GWT: PL Matchweek (mostly) 17

[hatterson]

I'm not against any grey area at all. If the arms are against his body, that can be let go.

Same as if a puck deflects off of a skate unwittingly. The problems started when they put in this whole you can "redirect" the puck nonsense. Nobody knows what redirecting it means and I would argue that redirecting it is f***ing kicking it.


Same thing here. If it would have hit your chest but hit your tucked arm first, fine. Now we've got this bullshit where guys' arms are flailing around like Bayley buddies and the ref has to arbitrarily decide if he could have helped it or not.

Sometimes you can't help kicking somebody in the face. It's still a foul if you do it.

It’s actually not an automatic foul, so great example.

 

[Machinehead]

It’s actually not an automatic foul, so great example.

I've never seen a high boot not called but whatever.

I just don't think handballs have to be hard. Hand + ball = handball.

The Gomez play that people reference is a handball 100 times out of 100. If it doesn't hit his hand, it's going through. Period. I don't give a f*** what he was trying to do with his body position.

In the play today, only his hand stopped the ball from going on net. If that's not a handball then handballs aren't a thing anymore. Just make it so that defenders can block with their hands so we know what to expect.

 

[Burner Account]

Wonder what Klopp will do for the FA Cup Friday

 

[Machinehead]

Wonder what Klopp will do for the FA Cup Friday

I hope he plays Salah's children just so I can read the raging on the internet.

 

[hatterson]

I've never seen a high boot not called but whatever.

I wasn’t referencing a high boot, I was referencing a player “kicking somebody in the face” and not getting a foul called for it which actually happened a couple days ago. The ball was in the box, on the half volley, and the attacker tried to take a shot. Ball was about shin, maybe knee high. A defender was literally sitting down beside it and ended up getting kicked in the face.

I just don't think handballs have to be hard. Hand + ball = handball.

Actually with the new rule it isn’t that hard. Intent doesn’t matter. Just check if the arm is in a natural position given his actions and below the shoulder. Sure that’s subjective, but so is literally everything an official does. Yes there will be disagreements, that will always happen no matter what. But that’s infinitely better than what was happening the first 4 or 5 or whatever weeks of this season where on a weekly basis the talk was about an absolutely absurd handball penalty that was given.

 

[Machinehead]

I wasn’t referencing a high boot, I was referencing a player “kicking somebody in the face” and not getting a foul called for it which actually happened a couple days ago. The ball was in the box, on the half volley, and the attacker tried to take a shot. Ball was about shin, maybe knee high. A defender was literally sitting down beside it and ended up getting kicked in the face.



Actually with the new rule it isn’t that hard. Intent doesn’t matter. Just check if the arm is in a natural position given his actions and below the shoulder. Sure that’s subjective, but so is literally everything an official does. Yes there will be disagreements, that will always happen no matter what. But that’s infinitely better than what was happening the first 4 or 5 or whatever weeks of this season where on a weekly basis the talk was about an absolutely absurd handball penalty that was given.

What's a natural position?

 

[hatterson]

What's a natural position?

You generally trust on the several decades of being a human being that most refs have under their belt to determine that.

 

[Machinehead]

You generally trust on the several decades of being a human being that most refs have under their belt to determine that.

Bullshit. Explain to me what it is.

 

[S E P H]

Soton beat Arsenal, that right there proves how much of a good club they are so I am not surprised to see Pool lose.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The discussion about handball policy always reminds me of this:

 

[Havre]

I don't generally speaking believe things were better before. In terms of football rules not allowing the goalkeeper to handle passes from team mates with their hands is a definite plus compared to earlier times, but I do miss the time when hardly anything was considered a handball. We seem to have fixed something that didn't really need fixing. Players weren't running around making themselves big "randomly" blocking shots with their hands. The situation in the Liverpool game yesterday wouldn't even have been close to a discussion 20 years ago. Was it perfect? Did we have situations were players did use their hands slightly or speculating in making their body slightly bigger? Absolutely, but we had nothing of the drama we have now.

 

[Evilo]

Yes we did.
See Vata's hand. Or Maradona's.
Handball has been a problem in football for as long as I can remember.

 

[Havre]

Yes. Maradona wasn't deemed a handball because the rules were different

 

[Evilo]

I'm clearly answering the fact you said it didn't create drama.

 

[Havre]

Was it perfect? Did we have situations were players did use their hands slightly or speculating in making their body slightly bigger? Absolutely, but we had nothing of the drama we have now.

But by all means Evilo. Go on.

 

[Evilo]

"we had nothing of the drama we have now" .
Not sure what's hard here

 

[hatterson]

"we had nothing of the drama we have now" .
Not sure what's hard here

The key there is the implicit second part of the sentence “we had nothing of the drama we have now....caused by the handball rule”

The maradona drama obviously wasn’t about whether it was a handball or not but the fact that the refs somehow didn’t see one of the most obvious handballs in the history of the game at a massive moment in time.

 

[Havre]

"we had nothing of the drama we have now" .
Not sure what's hard here

Why don't you include the full sentence?

But you made your point clear. You think that Maradona wasn't deemed a handball because the rules were different back then. I would humbly disagree with that assessment.

And as you can see I never said handball situations weren't discussed before. I never said there was complete agreement on every call, but I do believe there wasn't much "drama".

Keep on digging Evilo. We all know you will never not have the last word. If you want to make such a big deal of "nothing of the drama" which to me "nothing" is not to be understood literally. I humbly apologize if that is an incorrect use of the phrase - as English is not my first language.

 

[hatterson]

Bullshit. Explain to me what it is.

A natural position would be one which is expected based on the actions the player is taking.

A player running will be expected to pump his arms, a player jumped will have arms out from his body a bit, a player sliding will have an arm under him to cushion against the ground, a player throwing himself into a block will have his arms separate slightly from his torso, etc.

There’s no easy definition you can give beyond a subjective description, but that doesn’t make it not clear.

The DOGSO rule I’d say is a “clear” rule and yet there’s tons of subjectivity in what constitutes an “obvious goal scoring opportunity” when you take into account potential cover from other players.

 

[Evilo]

The key there is the implicit second part of the sentence “we had nothing of the drama we have now....caused by the handball rule”

The maradona drama obviously wasn’t about whether it was a handball or not but the fact that the refs somehow didn’t see one of the most obvious handballs in the history of the game at a massive moment in time.

But that's not true again.
We had tons of drama caused by handballs, Maradona or not.
The previous rule of "intent" was always grey and people would argue about every call.

 

[hatterson]

But that's not true again.
We had tons of drama caused by handballs, Maradona or not.
The previous rule of "intent" was always grey and people would argue about every call.

I don’t disagree with that. My point was just that maradona is about the worst example possible since it had nothing to do with the rule.

 

[Evilo]

I don’t disagree with that. My point was just that maradona is about the worst example possible since it had nothing to do with the rule.

Yeah well I thought he meant that handballs in general were less drama before, which was not the case.

 

[Savant]

Of course the Man Utd fan is the resident referring rules

jk @hatterson we are cool.

 

[Machinehead]

A natural position would be one which is expected based on the actions the player is taking.

A player running will be expected to pump his arms, a player jumped will have arms out from his body a bit, a player sliding will have an arm under him to cushion against the ground, a player throwing himself into a block will have his arms separate slightly from his torso, etc.

There’s no easy definition you can give beyond a subjective description, but that doesn’t make it not clear.

The DOGSO rule I’d say is a “clear” rule and yet there’s tons of subjectivity in what constitutes an “obvious goal scoring opportunity” when you take into account potential cover from other players.

That kind of does make it not clear. If this were clear, the Gomez one and the one yesterday would have resulted in the same call.

An obvious scoring opportunity is a football thing. Natural position is asking referees to do science.

They shouldn't be asked to do anything. Again, I don't get why handball is something that has to be interpreted.

 

[S E P H]

The maradona drama obviously wasn’t about whether it was a handball or not but the fact that the refs somehow didn’t see one of the most obvious handballs in the history of the game at a massive moment in time.

Every major (and minor) sport has a "Maradona" or "Brett Hull" moment, it just happens from human error.