What is your interpretation of the (current) handball rules?

[Tomo]

Come on be serious, do you really think player have intentions to shooting the ball at someone's arm in that scenario?

If you have the whole goal or a player who is likely to score a goal to aim at then why would you aim for an arm?

Whether they intend or not they shot the ball at their arm, I don’t see why a player should be penalised for that. If there isn’t movement towards the ball from the arm/hand it shouldn’t be a pen, there has to be an element of deliberate. That was mostly how football was in the past and it reflected the spirit of the game. This penalty merchant jobs worth crap that incentivises players to try and kick the ball against opponents arms to win pens to me is wrong.

 

[mummy]

It's also penalising an attacking team for having a legitimate goal/chance ruled out

Where do you draw the line?

Sorry - don't agree. It's not 'penalising' anyone.
If a shot on target is accidentally blocked by any other part of a defender, you don't claim the attacking team is penalised. It's just life.
There's no reason why the arm and hand shouldn't be included in that - and only penalised if they're used deliberately to prevent the goal.

Think about it.

 

[Shadydan]

Whether they intend or not they shot the ball at their arm, I don’t see why a player should be penalised for that. If there isn’t movement towards the ball from the arm/hand it shouldn’t be a pen, there has to be an element of deliberate. That was mostly how football was in the past and it reflected the spirit of the game. This penalty merchant jobs worth crap that incentivises players to try and kick the ball against opponents arms to win pens to me is wrong.

Okay but why should the attacking team be penalised if a player stops a clear goal or goalscoring opportunity if the defending player stops a goal illegally?

Not everything in football should be deemed deliberate to be penalised, the majority of fouls aren't deliberate but they are given because it has taken away the advantage of the attacking team, some tackles aren't deliberate but are deemed as yellow's or red cards because the advantage of a clear goalscoring opportunity has been removed from the attacking team.

 

[Tomo]

Okay but why should the attacking team be penalised if a player stops a clear goal or goalscoring opportunity if the defending player stops a goal illegally?

Not everything in football should be deemed deliberate to be penalised, the majority of fouls aren't deliberate but they are given because it has taken away the advantage of the attacking team, some tackles aren't deliberate but are deemed as yellow's or red cards because the advantage of a clear goalscoring opportunity has been removed from the attacking team.

Because a player has arms. They shouldn’t have to run and jump with arms behind their back, this is how it was in the past and it was fine. If an attacker shoot a ball against a players arm that is just bad luck, if a player moves arms/hands towards the ball then fine give pen.

 

[Shadydan]

Sorry - don't agree. It's not 'penalising' anyone.
If a shot on target is accidentally blocked by any other part of a defender, you don't claim the attacking team is penalised. It's just life.
There's no reason why the arm and hand shouldn't be included in that - and only penalised if they're used deliberately to prevent the goal.

Think about it.

Of course it is.

You penalise then because you're not giving them any advantage that they created in that scenario.

Some fouls are deemed as accidental but are still fouls, why?...because you have removed the advantage from the attacking team, that's a very simple rule which has been adhered to for a long time, so what difference does it make when it's in the box when you've still stopped a goalscoring opportunity?

 

[Shadydan]

Because a player has arms. They shouldn’t have to run and jump with arms behind their back, this is how it was in the past and it was fine. If an attacker shoot a ball against a players arm that is just bad luck, if a player moves arms/hands towards the ball then fine give pen.

No one is asking a player to run or jump with their arms behind their back

For example I already gave an example of what would be a pen and what wouldn't - The Romero incident against Utd for example wasn't a pen for me because the ball was going over and thus there was no advantage for Utd i.e not a clear goalscoring opportunity.

Can't just put it down to bad luck, you might as well use the same logic on accidental tackles and not deem them punishable in that case.

There's generally a reason why we moved on from the past because some of those rules were outdated.

 

[Tomo]

Of course it is.

You penalise then because you're not giving them any advantage that they created in that scenario.

Some fouls are deemed as accidental but are still fouls, why?...because you have removed the advantage from the attacking team, that's a very simple rule which has been adhered to for a long time, so what difference does it make when it's in the box when you've still stopped a goalscoring opportunity?

Foul is not the same thing, if you try and tackle someone you are engaging the opponent, and if you fuck up you get penalised even if you didn’t mean it.

A handball where a player smashes the ball against another players arm/hand is entirely the action the player taking the shot, unless you expect footballer to run around with arms always behind them.

This is how handball used to be decades ago, is it hand to ball and it was more in the spirit of the game in my opinion. We shouldn’t have a game where players are smashing or crossing the ball with hope to hit arms. I think it’s cynical and goes against what football should be.

 

[Shadydan]

Foul is not the same thing, if you try and tackle someone you are engaging the opponent, and if you fuck up you get penalised even if you didn’t mean it.

A handball where a player smashes the ball against another players arm/hand is entirely the action the player taking the shot, unless you expect footballer to run around with arms always behind them.

This is how handball used to be decades ago, is it hand to ball and it was more in the spirit of the game in my opinion. We shouldn’t have a game where players are smashing or crossing the ball with hope to hit arms.

Nah see your last paragraph just proves that you're not even trying to comprehend anything I've said , so I'll ask again, why would a player deliberately aim for a player's arm when they have the whole goal to aim at? That even defies any sort of logic or practicality or common sense. No one in their right mind is going to think that hmmm even though I can score or perhaps pick out a team mate who can score but let me aim the ball at the defender's arm instead.

I'm not even talking about what Mane did in the CL final for example, I'm talking about a scenario which proves that the attacker was legit going for goal or a cross to another player who is most likely going to score.

A foul is a foul mate which is why handball is punishable by law, ask yourself why deliberate handballs are punished - the same reason why deliberate fouls are punished - now use the same logic on handballs and fouls, accidental fouls are punished even though the defender didn't mean it but things like this happen in football like that, as much as you protest that players have arms and it's not their fault if a player has limbs but shit happens and that's the only way you're going to be fair for both teams.

 

[manmountainbutters]

Nah see your last paragraph just proves that you're not even trying to comprehend anything I've said , so I'll ask again, why would a player deliberately aim for a player's arm when they have the whole goal to aim at? That even defies any sort of logic or practicality or common sense. No one in their right mind is going to think that hmmm even though I can score or perhaps pick out a team mate who can score but let me aim the ball at the defender's arm instead.

I'm not even talking about what Mane did in the CL final for example, I'm talking about a scenario which proves that the attacker was legit going for goal or a cross to another player who is most likely going to score.

A foul is a foul mate which is why handball is punishable by law, ask yourself why deliberate handballs are punished - the same reason why deliberate fouls are punished - now use the same logic on handballs and fouls, accidental fouls are punished even though the defender didn't mean it but things like this happen in football like that, as much as you protest that players have arms and it's not their fault if a player has limbs but shit happens and that's the only way you're going to be fair for both teams.

Problem with your suggestion is it doesn't get us away from the mess. What would is that a handball is when, in the view of the ref., the intention was to handball.

Agreed that many fouls are not intentional, but the game would be unworkable if every situation was "only if he meant it". Handball is a very specific case with very material consequences. The fact the old rule worked ok (or at least better than now) underlines the point, and the relevance of the distinction in the use of intent.

 

[mummy]

Nah see your last paragraph just proves that you're not even trying to comprehend anything I've said , so I'll ask again, why would a player deliberately aim for a player's arm when they have the whole goal to aim at? That even defies any sort of logic or practicality or common sense. No one in their right mind is going to think that hmmm even though I can score or perhaps pick out a team mate who can score but let me aim the ball at the defender's arm instead.

I'm not even talking about what Mane did in the CL final for example, I'm talking about a scenario which proves that the attacker was legit going for goal or a cross to another player who is most likely going to score.

A foul is a foul mate which is why handball is punishable by law, ask yourself why deliberate handballs are punished - the same reason why deliberate fouls are punished - now use the same logic on handballs and fouls, accidental fouls are punished even though the defender didn't mean it but things like this happen in football like that, as much as you protest that players have arms and it's not their fault if a player has limbs but shit happens and that's the only way you're going to be fair for both teams.

Let's put it this way - you're wrong.

 

[Shadydan]

Lat's put it this way - you're wrong.

ok, well argued.

 

[mummy]

ok, well argued.

I did the 'rational argument' thing on the previous page, but as usual you're a closed book.

 

[Tomo]

Nah see your last paragraph just proves that you're not even trying to comprehend anything I've said , so I'll ask again, why would a player deliberately aim for a player's arm when they have the whole goal to aim at? That even defies any sort of logic or practicality or common sense. No one in their right mind is going to think that hmmm even though I can score or perhaps pick out a team mate who can score but let me aim the ball at the defender's arm instead.

I'm not even talking about what Mane did in the CL final for example, I'm talking about a scenario which proves that the attacker was legit going for goal or a cross to another player who is most likely going to score.

A foul is a foul mate which is why handball is punishable by law, ask yourself why deliberate handballs are punished - the same reason why deliberate fouls are punished - now use the same logic on handballs and fouls, accidental fouls are punished even though the defender didn't mean it but things like this happen in football like that, as much as you protest that players have arms and it's not their fault if a player has limbs but shit happens and that's the only way you're going to be fair for both teams.

I get what you’re saying but this isn't a 2 + 2 = 4 situation. It’s an interpretation of what is best and I find the current situation very cynical.

If the rules were a football manager for handball, diving and offsides they would be Jose and Conte not Ange or Redknapp. They are negative interpretations/laws and for me go against what the game should be.

 

[manmountainbutters]

I get what you’re saying but this isn't a 2 + 2 = 4 situation. It’s an interpretation of what is best and I find the current situation very cynical.

If the rules were a football manager for handball, diving and offsides they would be Jose and Conte not Ange or Redknapp. They are negative interpretations/laws and for me go against what the game should be.

It's that the game, and officiating the game, is more complex and subtle than simply saying if we use "intent" here in a certain way, we therefore HAVE to use "intent" in other situations in a similar way. I don't agree with that. If it doesn't result in a better game, why would we feel bound to take that approach?

 

[Tomo]

It's that the game, and officiating the game, is more complex and subtle than simply saying if we use "intent" here in a certain way, we therefore HAVE to use "intent" in other situations in a similar way. I don't agree with that. If it doesn't result in a better game, why would we feel bound to take that approach?

There is always going to be subjectivity and there is right now but for me football laws should have some reflection of the behaviour we want to see in football and remove cynical elements from the game.

Handball: is there any movement towards the ball, if so then it’s a handball, if not then it’s not.

Diving: if a player dives and I mean clearly dives then it should be a 3 match retrospective ban. That behaviour needs to be got rid of.

Offside: a law that was made to stop goal hanging. For me VAR should overrule if there is clear daylight, the advantage was always historically with the attacker, now it’s with the defender.

Refs will never always get it 100% right but the laws for me seem more like laws Jose would write not Ange.

 

[Shadydan]

I did the 'rational argument' thing on the previous page, but as usual you're a closed book.

I could say the same for you though...we're having a debate and we're both being rationale, well at least I thought.

There's no wrong in having an opinion on this hence why I've been saying subjective.

 

[Tomo]

I have seen this raised multiple times by former players and coaches and a slight change of subject but sin bins?

Haven’t made up my mind on them.

Handball is also discussed below.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i75msCbKhpw

 

[Achilles]

It is extremely rare that a player intentionally handles the ball. Natural position, expected position, deflection off another part of the body, did the player have time to react, etc... All subjective and it will remain subjective until the end of time. As unlucky as I thought it was, I couldn't argue with the Romero call vs Woolwich, the ball was headed in, his upraised hand stopped it even though for me, for a player going down the way he was, it was in an "expected position." What is needed is consistency. Consistency and yellow cards given to the likes of Salah who seems to flick the ball towards defenders bodies multiple times a game and scream for handball.

 

[manmountainbutters]

It is extremely rare that a player intentionally handles the ball. Natural position, expected position, deflection off another part of the body, did the player have time to react, etc... All subjective and it will remain subjective until the end of time. As unlucky as I thought it was, I couldn't argue with the Romero call vs Woolwich, the ball was headed in, his upraised hand stopped it even though for me, for a player going down the way he was, it was in an "expected position." What is needed is consistency. Consistency and yellow cards given to the likes of Salah who seems to flick the ball towards defenders bodies multiple times a game and scream for handball.

Basing the rule on intent is just much more consistent with a key underlying premise of the game - you can't handle it unless you're the goalkeeper.

 

[manmountainbutters]

I have seen this raised multiple times by former players and coaches and a slight change of subject but sin bins?

Haven’t made up my mind on them.

Handball is also discussed below.


View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=i75msCbKhpw

It's potentially very useful. Would add some interest also.