AberdeenBud Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Pretty irrelevant I think.It's less a question of intent, more of this 'unnatural position' lark. I don't think he meant to block the ball with his right hand, but I think he was making himself big, in the way a goalkeeper does, and this is what blocked the ball. I also think that the officials genuinely missed it.When watched back in real time, it really isn't that clear, unless you're looking specifically for it, which of course, nobody was.My problem however, does not relate to the minutiae of the incident itself. It's all to do with the fact that players have only been punished in this way for violent acts towards others in the past. In this case and in my view, due to the profile of the game and the identity of the 'victim', the SFA are prepared to create a precedent. That people, is the unpalatable point here. I'm sure retrospective action has not only been used for violent acts. Simulation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I think bans for simulation annoy me more than ones like this. If simulation is worthy of a ban then it should be a red card offense as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Pretty irrelevant I think.It's less a question of intent, more of this 'unnatural position' lark. I don't think he meant to block the ball with his right hand, but I think he was making himself big, in the way a goalkeeper does, and this is what blocked the ball. I also think that the officials genuinely missed it.When watched back in real time, it really isn't that clear, unless you're looking specifically for it, which of course, nobody was.My problem however, does not relate to the minutiae of the incident itself. It's all to do with the fact that players have only been punished in this way for violent acts towards others in the past. In this case and in my view, due to the profile of the game and the identity of the 'victim', the SFA are prepared to create a precedent. That people, is the unpalatable point here. The unnatural position lark is a piece of advice. It is written down in the English referees association as advice but I do not think it is written down anywhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I think bans for simulation annoy me more than ones like this. If simulation is worthy of a ban then it should be a red card offense as well. Totally agree. If denying a goalscoring opportunity is a red card offence then creating a goal scoring opportunity should be of equal value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 The Hoops boss said: "It doesn't help us if someone gets banned. I don't think that's right "I don't think he did it on purpose, the ball was going very quickly. "It was reaction, but it was a clear hand ball, a red card and a penalty. "I hope that he will play, the best players should always play in the final. "I don't think it is a positive thing to ban anybody." Ronny Deila = Good Guy* * apart from when he does the 'Ronny Roar' *or when lying about one of his racist players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonewolfie Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Chris Sutton has come out and called the official an idiot Sutton is the original moron - a king sized rat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiG Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Tyrone Smith has tweeted saying that the Meekings hearing will take place some time after 3 today. So I guess a verdict by 5/6 tonight or will it run over until tomorrow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScarf Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Have we ever had more possession against Celtic in a game before Sunday? They seemed happy for us to have the ball a lot of the time. Something you don't usually see from Celtic domestically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellAnderson Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I aye thought that a "deliberate" hand ball where the hand was in an unnatural position but there's no way he's meaning to hit the ball (arm in the air through lack of control, arm outstretched for balance etc) were fouls but a proper deliberate hand ball (man on the line, punching the ball in the net, picking the ball up cos you've had a hissy fit) were red cards. Am I completely wrong here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugster Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Am I completely wrong here? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTJohnboy Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Will any of the match officials be summoned to appear at Meekings tribunal? What will they say? (a) That they all missed it. (b) Didn't think it was deliberate handball that would have denied a goal-scoring opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellAnderson Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Yes What are the rules then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 What are the rules then? If it's a deliberate handball then it's a foul. If it's not a deliberate handball then it's not a foul. If you try to score with your hand, or deny an opposing team possession with a deliberate handball, then it's a yellow card. If you deny a goal or a goalscoring opportunity with a handball, then it's a red card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 What are the rules then? FIFA Laws of the Game 2014-15 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) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RussellAnderson Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 If it's a deliberate handball then it's a foul. If it's not a deliberate handball then it's not a foul. If you try to score with your hand, or deny an opposing team possession with a deliberate handball, then it's a yellow card. If you deny a goal or a goalscoring opportunity with a handball, then it's a red card. Cheers min. Do refs just ignore this then? I can't think of an incident where this would apply, mabye Suarez at the world cup a few years ago? Meekings certainly wasn't deliberate so its not even a foul then. Nobody ever wants to handle the ball so why is this the rule? Struggling here.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Cheers min. Do refs just ignore this then? I can't think of an incident where this would apply, mabye Suarez at the world cup a few years ago? Meekings certainly wasn't deliberate so its not even a foul then. Nobody ever wants to handle the ball so why is this the rule? Struggling here.. There is a nice wee article here. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4524354.stm The challenging decisions are if the defending player spreads their arms to make themselves bigger. "If the ball hits the arm then the referee must decide whether this action was to deliberately block the ball or whether the player has raised their arms to protect themselves - especially if the ball is hit at speed." The referee and referees' assistants, therefore, have a matter of seconds to weigh up these factors, and take the appropriate action. As for no player ever wanting to handle the ball... Maradona? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davie2wheels Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I've knicked this shamelessly from Kingsmills on CTO. He and I never agree about anything but this is spot on (his figures might be a bit oot but you'll catch his drift): "Professional football has been played now for 153 years. It has been routinely televised for half a century. FIFA have 209 national associations as members. Something in excess of ten million professional football matches have taken place over the last century and a half. In over fifteen million hours of play never before in the history of the World has an allegation of handball been dealt with retrospectively. If the Compliance Officer can explain to me what is so very different about the second semi final of the 2015 William Hill Scottish Cup from the over ten million matches that went before it then I might just be prepared to accept that there is a case to answer.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I think the SFA will reject the appeal. So this could be the next step for us. FIFA chief blasts SFA over Meekings decision FIFA vice president Jim Boyce launched a blistering attack on the SFA when he waded into the row that has seen Josh Meekings hit with a retrospective suspension for a blunder made by the match officials in Sunday’s semi-final win over Celtic. Meekings who faces a ban following the unprecedented decision of compliance officer Tony McGlennan to punish him for the handball missed by ref Stevie McLean and goalline assistant Alan Muir. The defender is expected to appear at Hampden today in the hope of having the charge thrown out. Boyce said: “This decision to suspend the player is setting a very, very dangerous precedent. “FIFA allow associations to make their own decisions but if this decision stands and Inverness feel it is unjust they would have every right to bring this matter up with the powers that be at FIFA.” (Daily Record) FIFA are quite alarmed by what has happened with this retrospective punishment. Except they aren't. The vice president's views are of no consequence whatsoever. Vice President is a purely decorative role. And of course, FIFA were similarly outraged when the SFA decided to take retrospective action against divers, back in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 Because it doesn't have to be intentional by any dictionary definition of intent. A guy can have absolutely no intent to handle to ball but it can still be "deliberate". A player with his hands in an un-natural position and his back turned to the ball, for example. That said, it's a moot point because Meekings clearly meant to handle the ball, and should have been sent off for deliberate handball. He really doesn't have much of a case, other than an emotional one. You very rarely see a player wilfully handle the ball, but this was a case. It seems to me that the kerfuffle is because it's a handball and not a violent foul that retrospective action is being taken , thus it's less important. Did Meekings cheat? Yes. Was it deliberate? Yes. Did it effect the result? Yes. Did the referee see it? No. That's your view but many others would say it wasn't. Which is why even video evidence during a game wouldn't sort this one out and why it's best left to the referee to make the decision on the day. Only time anything should be done retrospectively is violent conduct which the referee misses Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTJohnboy Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 That's your view but many others would say it wasn't. Which is why even video evidence during a game wouldn't sort this one out and why it's best left to the referee to make the decision on the day. Only time anything should be done retrospectively is violent conduct which the referee misses Absolutely. And whether he got it right or wrong it should be remembered he has only seconds to make that decision and without the use of endless action replays. It's certainly not an ideal system but it's the best we've got for the time being. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.