Luton Pen?

[jono_t2000]

What you're suggesting means you could put your arms in a scarecrow shape but then claim you couldn't get out of the way if the ball hits you from close range.

That's why the 'unnatural position' aspect is important.

A lot of football fans think a decision is wrong if an incident could've been interpreted differently. Unfortunately that's just the nature of anything subjective. These things will never be black and white and there will always be two or more different views.

According to the LotG both decisions were correct. Both times the ball hit the hand/arm above the shoulder. There's no reason for an outfield player to have their hands above their shoulders.

Oh I understand based on laws of the game it’s technically correct, but it doesn’t mean it’s not stupid.

I also disagree with no reason to have hands above shoulder height. Vini was barged in the shoulder/neck region and was instinctively protecting himself.

I also challenge you to jump competitively with your hands by your side without looking like a penguin.

Both penalties with a degree of common sense should not have been awarded.. just my opinion of course

 

[HodgysBrokenThumb]

They give a pen for that but no free kick for us when Gordon controls the ball with his hand then squares for an open net. Absolutely laughable decisions and rationale they come up with

Trippier did a similar basketball move yesterday in his own penalty area… no penalty given by VAR.

 

[paidsy]

So focused on the handball he could easily have given a foul.

Don’t so how the idiot who wrote the Sky report seemed to think their pen was clearer than ours. Bloke had his arm way out in front making any unnatural position.

If there was a bit of contact not sure Vinny could avoid much his arm going up (though strictly fulfils the criteria), especially with force from behind him.

I know that people don't care much about this, but the behaviour of sky in terms of their reporting and punditry/commentary needs to start being examined a bit more closely. They are constantly setting their preferred narratives time after time and given the amount of money the are piling into the game it's fair to ask the question is this really an acceptable practice?

Their behaviour during the play offs when Forest won was absolutely insane and in the final Forest were certainly getting the rub of the green with decisions. Some of it can be put down to sheer laziness but this needs to be kept in check. Nobody can look at the 2 pens in our game yesterday and come to the conclusion that their penalty was way more conclusive unless you're an idiot or just pushing the narrative.

In short, feck Sky.

 

[spikeachu]

I think the rule needs significantly simplifying. I think I'd look at breaking it down into 3 out of 4 questions that VAR need to consider depending on the context.

1. Was it a deliberate hand ball?
2. Could the offender have reasonably got their arm/hand out of the way, considering velocity and starting position of the ball?
3. Is there a >80% chance that the passage of play would have resulted in a goal if the ball's velocity or trajectory hadn't been changed? - ie considerations would include; Would the ball have gone through to an unmarked attacker? Was the ball on the way into the goal when a defender accidentally handled it on the line? Would the keeper have been in a position to make a save had the ball continued it's original trajectory?
4. Would a goal have been scored if the ball hadn't been handled?

In a defensive context, if 1,2 or 3 can be answered yes, then award the penalty.
In an attacking context where a goal is scored after a handball, ie Gordon, if 1, 2 or 4 can be answered yes, disallow the goal.

Maybe that's still too complicated and there's still some subjectivity, but at least the crowd know what criteria an incident is being judged against.

 

[Proper Blade]

Both penalties were completely ridiculous. How the flying fuck were either of them 'clear and obvious' errors?

They keep changing the laws of the game to integrate VAR, to the point where the laws are utterly incomprehensible. What a fucking mess football is.

 

[Rochdaleblade]

Absolute disgrace and VAR used it as a ‘levelling up’ decision…..referees have got no backbone and just fall into line with this shambles of way to run the game….they would more respect if they gave ‘their’ decision rather than being influenced by a team of clowns in Stockley Park.

Referee seemed to take ages to give their penalty, so it cannot have been clear and obvious.

Oh I understand based on laws of the game it’s technically correct, but it doesn’t mean it’s not stupid.

I also disagree with no reason to have hands above shoulder height. Vini was barged in the shoulder/neck region and was instinctively protecting himself.

I also challenge you to jump competitively with your hands by your side without looking like a penguin.

Both penalties with a degree of common sense should not have been awarded.. just my opinion of course

For me, the difference between the two penalties, was that for ours, the defenders arm was in an unnatural position because he had pushed our player under the ball, whereas Souzas hand is in an unnatural position because he has been smashed in the back of his head. If we take this to its' conclusion, maybe we should just tickle defenders on set pieces and try to head the ball at their arms.

 

[BigBed]

It's a looker....swit swooo!

 

[Neuschwanstein]

I think Souza takes a knock in the neck/head, and as a reflex puts his hands up to protect his head, and consequently his high hand is hit by the ball.

View attachment 179103View attachment 179104

Good spot, and this was not considered in the context of giving a penalty. This should have been a freekick to the Blades.

 

[LBA_Blade]

Agreed with a lot of posts on here that the handball law has been tweaked with too much for no apparent reason. It doesn’t strengthen the case just makes things more complex and opens things up for more grey areas. You could either change things to simply it whether that be did they have time to get out of the way etc or you could tweak it again to confuse people more, regardless if it is intentional or not any touch of the ball with the hand is a free kick if in the penalty area it could be an indirect free kick inside the D

 

[PokerBlade]

Not too long ago the conversation would've gone like this "Was it deliberate?" and I think then the answer is clearly no on both counts. Ball's in the air, players and arms are everywhere jumping for it, there's some collisions between players, ball strikes an arm but the player has no idea about it, get on with the game.

We can squabble about interpretations but does this make football better? That the arm might randomly strike a defender looking the other way and because of some tortured interpretation of the rules after reviewing video footage for a couple of minutes that the ref points to the spot?

The problem with handball was refs occasionally not seeing things. It was never really these complicated arguments about "unnatural positions" and all that jazz.

Take a classic like this:



Was the problem ever that we were confused at to whether Henry made his body unnaturally bigger by having his arm in an improper position for the action he was taking? Or was it just that the ref didn't spot it?

 

[Rochdaleblade]

We were also promised that VAR wouldn't re-referee games. This is exactly what happened yesterday as play went on for around 2 minutes before being called back for infringements that no-one had spotted. If you had enough cameras I'm sure you could spot offences at most corners.

 

[Alex Cheeseright]

Shearer says VAR is ruining the game. Well,Alan, no fkin shit Sherlock. And any changes will make it worse I'm sure. Why, call me crazy, but get current and ex players to come up with what VAR needs to check. Keep it to, once again, call me crazy .....obvious errors. I.e 2 feet offside, pushes in the back which get called everywhere else on the pitch except the penalty area. Dives, deliberate hand balls. If it is accidental hand ball and the ref doesn't see it, part of the game, play on. If it is deliberate and ref misses it, VAR comes into play. If it's inches on an offside and the lino misses it, part of the game, play on. Way off side and lino is asleep, VAR do you thing.
We need to go back to "obvious " errors. Refs make mistakes as do players, part of the game. Everyone hates micromanagement at their work, so why should we have it during our favorite game.
I know, it's all about money.

 

[Frank the tank]

Problem is everytime a big club get on the wrong end of a var there is week long vigil on sky sports and then a rule change
The pgmol need to grow some bollox and we'll them to like it or lump it

 

[iBlade.]

Referees/VAR assistants shouldn't be viewing hand balls or any other incident for that matter in slow motion. That alone will cut out a lot of the bullshit decisions

 

[Mumbo]

What you're suggesting means you could put your arms in a scarecrow shape but then claim you couldn't get out of the way if the ball hits you from close range.

That's why the 'unnatural position' aspect is important.

A lot of football fans think a decision is wrong if an incident could've been interpreted differently. Unfortunately that's just the nature of anything subjective. These things will never be black and white and there will always be two or more different views.

According to the LotG both decisions were correct. Both times the ball hit the hand/arm above the shoulder. There's no reason for an outfield player to have their hands above their shoulders.

There are many many reasons why an outfield player might raise his arms above his shoulders
and there’s nothing unnatural about it whatsover,
I’ll take a wild guess and say it happens 500 times in 90 minutes but it’s probably much more.

 

[1889]

I’m sure the handball rule was, if it was ‘accidental’ handball and as a result the ball ricocheted to the advantage of the offending team, it was a free kick.

Meaning ours would have been a pen, as their player diverted the ball away from goal and into the keepers hands.

Theirs wouldn’t have been a pen, as the ball barely touched Souza and didn’t then divert course to our advantage.

Personally I can’t think of a fairer or simpler way to assess and decide these incidents?

Which is probably why it was changef

 

[Hackey Blade]

If both penalties were awarded by the letter of the law, why wasn't Luton's goal disqualified, again by the letter of the law Morris quite clearly gets to the end of his run up then feigns/stops before kicking the ball why no var intervention on this.

 

[1987]

They talk about the pennos here. Basically, the one we got was a bit dodgy, the one they got was awful.

 

[Mouth of the South]

A little like elements of the offside law e.g. interfering with play, the only way to clear-up the office rule is to take the subjectivity away. The VAR official was technically correct as per the current offside law to recommend the ref views the footage.
Many won't like it but the only way to remove opinion and debate is to firm up the law - if it hits the hand, it's handball. That would take out intent, assessment of interference and judgment of body position. They actually moved towards this interpretation in Spain and while some awards could be deemed unfair as the defender either wasn't aware or could do little about the ball hitting them, everyone is clear and it makes the rulings more consistent.

 

[Nickydblade]

They talk about the pennos here. Basically, the one we got was a bit dodgy, the one they got was awful.

Agree with them, thought Vini’s handball was no way a pen at the time (watched on stream not there). I naively thought VAR / ref would say no.

Theirs was soft but more of a shout.

Good job it didn’t matter in end

 

[Jon B]

Both penalties were a bad joke.

 

[10-0 win]

Our pen justified by the rules lutons an error according to dermot gallagher

 

[ThirdGenBlade]

Ball hits hand which is above the shoulder meets the criterion for a pen.

I wasn’t aware that Adebayo’s straight right to the jaw to head the ball in the first place was within the laws of the game though!

View attachment 179097

Think it’s actually a left cross to the jaw (!) - but brilliant screenshot and spot on, should have been no pen because of the foul.

By the way, where are the graphs Graphman?!

UTB & FTP

 

[Melbourne Blade]

Unfortunately the second the ref is asked to review the decision they're extremely unlikely to overrule the var decision. Especially kavanagh who is an absolute fanny who needs a face slap.

The whole intent of "clear and obvious error' is now beyond a joke