Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community
Klimowicz

In your opinion, handball or not?

Handball or no handball?  

88 members have voted

  1. 1. Oui or Ne?

    • Yes, his hand moved deliberately towards the ball
    • No, he didn't have enough time to react for it to be deliberate.
    • Who is handball?


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, Mr Wallin said:

No offence mate but you don't really know the rules for VAR do you???

The referee (Pitana) initially gave a goalkick (which would indicate he didn't see the contact by the Croat at all). The VAR had a look and though it was likely a foul (and penalty) and the difference between a goalkick and a penalty is a clear error and thus he sent it down to Pitana to have a look. Pitana then looked a several angles and decided to award the penalty. This is all just as the procedure is meant to work. 

The FK that was awarded to France ahead of the first goal was a simple foul outside the PA. That is not a situation that the VAR is allowed to send down (unless he thinks that the offence was actually worthy of a red card that the referee didn't call).

 

You might not like or agree with one or both calls but VAR followed its instructions fully there.

I know exactly how it works thanks, love the usual condescending tone when it comes to ref decisions

It has to be a clear error, so when the referee has to look at it several times, goes away, then has to have another quick look again before reaching a decision, it obviously isn't a clear and obvious error, therefore it should never have been given

The 2nd part of my post was obviously a flippant point about both VAR and the on field referee not following the rules, so they may as well give Croatia a free kick for the dive as well whilst they're making stuff up 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 34 minutes, Barry Cartman a dit :

I know exactly how it works thanks, love the usual condescending tone when it comes to ref decisions

It has to be a clear error, so when the referee has to look at it several times, goes away, then has to have another quick look again before reaching a decision, it obviously isn't a clear and obvious error, therefore it should never have been given

The 2nd part of my post was obviously a flippant point about both VAR and the on field referee not following the rules, so they may as well give Croatia a free kick for the dive as well whilst they're making stuff up 

Awarding a goalkick was a clear error...

And you're confusing clear error and the fact it take time to look at it...

if the police get the wrong murderer, it's a clear error, and the fact that it take 5 years to find disculping elements doesn't make that less clear that if it takes only one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, westy8chimp said:

Each player in line of the ball there (Matuidi, Perisic, Strinic?) have their arms out/flailing as the ball comes.

Like I said earlier, no on jumps like a statue. If the Croat just in front of Matuidi has got a flick and diverted it half a yard, it hits Matuidi's arm. Even in his current motion which is natural, you would then be reviewing the video saying definite handball by Matuidi as his arm moves in the direction of the ball. It's easy to slow mo it back retrospectively and say Perisic arm moves towards the ball... I just think as you jump your arms go up and down it was the natural path and the ball is deflected at him very quickly from very close.

In real time there is no way Perisic reacts that quickly. There is more movement after as he panics realising the ball hit his hand.

 

It doesn't matter in the slightest if the other players also moved their arms in a similar way, none of them handballed it, sorry but what a ridiculous argument. Yes it is easy to retrospectively go back and look at the replays which is exactly what happened and why it was given in the first place. I also said it was more a reaction than intent from the player but the intent doesn't really matter, a lot of the time fouls and penalties aren't intentional but you still have to give what is right to give in that situation.

Can you honestly not see why a ref looking at that gives the penalty whether you think its harsh or not? I genuinely again don't understand how people are baffled by it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many times has there been a penalty shout that went out for a goal kick and VAR just waves it away, why was this instance any different? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marc Albrighton said:

It doesn't matter in the slightest if the other players also moved their arms in a similar way, none of them handballed it,

people who think its a penalty are saying he deliberately moved towards the ball... i'm saying when you watch real time, everybody moves their arms in the same fashion. Is Matuidi deliberately trying to handle the ball? No... the movement is the same though ... it's just coincidence that the ball hits Perisic... then when you slow mo, it looks like hand to ball ...but it definitely isn't. it's ball to hand.

It's very relevant as well.. like I say, knowing retrospectively Matuidi's movement and that he headed it, not handled it... we can take that as benchmark for 'normal' movement. So if the ball was flicked off the Croatia player and hit Matuidi... we could watch the video back (with exact same movement) and it would look like handball (arm coming downwards all the time during his movement).

do you think Perisic's arm goes a different direction if Matuidi heads it 10 yards over him... or 10 yards wide... I don't! It's how he was moving regardless.

Watch any aerial challenge (forget where the ball is) the movement of the arms is always the same and natural

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

people who think its a penalty are saying he deliberately moved towards the ball... i'm saying when you watch real time, everybody moves their arms in the same fashion. Is Matuidi deliberately trying to handle the ball? No... the movement is the same though ... it's just coincidence that the ball hits Perisic... then when you slow mo, it looks like hand to ball ...but it definitely isn't. it's ball to hand.

It's very relevant as well.. like I say, knowing retrospectively Matuidi's movement and that he headed it, not handled it... we can take that as benchmark for 'normal' movement. So if the ball was flicked off the Croatia player and hit Matuidi... we could watch the video back (with exact same movement) and it would look like handball (arm coming downwards all the time during his movement).

do you think Perisic's arm goes a different direction if Matuidi heads it 10 yards over him... or 10 yards wide... I don't! It's how he was moving regardless.

Watch any aerial challenge (forget where the ball is) the movement of the arms is always the same and natural

But i'm not arguing about ifs because they didn't happen, im debating the event which did happen, how are ifs and buts relevant? As i said in the match thread i'm perfectly fine with people disagreeing with the penalty decision but it baffles me that anyone cant see why the ref has given it based on the replays. Another ref might not have given it and i would have been able to see why. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Marc Albrighton said:

how are ifs and buts relevant?

hmmm you aren't getting it and I'm not explaining it well... but if you use retrospective slow mo footage to damn one player and say his movement was deliberate towards the ball... but can see the player who headed the ball performing the same movements ...

I just think the movement is natural... the ball is too close... the deflection happens too fast. I don't think a slow mo replay watched 10 times is good evidence to overturn natural instinct and real time events. As Keane said at HT "it's disgusting, i'll bet any money this ref has never played football in his life".

That's some matrix **** if Perisic deliberately handled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 25 minutes, Barry Cartman a dit :

How many times has there been a penalty shout that went out for a goal kick and VAR just waves it away, why was this instance any different? 

i guess when a whole team show that they think it's a penalty and there was an handball, then people in the VAR room look at what happened? and then when they see clearly the hand of a player going toward the ball, they say to the ref what they saw and ask him to go look at it...

Let's recap :

  • Pitana clearly didn't see the action well initially not seeing Perisic touching the ball (proven by him not even giving a corner)
  • French protests as they saw he CLEARLY made an error (didn't see the action) and didn't see the hand touching the ball
  • VAR room confirm that Perisic touch ball with hand and signal it to Pitana (so he can JUDGE if there is an handball or not)
  • Pitana look at video, and appropriately take his time to judge (you don't want to rush your judgement if you can avoid it and want to look at every angle in this kind of situation)
  • judge (rightfully) its an handball

It's clearly how VAR is supposed to be used

Now you can argue that it shouldn't be judged an handball, but you see clearly the palm opening and the arm going to the ball (much more clearly for exemple than on japanese pen goal against Senegal, were the contact and intentionality aren't much more important)

Nobody is saying Perisic had time to think "let's hit the ball with my hand" but as the ball was going in his arm direction, he had the reflex to touch it.

Is it an harsh penalty : yes.

Is there clearly an handball (according to current rules ) : yes (it would be an handball 100% of the time if seen outside the area)

Do these kind of fault should give a penalty/goal?  i don't think so and i don't think it's fair that these fault have the same consequence than let's say the Danish fault on Rebic in the round of 16, but hey that's how the rules are given that a fault in the area = penalty no matter the nature of the fault

Edited by Cyp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minuti fa, westy8chimp ha scritto:

people who think its a penalty are saying he deliberately moved towards the ball...

No, not at all. A player doesn't need to hit "deliberately" or "intentionally" the ball with his hand for a penalty to be awarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

hmmm you aren't getting it and I'm not explaining it well... but if you use retrospective slow mo footage to damn one player and say his movement was deliberate towards the ball... but can see the player who headed the ball performing the same movements ...

I just think the movement is natural... the ball is too close... the deflection happens too fast. I don't think a slow mo replay watched 10 times is good evidence to overturn natural instinct and real time events. As Keane said at HT "it's disgusting, i'll bet any money this ref has never played football in his life".

That's some matrix **** if Perisic deliberately handled.

It does not matter how anyone else was moving their hands!!!! How many times do i have to say it, blimey. Its ridiculous and its not even the point i'm debating. Matuidi did not handball it in the box and thus gave the referee no opportunity to make a decision for us to debate. can't you see that even with me typing it like 3 times? I'm not having a go at you personally but you keep insisting on debating this silly point with me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 8 minutes, westy8chimp a dit :

hmmm you aren't getting it and I'm not explaining it well... but if you use retrospective slow mo footage to damn one player and say his movement was deliberate towards the ball... but can see the player who headed the ball performing the same movements ...

I just think the movement is natural... the ball is too close... the deflection happens too fast. I don't think a slow mo replay watched 10 times is good evidence to overturn natural instinct and real time events. As Keane said at HT "it's disgusting, i'll bet any money this ref has never played football in his life".

That's some matrix **** if Perisic deliberately handled.

the question of the movement being natural is irelevant..but if your "natural" movement result in your hand moving to touch the ball, then it can be a handball, especially if you made no VISIBLE effort to try to avoid the situation

Keane comment is stupid ad hominem...and really if you think top level referees don't know or never played football...

Edited by Cyp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Federico said:

No, not at all. A player doesn't need to hit "deliberately" or "intentionally" the ball with his hand for a penalty to be awarded.

By what criteria is it a handball then... as proximity wise it would be in his defence, movement wise it would be in his defence... has he gained anything by handling the ball? No.. wasn't dangerous anyway but Croatia player directly behind.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until we have means to read people's minds, the talk of handball being deliberate or not is not very fruitful. Most players would have the cunning to appear as to not do things in a deliberate manner, as with the usual "clipping people from behind and "look, my hands are waving about in the air, so I couldn't possibly have meant to do any harm"" gesture, or with many cases where people appear to dive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to explain with my poor english.

According to me (and my criteria is based on how the rule is applied in Italy) the movement of the arms must be coherent with the movement of the body and the arms must not extend/enhance the volume/area covered by the body.

In my opinion both cases are broken by Perisic: he jumps with his arms wide on his flanks (I don't know about you but I don't jump that way) and, particulary by doing so, he enhances the exposure/volume of the body. It wasn't intended for sure, there's no doubt on that. But intention is not a factor in this situation I'm afraid.

Pundits here had no doubt about the penalty and it was clear it was to be given far before it was given for real. So I'm not really sure what're we're discussing about here. The rule should be changed? Yes maybe it should, but in the current state of things, the rule is quite clear for me and applied correctly, unfortunately for Croatia.

Why defenders cross their arms on their backs when tackling or challaning the ball next to the box? To avoid these situations I assume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Barry Cartman said:

How many times has there been a penalty shout that went out for a goal kick and VAR just waves it away, why was this instance any different? 

Because if the referee sees it, he either awards a corner or a penalty. Ergo he clearly didn't see it.

Can't think of any handball shouts where it's happened this World Cup (and I've had the TV on for most of it) and can't think of any where the ref decided a player won the ball when he didn't that got reviewed (a couple where the ref has correctly seen the player didn't get the ball and debatably decided the contact wasn't a foul as the player going down wasn't getting the ball and so milked the challenge, but allowing those dubious decisions when he's obviously seen the incident clearly to stand is what the "clear and obvious" guideline is for)

 

18 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

people who think its a penalty are saying he deliberately moved towards the ball... i'm saying when you watch real time, everybody moves their arms in the same fashion. Is Matuidi deliberately trying to handle the ball? No... the movement is the same though ... it's just coincidence that the ball hits Perisic... then when you slow mo, it looks like hand to ball ...but it definitely isn't. it's ball to hand.

It's very relevant as well.. like I say, knowing retrospectively Matuidi's movement and that he headed it, not handled it... we can take that as benchmark for 'normal' movement. So if the ball was flicked off the Croatia player and hit Matuidi... we could watch the video back (with exact same movement) and it would look like handball (arm coming downwards all the time during his movement).

do you think Perisic's arm goes a different direction if Matuidi heads it 10 yards over him... or 10 yards wide... I don't! It's how he was moving regardless.

Watch any aerial challenge (forget where the ball is) the movement of the arms is always the same and natural

It's fairly natural looking because your arms do move down in an aerial challenge, but that left arm moves down a lot faster than the right, especially when Matuidi misses it. I'm not convinced it moves down quite so sharply if Matuidi gets a flick on it; possibly it even reflexively stretches out in another direction...

Matuidi's arm is moving speedily away from the ball whether he heads it or not. And he almost certainly gets penalised if the cross lands on his arm there anyway, which nobody would object to.

I am going to avoid voting on this now purely to upset you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 30 minutes, westy8chimp a dit :

By what criteria is it a handball then... as proximity wise it would be in his defence, movement wise it would be in his defence... has he gained anything by handling the ball? No.. wasn't dangerous anyway but Croatia player directly behind.

 

did umtiti win something by doing his blatant handball against australia? or Piqué against Russia?

Edit : to clarify i didn't vote because while i think it's an handball, i don't think it's deliberate (in the sense of him doing it on purpose). I also do think that Croatia falling behind 2-1 at this point was massively unlucky and "unfair" (in a moral) as they were totally outplaying a very poor french team.

Edited by Cyp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"a decision can only be changed if the footage shows a ‘clear error’ (or that a serious offence/incident has been missed) – the question is not ‘was the decision correct?’ but ‘was the decision clearly wrong?’"

Now to me it doesn't meet that criteria, I don't see how you can say with any certainty whether it is deliberate or not.

I still find the first goal more annoying, because that it straight forward cheating that apparently only Neymar gets criticised for at this World Cup.

Edited by Reggiana

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 2 minutes, Reggiana a dit :

"a decision can only be changed if the footage shows a ‘clear error’ (or that a serious offence/incident has been missed) – the question is not ‘was the decision correct?’ but ‘was the decision clearly wrong?’"

Now to me it doesn't meet that criteria, I don't see how you can say with any certainty whether it is deliberate or not.

I still find the first goal more annoying, because that it straight forward cheating that apparently only Neymar gets criticised for at this World Cup.

not seeing the hand touching the ball IS a clear error so VAR has to be used.

Pitana then had the opportunity to judge whether or not it was an handball or not.

Also deliberate isn't a criteria really taken into account for judging handball( it isn't for most fault anyway, and the intentionality of the fault is generally only an aggravating circonstancy, and if going this way the Colombian handball against Japan isn't deliberate )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

am going to avoid voting on this now purely to upset you.

Should be a forum rule... If you are going to opine on a topic that has a vote... You have to vote first or the topic stays read only! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cyp said:

not seeing the hand touching the ball IS a clear error so VAR has to be used.

Pitana then had the opportunity to judge whether or not it was an handball or not.

Also deliberate isn't a criteria really taken into account for judging handball( it isn't for most fault anyway, and the intentionality of the fault is generally only an aggravating circonstancy, and if going this way the Colombian handball against Japan isn't deliberate )

The law literally says it needs to be a "deliberate act".

I agree that it has clearly touched his hand and therefore it is clearly not a goal kick, I don't agree that it is clearly deliberate so I'd say it's a corner. The clearly bit only relates to something VAR can review though, so it is a case of there should only be a review if the referee was "clearly wrong" not to give a penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a 2 minutes, Reggiana a dit :

The law literally says it needs to be a "deliberate act".

 

Jumping with your arm spread is a deliberate act. to top it of, his palm is open and arm move in the direction of the ball. The handball is far clearer imo than that of the Colombian defender against Japan to me for exemple (Colombian jump to try an header and it hit is upper arm) though i do agree that Perisic was in a much less dangerous situation...nobody would argue that wasn't a pen for Japan.

il y a 2 minutes, Reggiana a dit :

I agree that it has clearly touched his hand and therefore it is clearly not a goal kick, I don't agree that it is clearly deliberate so I'd say it's a corner. The clearly bit only relates to something VAR can review though, so it is a case of there should only be a review if the referee was "clearly wrong" not to give a penalty. 

yes but to judge if the handball is clear ref has to see it, and VAR room thought it was an handball (i think they are right given the criteria for handball) so they told him to review.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, westy8chimp said:

Should be a forum rule... If you are going to opine on a topic that has a vote... You have to vote first or the topic stays read only! 

 

Well, not if the alternatives are deliberately false. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2  different articles in the press today from ex-refs- Poll and Halsey- One says yes and one says no.  What chance have the fans got?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dermot Gallagher also says no pen.

I said on page 1 it's too tough to call, in real time it's not a penalty, using slow mo it is however slow mo doesn't always tell the whole story, a proper 50/50 call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He moves the arm towards the ball, therefore it's a penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Hodgy said:

Dermot Gallagher also says no pen.

I said on page 1 it's too tough to call, in real time it's not a penalty, using slow mo it is however slow mo doesn't always tell the whole story, a proper 50/50 call.

It says in the VAR rules that they should only use slow mo to work out whether it has actually hit his hand, for deciding whether it is deliberate they are only supposed to use real time replays.

15 hours ago, Cyp said:

Jumping with your arm spread is a deliberate act. to top it of, his palm is open and arm move in the direction of the ball. The handball is far clearer imo than that of the Colombian defender against Japan to me for exemple (Colombian jump to try an header and it hit is upper arm) though i do agree that Perisic was in a much less dangerous situation...nobody would argue that wasn't a pen for Japan.

yes but to judge if the handball is clear ref has to see it, and VAR room thought it was an handball (i think they are right given the criteria for handball) so they told him to review.

Sanchez has his arm out fairly rigidly to the side of him, to me that is a clearer handball. But that isn't really the point because the ref gave that one on the pitch, the point of VAR is it is only meant to be used when a decision is clearly wrong with respect to one of the four incidents they check, so saying the VAR thought it was handball is not right as they're meant to be pretty much certain it was handball before they call for a review. Maybe Croatia were just unlucky with the referees in the VAR room as there seems to be as much of a split between ex-refs as there does between fans as to whether it was a penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

39 vs 38 in favour of no. @enigmatic the contrarian he is, we will assume makes it 39 vs 39. But we have Brock which counts as at least 2 votes.

Either way, extremely close and that's with almost 80 votes of football fans so it's a pretty good barometer. Handball call 50/50 so VAR should not have overturned the decision.

VAR was brought in to clear up the major mistakes (like goal line technology) where it's pretty much fact that the decision was wrong. This was a subjective, borderline call. Slow mo replay have also made a big impact on the refs judgement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
il y a une heure, westy8chimp a dit :

39 vs 38 in favour of no. @enigmatic the contrarian he is, we will assume makes it 39 vs 39. But we have Brock which counts as at least 2 votes.

Either way, extremely close and that's with almost 80 votes of football fans so it's a pretty good barometer. Handball call 50/50 so VAR should not have overturned the decision.

VAR was brought in to clear up the major mistakes (like goal line technology) where it's pretty much fact that the decision was wrong. This was a subjective, borderline call. Slow mo replay have also made a big impact on the refs judgement.

Il y a 17 heures, kensteidel a dit :

Well, not if the alternatives are deliberately false. 

you have people voting NO and saying it is a handball in their post (like GunmaN for exemple), just to say.

If you had an option : "yes, but he didn't do it on purpose" results would probably different.

Also if i recall right, aren't VAR video shown at real speed (no slow mo)?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 ora fa, Cyp ha scritto:

Also if i recall right, aren't VAR video shown at real speed (no slow mo)?

If so, you'd lose the real meaning of using VAR I suppose :)

And anyway, it wasn't VAR calling the penalty. The refs at the VAR center did communicate with Pitana inviting him for a field review. He watched that action for a good amount of time and the decision taken on the field was overturned by Pitana and him only.

The arm was wide, the ball was kicked long away, no ricochets whatsoever... Would I have personally awarded that penalty? No I wouldn't, but I'm against the rule and not against the decision. The rule was applied correctly.

And I have seen many many worse penalties awarded along this last season.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, westy8chimp said:

Handball call 50/50 so VAR should not have overturned the decision.

VAR was brought in to clear up the major mistakes (like goal line technology) where it's pretty much fact that the decision was wrong. This was a subjective, borderline call. Slow mo replay have also made a big impact on the refs judgement.

It's unequivocal fact that the original decision that Perisic had not made contact with the ball with any part of his body was incorrect, probably because the ref had Arsene Wenger's view of the incident. VAR didn't overturn a 50/50 ball-to-hand call (which could easily have been left unchallenged and probably would have been under the current system), it overturned a clearly mistaken "nothing happened" call in a potentially major situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's obvious that decision is  dubious.

Lots of varied opinions. Both in here and among former players and referees.

Which means something needs to be done about situations like this.
As I already said, based on this WC criteria, Pitana made a correct call.

Perišić obviously didn't play with his hand on purpose because he didn't even see the ball. If he did, he should maybe switch to goalkeeper position, because those would be some amazing reflexes.

And the biggest thing for me, the ball is obviously not going towards the goal and it would almost certainly be easily cleared away by Croatian defender.

 

Imo, if the ball is headed on target or towards an attacker that will get into a good goalscoring position, it should be a penalty regardless of arm position or  intention.

If it's just some random handball that has no consequences on the play, it shouldn't be a penalty.

 

And even bigger issue is that players can still dive and get set-piece opportunities in dangerous situations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, enigmatic said:

it overturned a clearly mistaken "nothing happened" call in a potentially major situation.

they aren't allowed to use it to change a corner decision :D 

But that not withstanding, I don't blame VAR for calling the incident to the refs attention.. I blame the ref for using VAR to rule a penalty. My belief is that if he did see the event in real time, he gives a corner not a penalty. It's the multi-angle, multi-view of the incident (possibly in slow mo) that's made him see something that wasn't there in real time. Any doubt and it shouldn't be a penalty... we have 81 football fans who have had days to review it and are still 50/50 ... it doesn't meet the criteria of the rules (although it seems every word in the rule is a point of interpretation and debate).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Perišić obviously didn't play with his hand on purpose because he didn't even see the ball. If he did, he should maybe switch to goalkeeper position, because those would be some amazing reflexes.

How about those competitive international beach volleyball tournaments he's played in on the side? 

41E391F300000578-0-image-a-260_149877573

Don't think you need even need reflexes that good to handle a ball when you've been watching where the cross is going all the way and it ends up roughly where you'd expect it. The general assumption is if the ball's travelled that far, you should have been able to decide whether to move your arm away from where it's likely to end up or towards it, and the sharp movement at the end is towards it. I mean, he could theoretically have actually have intended to jerk his arm out the way instead, but if he did, he ****ed up...

-

If 50% of people think it's a penalty and everybody thinks the original reason it wasn't awarded is wrong it's not a "corner decision" :D 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He can't possibly predict that Matuidi will miss the ball, look at his head, do you really think he handballed it on purpose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Matuidi's trying to get the finest possible glance on it, and Perisic's arm and leg both move towards the ball when he doesn't. It's obviously not a perfectly controlled and planned action, but I'd be very surprised he wasn't thinking about trying to block the cross as it came in...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/07/2018 at 16:57, Barry Cartman said:

I know exactly how it works thanks, love the usual condescending tone when it comes to ref decisions

It has to be a clear error, so when the referee has to look at it several times, goes away, then has to have another quick look again before reaching a decision, it obviously isn't a clear and obvious error, therefore it should never have been given

But that's not how it works... The time it took the referee to complete the OFR and the question of IF it was a clear error are not in any way related.

If Pitana had called a corner (indicating he had seen a touch by the Croat) then I don't think that the VAR had sent up a review as not calling a PK from that contact wouldn't have been a clear error. But as Pitana called a goalkick (meaning he thought the last touch came of a French player) then the VAR, if he thought that the contact likely should be a PK, was free to send it up for review because not seeing the contact at all is easily a clear error.

I also think that if this had happened in a CL match a few months ago where there are no VAR's but instead are AAR's then the end result would still have been a PK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this has highlighted for me is that the wording of the handball rules surely needs a rewrite as it’s so confusing to those of us unfamiliar with the rules.

The grand majority of handballs are obviously not deliberate but this surely falls in the ‘clear and obvious error’ category. However, anyone one of my friends I tried to argue this against would just throw that word ‘deliberate’ at me and I’m certainly not in a position to know how to argue against it, other than using my eyes and seeing a player block the ball in a dangerous area with his (literal) hand :D 

Edited by ArsenalFan7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ArsenalFan7 said:

other than using my eyes and seeing a player block the ball in a dangerous area with his (literal) hand

ah this is not true though... fact is we have all seen the ball and hand make contact.

Word 'block' assumes aforethought/intent you are interpreting that, where I interpret the event as natural movement and no intent to block.

You also subjectively refer to a 'dangerous area'... where I subjectively think there is no danger ... player behind would have blocked it... header wasn't particularly going to cause any trouble.

It's the subjective opinion, and individual interpretation which is the crux of the debate... neither side has any fact other than the ball did touch the hand (or the hand did touch the ball)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Well, it's obvious that decision is  dubious.

The only thing that is obvious is that very few fans (or pundits) have any clue to how the handling law works. Don't get me wrong, I can accept that some won't think that it is handling but a lot of the arguments made have no basis in the laws.

 

7 hours ago, GunmaN1905 said:

And the biggest thing for me, the ball is obviously not going towards the goal and it would almost certainly be easily cleared away by Croatian defender.

Imo, if the ball is headed on target or towards an attacker that will get into a good goalscoring position, it should be a penalty regardless of arm position or  intention.

If it's just some random handball that has no consequences on the play, it shouldn't be a penalty.

That is a perfectly fine opinion to have for a fan. For a referee however there is no basis in law to reason or call situations like that.

 

7 hours ago, GunmaN1905 said:

Perišić obviously didn't play with his hand on purpose because he didn't even see the ball. If he did, he should maybe switch to goalkeeper position, because those would be some amazing reflexes.

Yes and no IMO. I see this situation as being very much like the Henry handball v Ireland a few years ago.

Both players were moving in perfectly normal ways.

Both players arm/hand were moving in natural ways.

Both times the ball reached them somewhat unexpected.

Both times the ball ended up in very close proximity of their arm/hand without them intentionally making it so.

And both times the players used the opportunity to steer/guide the ball in a favourable direction (obviously Henry gained more from it but that is irrelevant to the decision).

Was it more of an instinctive reaction than an intentional act? Yes, but that doesn't matter. Looking for if a player tries to take advantage of unintentional contact is something that referees are taught when they progress from beginner levels and IMO both Perisic and Henry did just that. They are both just as clear offences (and that's regardless if it is at this WC or any other competition).

 

 

7 hours ago, GunmaN1905 said:

And even bigger issue is that players can still dive and get set-piece opportunities in dangerous situations.

And here the wast majority of referees around the world agrees with you. The lines for what can/can't be reviewed is somewhat arbitrarily drawn and it presents just as much of an issue as the question about how the things that can be reviewed is reviewed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/07/2018 at 18:11, westy8chimp said:

As Keane said at HT "it's disgusting, i'll bet any money this ref has never played football in his life".

That argument works both ways though and I'd wager quite a lot on the referee have spent a lot more hours playing football than what Keane have spent refereeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...