Hawkeye Decision at Villa Park

[Hamburg Blade]

I’m sure you’re right. The part I’ve highlighted is the crux of the issue for me, I’m not sure if the laws allow for this distinction when considering goalkeepers marginally outside their area. If it’s deliberately handling the ball in an area of the pitch that the laws don’t allow you to (everywhere for outfield players, outside your area for goalkeepers), then you’re right. I think there could be an argument made that unintentionally carrying the ball out of your area is akin to ‘ball-to-hand’ in whether it is a deliberate handball and therefore a handball offence, but I agree with you that isn’t the current wording or interpretation of the law.

In my mind’s eye the scenario was a goalkeeper rushing out to collect just inside the 18 yard line, sliding behind the 18 yard line and releasing just as the ball is over the line. That Kite decision doesn’t even look particularly close.

I think the problem with interpreting the way you say, though I can see how you can say it wasn't intentionally carried out therefore it wasn't intentionally handled where it shouldn't have been, is that pretty much every instance of a keeper going fractionally over the line could be seen as a lack of judgement of exactly where the line is and accidental. It would be licence for keepers to extend the area when needed. If the keeper is going to handle anywhere near the line, he has to know that he's on the limit and be aware of where the line is. "I know where the line is but I'm going to take the chance I'm not going to slide out/carry it out" etc, could also be seen as deliberate.

The Kite incident is my first memory of feeling that there was a bias against us.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

Just thinking about the incident on Sunday and VAR - VAR can check for potential red cards from missed incidents, but not for general fouls/handball outside the penalty area. Let's say the keeper did handle the ball outside the area and the ref missed it: VAR checks because it's a potential red card, but only if it prevents a clear goal scoring opportunity, so if there are no defenders anywhere near and the attacker could get to the ball, it's a red card and VAR calls the ref back to give the foul and red card. If there are defenders near, it isn't an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, so no red card, what does VAR do? It's not supposed to be used for spotting fouls outside the penalty area, does it ignore it?

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Two attitudes to this are very odd to me, the first is this "don't object, don't make a fuss, move on, it's in the past" - we heard it and still hear it from a lot of fans about the Tevez case. Why is there this belief that you should get bent over and shafted by cheats, liers, incompetence or people who apply the rules in a biased way and then turn around and say 'thank you very much for the privilege of being allowed to take part'.

There is an enormous difference between taking legal action on the basis that a team has deliberately flouted the rules for its own advantage, and taking one against a highly unfortunate technology failure. The only thing about this that’s annoyed me is VAR failing to intervene to overturn a clear error (which common sense would have dictated) coupled with Hawkeye’s likely decision to lie about the occlusion reasoning. That annoyance is for me in a totally different league to the anger over the 3rd party breach. Unless you’re of the opinion that the tech failure was deliberate, I don’t really know why anyone’s too bothered. I’m more concerned about how VAR has, and will continue to be, used.

 

[Hamburg Blade]

There is an enormous difference between taking legal action on the basis that a team has deliberately flouted the rules for its own advantage, and taking one against a highly unfortunate technology failure. The only thing about this that’s annoyed me is VAR failing to intervene to overturn a clear error (which common sense would have dictated) coupled with Hawkeye’s likely decision to lie about the occlusion reasoning. That annoyance is for me in a totally different league to the anger over the 3rd party breach. Unless you’re of the opinion that the tech failure was deliberate, I don’t really know why anyone’s too bothered. I’m more concerned about how VAR has, and will continue to be, used.

I agree the two situations are very different, I am comparing the attitude of not standing up for what's right. As I said, they've brought this on themselves by bringing in technology that has introduced absolutes. In many areas of life you can sue for technological failures, design failures or negligence associated with its implementation.
The issue is important at a fundamental level - how is technology to be treated in the sport, who has ultimate responsibility for decisions and what levels of failure should be tolerated? They have been careful, so far, to make VAR subject to the referee and even in its operation it is used as a tool to make subjective decisions. Drawing lines on screens for offside pushes this towards an absolute again and towards possible claims if it's not done right. This is what you get when you decide to make something exact and then fail - in a situation where millions and millions of pounds are at stake.

 

[Punk Blade]

Just thinking about the incident on Sunday and VAR - VAR can check for potential red cards from missed incidents, but not for general fouls/handball outside the penalty area. Let's say the keeper did handle the ball outside the area and the ref missed it: VAR checks because it's a potential red card, but only if it prevents a clear goal scoring opportunity, so if there are no defenders anywhere near and the attacker could get to the ball, it's a red card and VAR calls the ref back to give the foul and red card. If there are defenders near, it isn't an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, so no red card, what does VAR do? It's not supposed to be used for spotting fouls outside the penalty area, does it ignore it?

Essentially yes. There are plenty of scenarios, and I’m sure real life incidents, where VAR will have seen a foul not given by the referee but has no power to do anything about it.

I wonder if they inform the ref during the game
“No penalty, but you missed a foul in the build up”
“Not a red card, but you should have seen the foul”
“Had a rewatch of a few things because we were bored, you’ve got loads wrong”

 

[Silent Blade]

Don’t recall it happening to Tracy (might have but I can’t remember) but I seem to recall John Hope did it against Chelsea at the Lane and they scored from free kick.

Chelsea never scored against Hope at the Lane. We won 1-0 on 25/9/1971. Maybe you were thinking of Pat Jennings on 11/9/1971 when he threw the ball to a team mate and the linesman ruled that the ball was still in his hand outside the penalty box. We scored from the free kick (TC chip Mike England, trying to clear, headed over Jennings and Dearden raced to the line to force the ball into the net)

 

[Blade56]

Chelsea never scored against Hope at the Lane. We won 1-0 on 25/9/1971. Maybe you were thinking of Pat Jennings on 11/9/1971 when he threw the ball to a team mate and the linesman ruled that the ball was still in his hand outside the penalty box. We scored from the free kick (TC chip Mike England, trying to clear, headed over Jennings and Dearden raced to the line to force the ball into the net)

Thanks SB, confirms my age is taking its toll on my memory.

 

[Geordie Blade]

A red card can still be given for handball even if the keeper would still have been able to stop the ball another way. I take it in your two examples you mean he could have done those things after handballing it - but that doesn't affect the red card, which is applied before the keeper does anything else.
Only the intervention of a nearby defender can prevent a red card.

My examples meant that the keeper could have done either of those things instead of handballing it. The point is, there wasn't really a 'goalscoring opportunity', because the keeper has control of the ball. If he then chooses to put his hand on it (outside the area), that's not a red card.

On the other hand, if a keeper is running out to a high through ball and could possibly head it, but instead handles it, just in front of the striker, that's a different matter. The keeper doesn't have control of the ball and there's a clear goalscoring opportunity there.

In Sunday's incident, I don't think the ref could possibly think that we were about to get a goalscoring opportunity.

 

[Silent Blade]

Thanks SB, confirms my age is taking its toll on my memory.

Think Hope handled outside the box in the 2-2 draw at Hawthorns in January 1972. Think Tony Brown scored from the free kick.

 

[Geordie Blade]

My point is more around what is deliberate in the sense of a handball offence, not deliberate in handling the ball. If a goalkeeper deliberately, and legally, handles the ball in his own area, and he then realises that his momentum carried the ball out of the area a split second too late and released the ball, is that ‘deliberate’ in the sense of a handball offence, or accidental as his intention was only ever to handle the ball inside his area?

I posit that we live in a purely deterministic universe, and the goalkeeper does not have free will

Actually, according to the laws, a goalkeeper's handball outside the area has to be interpreted as deliberate. Accidental handball isn't an offence, unless it leads directly to a goal. The definition of 'deliberate' in football is somewhat different to everyday use though! As someone has argued on here, why would any player ever deliberately handle the ball in their own area? It wouldn't make any sense, unless it was stopping a certain goal.

 

[Blade56]

Think Hope handled outside the box in the 2-2 draw at Hawthorns in January 1972. Think Tony Brown scored from the free kick.

Remember Jim brown scoring on a windy day at Saltergate........ I think....... goo on, tell me I’m wrong again, take me pants down, slap me arse with a spatula infront of the whole combined football knowledge of the S24 forum

 

[Silent Blade]

Remember Jim brown scoring on a windy day at Saltergate........ I think....... goo on, tell me I’m wrong again, take me pants down, slap me arse with a spatula infront of the whole combined football knowledge of the S24 forum

v Stockport in October 1983. Also scored for Washington Diplomats

 

[Blade56]

v Stockport in October 1983. Also scored for Washington Diplomats

 

[Hamburg Blade]

My examples meant that the keeper could have done either of those things instead of handballing it. The point is, there wasn't really a 'goalscoring opportunity', because the keeper has control of the ball. If he then chooses to put his hand on it (outside the area), that's not a red card.

On the other hand, if a keeper is running out to a high through ball and could possibly head it, but instead handles it, just in front of the striker, that's a different matter. The keeper doesn't have control of the ball and there's a clear goalscoring opportunity there.

In Sunday's incident, I don't think the ref could possibly think that we were about to get a goalscoring opportunity.

The incident on Sunday is a bit hazy, I seem to remember too many nearby defenders for it to have been a red-card opportunity and anyway I don't think the ball went out of the area, but had it, I'm not sure your theory about the keeper being in control of the ball and could therefore kick it away would hold up. He had control of the ball because he had illegally used his hands to control it. He can't use an illegal handball to claim control and therefore prevent himself being given a red card.

 

[BanderSerge]

Didnt we get compensation for Tevez?? And the arsenal game was voided? Segers - suppose we could have sued him as an individual but that would have come at the end of a court case proving he took bribes (cannot remember if he did have a trial or not)

Tevez- £20m while that set of scum grabbed £100m per season? Whooopi feckin dooooooooooo! Arsenal game was replayed at Arsenal not Bramall Lane, anybody who was there that day will tell you we fully deserved a replay. If Segers didn’t take (allegedly) a bribe, it was the best impression of a bent c#nt I’ve ever seen.

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

Here's our goal at Crystal Palace. As you can see, goalposts are in the way and goalkeeper behind the line. The ONLY difference between this one and Villa, is there isn't a defender straddling the goal line.

It's alright everyone saying 'move on', and to an extent I agree. The incident hasn't affected us. But there has to be some degree of accountability. Where are the pictures from Villa Park proving what they're saying?

 

[Worksop II]

but was very critical of the team in the VAR room saying it’s their job to monitor everything....they are there to assist the ref.

I am quite happy Hawkeye fucked this up, but VAR (Tierney) have snatched the resposibility away from them

A second Own Goal in one incident