MUN v NFO
- Thread starter Joshref
- Start date
I guess he’s correct in law. It takes a touch off the defender on its way in which changes the movement (only slightly). It’s accidental, not an unnatural position, didn’t score directly from the handball. However, it doesn’t ‘feel’ right
In truthness I think it's very subjective but the goal being disallowed feels more the correct outcome however I suspect because it's Man United, we will hear a huge uproar instead of praising the ref for sticking with his decision which is what people want too see more of.
FinalWhistle
Armchair Referee
Gary Neville just did his nut over that one lol. Easy to forget his an ex ManU player and supporter going by his comments, so credit to him for being impartial.
Unlike the other controversial incident I commented on the other day, I'm not sure about this one. Sure, his arm was a little bit away from his body and the ball got caught a little between his arm and body, but it was from close range so no time to react and I can't see any intention to direct the ball with his arm, so I dunno given the current rules.
Generally, in my opinion, if a ball touches the arm, then a goal should be disallowed no matter how accidental. The only decisions should be on yellow cards and penalties.
Unlike the other controversial incident I commented on the other day, I'm not sure about this one. Sure, his arm was a little bit away from his body and the ball got caught a little between his arm and body, but it was from close range so no time to react and I can't see any intention to direct the ball with his arm, so I dunno given the current rules.
Generally, in my opinion, if a ball touches the arm, then a goal should be disallowed no matter how accidental. The only decisions should be on yellow cards and penalties.
I don't think it's a HB
But I do think it's a professional football HB
Just another facet of VAR which is shoite. Going to that bloody screen.
99/100 it just wastes time, then on the 1/100 occasion when the Ref sticks with the original decision, it's very controversial
It's all just very very broken
But I do think it's a professional football HB
Just another facet of VAR which is shoite. Going to that bloody screen.
99/100 it just wastes time, then on the 1/100 occasion when the Ref sticks with the original decision, it's very controversial
It's all just very very broken
FinalWhistle
Armchair Referee
I think the core problem is that every incident is literally unique and grey areas will always be there, so no matter how rigorously and consistently one tries to judge it, there will always be disagreement. Hence, controversies can be reduced, but not eliminated. I don't think the current VAR system is as good as it could be though and needs refinement.
They changed the LotG a few years ago so that something like this would be disallowed because it accidentally hit an attacker's arm in the build-up to the goal, and everyone complained. So they changed the Laws, now they're complaining here too. Football's two-facedness is laughable. (not having a go at you btw @QuaverRef)
It's the correct decision on-field from Michael Salisbury (assuming he did see that the ball touched the attacker's arm), and the correct decision from him again at the monitor too. Unless MS has said over comms that he didn't realise it touched the arm, I'm not sure why Matt Donohue has recommended a review.
deusex
RefChat Addict
Being wrong doesn't get you points for being "impartial".
It's well known amonst Utd fans that, in his attempts to be imaprtial, Gary Neville talks absolute nonsense against Man Utd every game. Give us Carragher any day of the week
FinalWhistle
Armchair Referee
Yes, he is actually impartial in the context of whether he thought that should have been a goal or not, proved, as what he said went against MU's interests here. Whether he talks nonsense a lot of the time or not is a separate argument not relevant to this and I'm not getting into it.
Reading the BBC sport text feed it's amusing that people have texted in saying it's the VAR fault for the decision. It really is clear if your totally against something, it clouds your judgment of it.
Then you got some guy from the athletic blaming the VAR because the right decision was to award the goal it seems from his quote.
For me, I have no issues with the VAR recommending a review nor do I have an issue with the ref over ruling him, I think it's a bit of a grey area in all honesty.
Then you got some guy from the athletic blaming the VAR because the right decision was to award the goal it seems from his quote.
For me, I have no issues with the VAR recommending a review nor do I have an issue with the ref over ruling him, I think it's a bit of a grey area in all honesty.
Just seen it, you have to give this as handball. He hasn’t meant it (arm in a ‘natural position’), it’s accidental, but it has hit the arm and he has controlled the ball thanks to that touch and gained an unfair advantage so as people have already said, the game expects a handball - just give it. Might be ‘unlucky’ for Mbuemo but every touch of the ball is somewhat down to luck.
bester
RefChat Addict
Listened on TalkSport. Matterface said straight away that it was accidental and shouldn't be referred.
Explained the law quite well.
Steve Bruce spent the time opining he didn't know what the rules were anymore without committing either way until the referee stuck with his decision.
Explained the law quite well.
Steve Bruce spent the time opining he didn't know what the rules were anymore without committing either way until the referee stuck with his decision.
No, you don't, because it's not a handball offence. We shouldn't be perpetuating misunderstandings in Law just because "the game expects it".
I think he’s moved his body (and his arms) after the deflection towards the ball in order to control it, which is the first consideration of the law, so I think handball - happy for you to disagree (and the professionals obviously disagree too as the ref gave the decision here, but on the other hand the VAR obviously thought handball too) - I think it just shows the law is a mess - look at the handballs in the CL recently that have deflected on to arms and been given, despite being closer to the body and still ‘in a natural position.’
deusex
RefChat Addict
Your logic is flawed.
GN, in an attempt to appear impartial, is the most anti-man utd commentator there is.
I definitely agree that the law concerning handball is more complicated than it ever was and should be, but let’s not forget that although much simpler in my hey days of the 70s, 80’s, 90’s & even 2000’s, the award of penalties still came across on many occasions as inconsistent. So, whilst people may say they don’t know what is handball anymore, they often didn’t know back in the day!
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
If you genuinely believe that he has deliberately moved his arm toward the ball (post 15) then of course this should be given. If, however, you believe what you say in your first sentence above, then you absolutely can’t give this as handball in accordance with the laws. It is a fundamental principle of the law, as it’s currently written, that the ONLY advantage you cannot get from an accidental handball is for that player to immediately score a goal.
The fact that many players / commentators etc believe it’s unfair to gain ANY advantage from the ball accidentally striking the arm is irrelevant
I’ve had plenty of arguments about this today with football fans and other referees alike.
The football fans think it’s a clear handball just because.
The other referees including Darren Cann (albeit he’s not one of the ones I’ve argued with) say they think it’s handball because the game expects it there.
There is no law justification to disallow the goal imo. It deflects off his side on to his arm which is in close proximity to where it deflects from. The arm isn’t in an entirely unnatural position for the action he’s taking. And it wasn’t him who scored the goal.
I think it’s a poor recommendation to review and Salisbury was correct to stick by his decision, but it’s a hard one for football fans to accept.
The football fans think it’s a clear handball just because.
The other referees including Darren Cann (albeit he’s not one of the ones I’ve argued with) say they think it’s handball because the game expects it there.
There is no law justification to disallow the goal imo. It deflects off his side on to his arm which is in close proximity to where it deflects from. The arm isn’t in an entirely unnatural position for the action he’s taking. And it wasn’t him who scored the goal.
I think it’s a poor recommendation to review and Salisbury was correct to stick by his decision, but it’s a hard one for football fans to accept.