Guest TOPFITTER Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 I'm sorry but I fail to see how he has moved his hands towards the ball? His hand are up at his chest and the ball is flicked onto them. It then bounces off the arms and away before he puts his arms down. Flemings tackle was pretty shocking. Both players were very lucky. Fleming not to be red carded and the other lad not to be seriously injured. therefore if they were down by his side or around waist level the Ref would maybe have considered it ball to hand in a natural position, but as they are "Up At his Chest" and so in an unnatural position award = PENALTY !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 therefore if they were down by his side or around waist level the Ref would maybe have considered it ball to hand in a natural position, but as they are "Up At his Chest" and so in an unnatural position award = PENALTY !!! Learn the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Vojáček Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 therefore if they were down by his side or around waist level the Ref would maybe have considered it ball to hand in a natural position, but as they are "Up At his Chest" and so in an unnatural position award = PENALTY !!! Who on earth runs with their hands behind their back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 He just about catches the ball. No complaints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Learn the rules. No matter what the rules say, you see penalties given in that kind of situation all the time. The guy sliding in with his hand above his head, players with arms outstretched etc. You see players, quite regularly, get told not to put their arms up in front of them when they are in walls at free kicks. You even see, EPL players particularly, putting their hands behind their back especially in the box. The interpretation of the rules is pretty obvious, "unnatural" position equals handball. Personally, I dont really agree with that, especially in instances where the hand isnt actually in an unnatural position eg when sliding to block a cross/shot, but thats how it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
die hard doonhamer Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Neither of the handballs are penalties for me, but I can see why the first was given. The tackle on Higgins is a shocker, and it's definitely a foul on Kiltie, nowhere near the ball but got all of the man, very clear cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Moonster Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 No matter what the rules say, you see penalties given in that kind of situation all the time. The guy sliding in with his hand above his head, players with arms outstretched etc. You see players, quite regularly, get told not to put their arms up in front of them when they are in walls at free kicks. You even see, EPL players particularly, putting their hands behind their back especially in the box. The interpretation of the rules is pretty obvious, "unnatural" position equals handball. Personally, I dont really agree with that, especially in instances where the hand isnt actually in an unnatural position eg when sliding to block a cross/shot, but thats how it is. That's because that IS unnatural and you're deliberately putting your arm somewhere that it can stop the ball. Taggart's running and stops, of course his arms won't be right by his side. If the Queens player right next to him doesn't touch that ball his hand isn't anywhere near the ball. What the ref has said by giving that penalty is that Taggart deliberately put his arm in an unnatural position to block the ball from a pass played from about a yard away. It's just not a clear penalty. The rule isn't unnatural position, it's deliberate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Paddy Flannery Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 He just about catches the ball. No complaints. lol. Nice healthy debate going on here and this appears. Carry on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
die hard doonhamer Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 This is the law, btw: Handling the ball Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: • the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) • the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) • the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement • touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement Disciplinary sanctions There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player: • deliberately handles the ball to prevent an opponent gaining possession • attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball A player is sent off, however, if he prevents a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball. This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TOPFITTER Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Learn the rules. LAW 12 - FOULS AND MISCONDUCT Direct free kick A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force: • kicks or attempts to kick an opponent • trips or attempts to trip an opponent • jumps at an opponent • charges an opponent • strikes or attempts to strike an opponent • pushes an opponent • tackles an opponent A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences: • holds an opponent • spits at an opponent • handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area) A direct free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred (see Law 13 - Position of free kick). Penalty kick A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play. So I assume the referee believed the movement was deliberate and so awarded a penalty. The unnatural position judgement is only to assist the referee to decide on the deliberate or accidental nature of the handling off the ball, in this case the referee must have considered the movement deliberate. Try reading the Laws Of The Game once in a while, you may learn something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 That's because that IS unnatural and you're deliberately putting your arm somewhere that it can stop the ball. Taggart's running and stops, of course his arms won't be right by his side. If the Queens player right next to him doesn't touch that ball his hand isn't anywhere near the ball. What the ref has said by giving that penalty is that Taggart deliberately put his arm in an unnatural position to block the ball from a pass played from about a yard away. It's just not a clear penalty. The rule isn't unnatural position, it's deliberate. I know what the rule is. I also know what Ive seen penalties given for countless times. A player sliding on the ground to try and block a shot hasnt put their arm above their head to deliberately block the ball but they are regularly penalised for it. A player running with his arm outstretched isnt, necessarily, putting it their to block the ball but they are regularly penalised for it. A player in the box with his hands in front of him who then blocks the ball with his hands is going to give away a penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19QOS19 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 I've said this before, but I would love to see a trial introduced to football with the rules similar to hockey. In hockey, if the ball hits your foot it a foul, no questions asked and no arguments ever ensue. Could football not try this with handball? It would surely cut out all the was it wasn't it debates and it would give referees an easier time of it. The inconsistency of decisions on these matters is becoming tedious tbh. Something needs to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Okay, Mr Pedantic, no one said the actual word stonewall however... So a clear penalty, as clear as you'll get but not stonewall? Yes, that's about the size of it. I think it was a penalty and it's pretty clear why I think that and why the referee, who had a better angle than any of us, thought it was. That doesn't make it "stonewall". If it was stonewall nobody would be arguing about it. I didn't say it was "as clear as you'll get" (which it obviously wasn't) and I had missed Cammy saying that. But it's not the arms by his side, could do nothing about about it incident it was portrayed as initially either. His arms are well out from his body and reaching forward when he pretty much bats the ball down. Whether he meant it or not that's asking for trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeezeboxson Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 If it had been the other way about I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be considered a clear penalty by any of your fans. Fleming's tackle is horrific though! Shame he seems to get carried away like that every now and again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 If it had been the other way about I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be considered a clear penalty by any of your fans. It's a penalty irrespective of what colour shirt they're wearing. He just about catches the thing!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Vojáček Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 . He just about catches the thing!!! Genuinely not sure if serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MONKMAN Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Genuinely not sure if serious. No, but it's a blatant penalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockson Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 No, but it's a blatant penalty. If the ref gives it, it's a penalty. If the ref doesn't give it, it's not. Blame the ref. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cedrick1 Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 classic case of if its for you its a pen .if its against you it isnt. from my view understand why ref gave it and tv hasnt changed my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Let it go, it's over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.