In fact my simplified defintion of the entire handball law is "no reasonable attempt to avoid hand/ball contact". However, if we are liberated eniugh to make this interpretation, why do we need the unnatural clause at all? Furthur more calling that clause a non-deliberate handball offence somewhat contradicts our interpretation.
 
one said:
I'm with you on this. In fact my simplified defintion of the entire handball law is "no reasonable attempt to avoid hand/ball contact". However, if we are liberated eniugh to make this interpretation, why do we need the unnatural clause at all? Furthur more calling that clause a non-deliberate handball offence somewhat contradicts our interpretation.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Originally “biggering” was considered a form of deliberate handling. As I understand it, the concept really grew out of trying to g to identify sneaky deliberate handling—moving the arm into a likely path of the ball so the ball would likely be hit “accidentally” by an opponent’s shot or cross. And trying to figure out how to apply it let it evolve into something more that we now consider non-deliberate. But almost all “biggering” calls are things we would have called deliberate handling in the past, but have now been downgraded to this weird status. A bad development IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top