Spurs vs Newcastle

[Russell Jones]

Unfortunately the vast majority of referees give handball any time the ball hits the arm and the player is perceived to gain an advantage.
I've little doubt if the officials had seen it hit the arm they would've given it under the guise of 'safe refereeing' and 'what football expects'.
VAR has to strictly follow the law.

Based on the guidance being given to the PGMOL officials, had this (incorrectly) been given as a HB offence, then they would have been severely marked down on their evaluation. The arm is in an entirely natural position and the ball is kicked towards them at pace from (relatively) close by. You can also tell from the way the ball impacts the hand / arm that it's ball to hand rather than hand to ball. Net, net, this is almost the 'poster child' of the very definition of a non offence. Any official giving HB for this would be doing the rest of us a major disservice .. it would simply reinforce the existing player myth that you are not allowed to gain an advantage through accidental contact of the ball and hand.

 

[bester]

I don't disagree.

In practice nearly every referee will give a handball when it hits an arm and a player gains an advantage.

 

[Big Cat]

I don't disagree.

In practice nearly every referee will give a handball when it hits an arm and a player gains an advantage.

I wouldn't. Safe refereeing when it's well and truly wrong is just very bad refereeing IMO. I'm not afraid of the consequences of doing the right thing.
This would have been a disaster for Law (don't even think a UEFA ref would've stooped that low) if either the Ref or VAR had deemed it HB.
There's nothing else to say as @Russell Jones has said all anyone needs to know (and unfortunately for him, he bats for Spurs )

 

[Runner Ref]

I don't disagree.

In practice nearly every referee will give a handball when it hits an arm and a player gains an advantage.

I completely agree that there will be some referees at grassroots that will do this, and as said previously, they’re doing a disservice to the game and other referees. But it’s a bit of a push to say nearly every referee would do it.

 

[Big Cat]

I completely agree that there will be some referees at grassroots that will do this, and as said previously, they’re doing a disservice to the game and other referees. But it’s a bit of a push to say nearly every referee would do it.

I think @bester is right that a lot would give it. But they'd be wrong to do so. You can't defend wrong, not when this was a perfect example of 'accidental' also in the absence of 'unnaturally bigger'. A perfect example. 'The ball was close' and the hand arm were down by the side
I'd enjoy taking pelters for not giving it because I'd know I was right not to do so. That's not cos I'm a tough guy, I just have a strong sense of right and wrong and won't tolerate allowing myself to be knowingly wrong all in a bid to avoid a challenge

 

[one]

His arm doesn’t need to be close to his body. It needs to be in a natural position for the action he is doing. I’m not sure where else you think his arm should be?

Even then, how is this not close to his body?

View attachment 7817

QQ to anyone who thinks the arm that the ball hit is in an unnaturally position. There are three other arms in this pic, are any of them in a natural position?

If that's unnatural then 95% of players have their arms in an unnaturally position (looking at any football pic). By definition what is natural, this can't be the case.

 

[Paul_10]

Of course we did have a law a few years ago where a goal would be disallowed if there is any sort of evidence of handball in the build up and this would of fell foul of that if that law is still in place.

As usual people in football don't like change so it got changed again just to include the goal scorer, at least that sort of law meant it's much easier and consistent for a referee/VAR to penalised and potentially reduce controversy.

For me, I think if this was a handball shout for a penalty it won't be given so can accept a non intervention here as it keeps some consistency on this high bar regarding handball but it doesn't feel right too me that a ball hitting clean on the hand has had a major role to creating a goalscoring opportunity.

Just fortunate this occured very early in the game and not near the end.

 

[Runner Ref]

Of course we did have a law a few years ago where a goal would be disallowed if there is any sort of evidence of handball in the build up and this would of fell foul of that if that law is still in place.

As usual people in football don't like change so it got changed again just to include the goal scorer, at least that sort of law meant it's much easier and consistent for a referee/VAR to penalised and potentially reduce controversy.

For me, I think if this was a handball shout for a penalty it won't be given so can accept a non intervention here as it keeps some consistency on this high bar regarding handball but it doesn't feel right too me that a ball hitting clean on the hand has had a major role to creating a goalscoring opportunity.

Just fortunate this occured very early in the game and not near the end.

The law was changed because people complained that too many goals were being ruled out because of it.

If people want consistency for handballs, the only option is any contact with the hand/arm is punishable. But in reality, no one wants that either.

Josh Maja’s disallowed goal after it hit Mario Laminas arm was a prime example of why they changed the law-: https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/56291850.amp

Ps- how can you say you would be okay with this handball not being given as a penalty, but it doesn’t feel right not being given for something that leads to a goal scoring opportunity? You can’t get much more of a clear goal scoring opportunity than a penalty…….

 

[RustyRef]

Where else exactly should his arm be? For those saying the goal should have been disallowed for handball, would you be giving a penalty if it had been a defender's arm in exactly the same position? If not you'd be totally wrong in law, as it is exactly the same considerations you'd have to apply for both.

 

[RefIADad]

Hand down by his side somewhat, but surely thats handball as it wouldnt go to the newcastle player otherwise? interested to hear some opinions on this

I know it's been mentioned by others, but it's important to remember that the bolded part has zero relevance to whether a potential offense is handling or not. The ONLY two instances where "accidental" handling (I know that's not officially a term in Law, but I'll use it here for brevity) is deemed as handling are as follows.

1. The ball goes directly into the opponent's goal off of the hand or arm of the attacker.
2. The ball goes off the hand or arm of the attacker and a goal is IMMEDIATELY scored by the same player through an otherwise legal method (i.e. kicked into the goal).

In the situation during the Newcastle-Tottenham match, the only factors that are considered for handling are 1) was the handling "deliberate" (i.e. the hand or arm moved to the ball)? Or, 2) was the arm in an unnatural position at the time of contact? In live action and replays, I am convinced neither of the two conditions were met. The subsequent events have no bearing on the call.

 

[Paul_10]

The law was changed because people complained that too many goals were being ruled out because of it.

If people want consistency for handballs, the only option is any contact with the hand/arm is punishable. But in reality, no one wants that either.

Josh Maja’s disallowed goal after it hit Mario Laminas arm was a prime example of why they changed the law-: https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/56291850.amp

Ps- how can you say you would be okay with this handball not being given as a penalty, but it doesn’t feel right not being given for something that leads to a goal scoring opportunity? You can’t get much more of a clear goal scoring opportunity than a penalty…….

That's what I'm saying, people moan about rule changes and therefore you potentially losing consistency that everyone craves for. I reckon another VAR may of recommended an on field review for this or we see something similar later on in the season and get intervened upon.

I never said I'm okay if a handball like this is not given as a penalty, I just think they are trying to be consistent with this higher bar on handball and I wouldn't expect a penalty to be given if this was a defender in the box.

 

[Tingting]

We know the ball literally touches his hand, no one is disputing that.

If you think the position of his arms are unnaturally making him bigger, where do you think they should have been?

Where do laws mentions unfair advantages?

Just an advantage in general. I think it kinda is unatural. Hard to tell. The arms seem pretty spread out beyond his body. But I can see how it could not be a handball.

 

[Runner Ref]

Just an advantage in general. I think it kinda is unatural. Hard to tell. The arms seem pretty spread out beyond his body. But I can see how it could not be a handball.

But advantage doesn’t mean anything in this instance.

Where do you think his arms would be better suited to a natural position for this instance? Look at @one post earlier on in regards to this.

 

[Purron4]

Just an advantage in general. I think it kinda is unatural. Hard to tell. The arms seem pretty spread out beyond his body. But I can see how it could not be a handball.

Have you ever played football? I imagine you have and should understand that Joelintons arms are in a a completely natural position and in no way did he make his body bigger.

I'm calling it a bit of karma for the PSG penalty last year.

 

[RustyRef]

That's what I'm saying, people moan about rule changes and therefore you potentially losing consistency that everyone craves for. I reckon another VAR may of recommended an on field review for this or we see something similar later on in the season and get intervened upon.

I never said I'm okay if a handball like this is not given as a penalty, I just think they are trying to be consistent with this higher bar on handball and I wouldn't expect a penalty to be given if this was a defender in the box.

No VAR in England would get involved because players have been told that they don't need to defend with their arms behind their backs, and consequently all match officials have been told not to penalise when the hand and arm is in a position supportable by the footballing action being performed. His arm here was exactly where you would expect any footballer's arm to be in that situation.

In previous seasons you may well have been right, but how many VAR referrals have their been for handling this season compared to previous seasons. Hardly any, and when they have happened the arm has been up in the air.

 

[Tingting]

Have you ever played football? I imagine you have and should understand that Joelintons arms are in a a completely natural position and in no way did he make his body bigger.

I'm calling it a bit of karma for the PSG penalty last year.

Yeah, I have. I play for comprtitive club. But what confuses me is that whenever I receive a handball the referee calls it. Unless, its arms behind, the ref will call it. I incorporate those experiances into my rulebook, so it kinda sticks.

 

[Runner Ref]

Yeah, I have. I play for comprtitive club. But what confuses me is that whenever I receive a handball the referee calls it. Unless, its arms behind, the ref will call it. I incorporate those experiances into my rulebook, so it kinda sticks.

Well, those referees and your rule book are wrong if that’s the case. Not all handballs are punishable. If your rule book says otherwise, you need a re-read if the laws!