A&H

Toulouse v Liverpool

GraemeS

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
Go on then, I'll throw this one in for discussion as well. Late scramble for an equalising goal, goal is scored, eventually called back by VAR for a handball in the build-up, about 8 passes and a block/interception earlier.

There are 3 questions for me:
1. Is it actually handball?
2. Is it clearly and obviously a missed handball?
3. Is it within the scope of the VAR's power to check this far back in the build up to a goal?

I'm not particularly convinced it even is a handball - the arm is in a natural position and he's trying to move away rather than towards the ball. I think it probably does touch his arm low enough to qualify for handball if there was intent, but I'd like to have seen that confirmed as well, it could easily have been above the "sleeve line".

Starts at 4:58 on the following highlights if you can watch them:
 
The Referee Store
I think it is handball but I don't think it is a clear and obvious error for VAR intervention. It would be a reasonable opinion that the contact is not deliberate and the arm is in a natural position.
On balance of probabilities I think it should be penalised (on-field), Mac Allister had a couple of seconds to prepare to control the ball and it looks like he puts his arm out late when he realises he isn't coming into the ball square on.
Point of contact is definitely below the armpit.

1699609301410.png
 
I think this is another example of what's HB in Europe and what's HB in the PL.

I think in the PL, due to the deflection of his body, that wouldn't be given. In Europe they don't use that consideration it seems, and place more emphasis on the arm position.

In terms of the position of the ball hitting the arm it's in the red zone and when forensically analysing it, the touch on the arm is factual.

The fact its hit the arm, the arm is making the body unnaturally bigger (subjective part is whether this is justifiable or a consequence) then I can't see how the VAR can overlook it. The issue is around then C&O, if my first point is right then yes, it's C&O wrong, as it ticks both the touches hand or arm & when this makes the body unnaturally bigger.

It's definitely in the same APP for me so yes I think it had to be checked as part of the Goal VAR check.

The defenders never gain control of the ball, they never really play it away from goal, they are all saves/blocks etc. so for me the APP starts when Macalister gains possession of the ball.
 
It's indicative of the of the trend towards VAR refereeing the entire game instead of just goals

I think it is HB, but that's irrelevant
 
I think this is the “correct” decision based on the LotG and the protocol as it is.

For me he clearly controls the ball with his arm. I think it’s deliberate and also easily fulfils biggerer criteria if you think it was accidental.

The only doubt for me is about the window for the “attacking phase of play” and if the defensive header is enough to start a new phase. AFAIK this is not specified in the LofG but the guidance is that the ball needs to travel out of the box I think and it does not here … who has that guidance, what ends the attacking phase?
 
Well according to the IFAB rules if the ball bounces of the body and doesn't directly result in a goal its not handball so this referee (and VAR) chose to use their own understanding of the old rules compared to those brought in last year (I think). Johnson on ESPN said pretty much the same thing.

If I was to use the old rules then yes I'd agree it was HB but surely the VAR would know the current implementation of the rules and use them?
 
Kinsleyr said:
Well according to the IFAB rules if the ball bounces of the body and doesn't directly result in a goal its not handball so this referee (and VAR) chose to use their own understanding of the old rules compared to those brought in last year (I think). Johnson on ESPN said pretty much the same thing.

If I was to use the old rules then yes I'd agree it was HB but surely the VAR would know the current implementation of the rules and use them?
Click to expand...
The ball bouncing off body is the old old rules. That is no longer in the rules, but, is still taught as a consideration..
 
JamesL said:
The ball bouncing off body is the old old rules. That is no longer in the rules, but, is still taught as a consideration..
Click to expand...
Ahh you're right - they have clarified it was a recommendation to say that if the ball is deflected from their body then it isn't HB. OK so that makes sense.
 
Kinsleyr said:
Well according to the IFAB rules if the ball bounces of the body and doesn't directly result in a goal its not handball
Click to expand...
Well, not quite. Setting aside where and when the handball occurs in relation to a goal being scored, it's still a handball if a player:

deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball.
Click to expand...
Or
touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger.
Click to expand...

So if the referee judges that the handling was deliberate or that the "unnaturally bigger" scenario applies then it's a handball no matter whether it leads directly to a goal or not.

I'm not 100% convinced that it's clear and obvious enough that either of those clauses does apply, for VAR to intervene but that's a whole different debate.
 
It has to be clear and obvious because he obviously makes his body bigger by having his arms in that position, it obviously hits his arm, and the referee clearly missed it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top