WHO Poll
Q:



Eddie B 5:28 Sun Jan 12
The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
It hits the hand of a defender in the box, completely accidental, rightly no penalty, so how come if it hits the hand of an attacking player, again completely accidental, then that should be penalised? What's the difference?

You would think that a rule that means less goals scored would be immediately ditched. Fucking joke.

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

Cheezey Bell-End 2:17 Tue Jan 14
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
People wanted something that made sense, not inventing new rules and interpretations that are beyond what the ref can reasonably see in real time.

Eerie Descent 12:49 Tue Jan 14
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
It's mental that they have made such a monumental change to what is and always has been the most popular and watched sport on the planet.

Still, every cunt wanted it. Apart from me and Franz Beckenbauer.

WHU(Exeter) 10:29 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Was a time not so long back I'd get all involved in decisions made in a game, and after watching football for 45 years would like to think that there wasn't much in any game where I wouldn't know what the decision should be. Even to the point of knkwing when 'expert' co-commentators were spouting absolute bollocks as far as their interpretations of the laws of the game were concerned.

Since the introduction of VAR I've slowly found myself past caring - the whole thing is a fucking joke and on its way to ruining the game as a spectacle.

Mike the Hammer 10:26 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
collyrob,

It's no goal and no penalty. West Ham rules apply.

collyrob 10:23 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Scenario

For instance, ball comes in to haller, chest height, he goes to control it and gets a slight nudge on the back, something you’d never give a penalty for, but his body moves a bit and it hits his arm and the ball drops and he scores, it goes to VAR, they see it hit his arm, which rules it out, but they see a slight nudge, do they rule out the goal and give a penalty?

Far Cough 9:51 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Didn't Van Dijk get away with a handball for Liverpool, which they scored from?


The law is an ass

Willtell 9:40 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
The fact is that Rice's hand was in a natural position and a defender leaned across him and headed it onto his arm. In previous seasons that would have been a goal because the handball would only very rarely have been noticed and even then if seen correctly, the ref should have ruled that it was accidental.

What changed was the rule that says it's not a goal if it touches an attacker's hand/arm in any circumstances. VAR then allows repeated slow-mos to see touches that were never before noticed or the ref could make a judgement on.

The silly sods at the FA are ruining the game by making too many changes at once and very badly applying VAR when there are lots of examples in major sports how it should be organised.

Sven Roeder 8:53 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
You could argue that the ball hitting a defenders hand accidentally in his own area and then the ball going to the other end for a goal was what happened when Trent AA got away with handball against Man City at Anfield.
Did Man City touch the ball again?
If not it’s in the build up ,innit ?

No pen and no goal disallowed
Win Win for Liverpool

Bungo 3:11 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
I think the basic problem is this.



Modern foorball is shit.

stewie griffin 3:06 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
The 'basic problem' with it is that it's not handball, Cheddie

VirginiaHam 3:02 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Block 12:41 Mon Jan 13

Phases?

FIFA apparently not happy with how we are using VAR in the interpretation of incidents such as this plus offside. Being to rigidly managed.

The net effect is goals are being disallowed and the game is being slowed down even more, so damaging the game.

They have a point. Handball should be the same for attackers as defenders.

Cony Tottee 12:46 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
What would happen if a defender accidently handles the ball in his own area and then runs the length of the pitch to score? Would the goal be disallowed and how would the game restart?

Block 12:41 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Poyet on GOS yesterday made an excellent point, what would have happened had the ball gone out for a corner and we then scored? would it have been still disallowed?

Bouncing Ludo 12:18 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
If a defender gets the ball kicked against his hand at close range in a "natural" position (i.e accidental and not a penalty) and then the ball is immediately hoofed to the other end and they score is that then disallowed? How is the game restarted?

Russ of the BML 11:15 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
I mean seriously, if football was invented a week ago as an entertainment sport and someone come up and said "Shall we introduce a camera to check if a ball unintentionally touches an attackers arm and rules out a goal?"

He would get kicked up the arse and told to fuck off.

Russ of the BML 11:13 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
There are two issues for me here. One is as the OP stated, why on earth is there a difference in the interpretation of the law for a defending player and attacking player? It is utterly absurd. Genuinely and completely crazy. They need to say if it touches the arm of anyone unintentionally then it is either handball or not. Just set the record straight so everyone knows where they stand.

The other issue is that VAR is being used inconsistently. I mean, had Rice gone through and before he could pass, fallen over and a Sheff Utd player picked up the ball, would VAR then stop the game and it go back to a Sheff Utd free kick? No. So, again, you either use it all the time or don't.

Far Cough 10:32 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Fuck phases, they have it in offsides as well, it's all unnecessary and it's all bollocks

Eddie B 10:22 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
It's all about 'phases' apparently. That's why Van Dyk's wasn't given a few weeks back.

Load of fucking bollocks.

joyo 4:02 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Sleazy Bell End.. I bet you have had your hands on a few balls over the years... Nudge nudge wink wink

Cheezey Bell-End 2:55 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
Either it's a shit rule or shit implementation. The ball hit his hand, but when does that advantage expire? The defence were there and had the opportunity to get the ball and failed. That wasn't because he handled it.

One Flew 2:27 Mon Jan 13
Re: The basic problem with this stupid handball rule
The only way I can think of getting this sorted is that the next time an attacking player has the ball accidentally brush his hand/arm he volleys it straight out for a throw in on the basis that the ref has missed it and VAR would catch it anyway.

Despite celebrating wildly with everyone else behind the goal I could see that it had touched Rice's arm and was only praying that for some reason we would get away with it.

It would take someone like a di Canio to do this, anyone out there? They'd probably just get booked for time wasting though, eh?

Page 1 - Next




Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: