The Footie Thread

[Tashyboy]

If only city could afford to fix the roof eh Tashy

I was bogged off bigstyle, those in front and behind. Bone dry. We get there and padded seat is wet through. A quick wipe over and down I am sat then drip, sock on my head. It was like bloody Chinese water torture. ?

On a massive positive, I had steak pud, chips and curry sauce. Irish curry sauce. Sweet lord where have you been all my life.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Homer just got back half an hour ago and still trying to dry out. Bloody hole in the roof above my head ??

Anyway, Fulham were very very good. They knocked it around better than most teams I have seen at City. Tosin at centre half was an excellent buy from the City academy. When you get promoted to the Prem. If you keep that team, that’s a mid table Prem team. I was impressed. There downfall. The gap between the front line and back four was as narrow as I have seen from a team. Leaves loads of space at the back. City did have a few chances, but a penalty, OG which was going wide and a goal from a corner well let’s say you never got battered.

That's good news (performance not the roof). To be honest we've been found out in the championship holding a narrow line and something Silva will need to look at. The best PL sides especially City and Liverpool will exploit that every time. I am worried whether we've learned the mistakes of buying half a new side every time we go up and would like to see us only buy PL standard players in key positions. Clearly we're need to replace Carvahol once he goes to Anfield which will be a big hole and I'd like to see a decent striker to support Mitrovic and not rely on him as much again

 

[clubchamp98]

Ave seen the handball that’s being discussed and I think it’s a shocker of a decision. However has as been explained they followed the letter of the ( handball ) law. But if that was a defender that had handled that and leathered the ball away would it of been a penalty. ?

By the laws it’s not handball.
But that will be given next week.
The handball rule is a joke now and has been for a while.

 

[Tashyboy]

That's good news (performance not the roof). To be honest we've been found out in the championship holding a narrow line and something Silva will need to look at. The best PL sides especially City and Liverpool will exploit that every time. I am worried whether we've learned the mistakes of buying half a new side every time we go up and would like to see us only buy PL standard players in key positions. Clearly we're need to replace Carvahol once he goes to Anfield which will be a big hole and I'd like to see a decent striker to support Mitrovic and not rely on him as much again

To be honest, he should stay at Fulham, but I think his contract is short. The defensive line is very high and it will be found out. Fulham played with 4 at the back and Ave lost count how many prem teams have 5 and defend deep.
That said, as a Fulham fan your in a happy place with that team.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

To be honest, he should stay at Fulham, but I think his contract is short. The defensive line is very high and it will be found out. Fulham played with 4 at the back and Ave lost count how many prem teams have 5 and defend deep.
That said, as a Fulham fan your in a happy place with that team.

He'll be out of contract in the summer and I'd love the club to give him even a 2 year deal if we go up. Let him get some PL experience behind him. I wouldn't want him to be another Sessignon and be so full of potential and get lured to a big side and disappear. Even if he went to Liverpool and they loaned him back for a year wouldn't be a bad compromise. I think Klopp is pretty good with the youngsters so it may not be too bad. He is definitely a real prospect

 

[Tashyboy]

By the laws it’s handball.
But that will be given next week.
The handball rule is a joke now and has been for a while.

The reason I ask re defenders handling it in those circumstance. In the past there have been laws that are not applied to attacking and defending teams in the same way. I honestly do not know why the handball rule and others have been made to be complicated

 

[clubchamp98]

The reason I ask re defenders handling it in those circumstance. In the past there have been laws that are not applied to attacking and defending teams in the same way. I honestly do not know why the handball rule and others have been made to be complicated

Yes typo by me I meant is not handball.
What happened to natural silhouette .
He couldn’t get his hand any further from his body???

 

[Pin-seeker]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1489548972633038849

Man Utd dealing with the situation well

I wonder how many Mendy shirts City had to exchange

Poor post this imo

 

[SteveW86]

Poor post this imo

You think what Utd are doing is poor? Or Phil posting it is poor?

 

[Pin-seeker]

You think what Utd are doing is poor? Or Phil posting it is poor?

The Mandy/City dig was poor imo.
Think it’s good what UTD are doing ??

 

[Canary_Yellow]

Disappointed. Thought we were going to set a record of being the first premier League team knocked out by non league

Sorry, we’ve already got that achievement safely locked away in the hall of shame. Luton knocked us out a few years ago, we had Harry Kane on loan and he was useless. I certainly wouldn’t have bet on what has come since!

 

[Deleted member 21784]

Sorry, we’ve already got that achievement safely locked away in the hall of shame. Luton knocked us out a few years ago, we had Harry Kane on loan and he was useless. I certainly wouldn’t have bet on what has come since!

Were you premier League at the time?

 

[Swango1980]

A day away, but still gobsmacked about how these, presumably well paid, officials are doing to the game, and their decisions on handball. A rule that is updated regularly, so they think watertight decisions can be made using VAR.

It is a farce, as others have said. The justification: it was accidental and someone else scores. That is the biggest insult to fans, they must think we are naive.

Genuinely, how many handball are deliberate? I remember Diego Maradona, Thierry Henry for France and Suarez for Uruguay. More often than not, it is accidental and the player has just got themselves into a bad position. Deliberate handball should have no relevance, except for whether a player is carded or not.

The key factor HAS to be whether the hand ball made a significant difference in the move. In Utd game, if ball had brushed his arm near his side, and it didn't make much difference to the move, then I could accept the goal standing. However, it is clear to all the ball hitting his hand made a big difference (imagine he was closer to goal line, and ball was about to go out of play until it hit his hand, and VAR allowed the goal to stand). The officials are paid enough, so they should be able to made responsible for making subjective calls. I mean, they need to anyway for fouls and red cards. By trying to make handball so black and white (where millions of handball scenarios can potentially exist), they just look like fools.

Also, if the ref had given the handball immediately, do you think he would have been roundly criticised for giving it? Or, would his bosses say he was absolutely correct in giving the handball decision? I suspect they would rightly back him 100%, which would just go to show what a farce it is.

The other big issue with this is that I think the referee will instinctively NOT give an infringement in a very dangerous situation, and assume VAR will clear things up. The ref might have seen the handball, and simply given it 10 years ago. But, now they are frightened of giving it, and then possibly.be shown to be wrong and criticised for not letting VAR do its job. The ref might have seen this on Friday. If so, he should be allowed to let play continue, but once goal is scored, clarify to VAR he thinks there was a handball, and ask VAR if he can review it. If he did miss it, then VAR should ask him to review it.

 

[Foxholer]

A day away, but still gobsmacked about how these, presumably well paid, officials are doing to the game, and their decisions on handball. A rule that is updated regularly, so they think watertight decisions can be made using VAR.

It is a farce, as others have said. The justification: it was accidental and someone else scores. That is the biggest insult to fans, they must think we are naive.

Genuinely, how many handball are deliberate? I remember Diego Maradona, Thierry Henry for France and Suarez for Uruguay. More often than not, it is accidental and the player has just got themselves into a bad position. Deliberate handball should have no relevance, except for whether a player is carded or not.

The key factor HAS to be whether the hand ball made a significant difference in the move. In Utd game, if ball had brushed his arm near his side, and it didn't make much difference to the move, then I could accept the goal standing. However, it is clear to all the ball hitting his hand made a big difference (imagine he was closer to goal line, and ball was about to go out of play until it hit his hand, and VAR allowed the goal to stand). The officials are paid enough, so they should be able to made responsible for making subjective calls. I mean, they need to anyway for fouls and red cards. By trying to make handball so black and white (where millions of handball scenarios can potentially exist), they just look like fools.

Also, if the ref had given the handball immediately, do you think he would have been roundly criticised for giving it? Or, would his bosses say he was absolutely correct in giving the handball decision? I suspect they would rightly back him 100%, which would just go to show what a farce it is.

Here ar the applicable rules for Handball:
<start quote>
For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence.

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• touches the ball with their hand/armwhen it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
• scores in the opponents' goal:
  • directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
  • immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

<end quote>
Which one is applicable to that incident? None as far as I can tell!

FWIW. Another clause could be added that would cover incidents like this in future along the lines of
'touches the ball with their hand/arm, even if accidental, within the opponent's Penalty Area'

 

[Swango1980]

Here ar the applicable rules for Handball:
<start quote>
For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence.

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
• scores in the opponents' goal:
  • directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
  • immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

<end quote>
Which one is applicable to that incident?

The second bullet point. However, one could then argue it is irrelevant as his arm was in a natural position at that moment.

That is a huge part of the point. It is the law itself, not the officials necessarily applying the law. On Friday, the players arm was miles away from his body, it hit his hand and it had a significant impact on the play. The written law needs to be able to recognise that as handball. It is clear to me, and many other fans pundits alike (not just restricted to Utd fans either). But, maybe we really all are just mugs.

And, I am sure we could find many incidents were handball HAS been given for similar situations, and there has been no outcry about the decision.

 

[Foxholer]

The second bullet point. However, one could then argue it is irrelevant as his arm was in a natural position at that moment.

That is a huge part of the point. It is the law itself, not the officials necessarily applying the law. On Friday, the players arm was miles away from his body, it hit his hand and it had a significant impact on the play. The written law needs to be able to recognise that as handball. It is clear to me, and many other fans pundits alike (not just restricted to Utd fans either). But, maybe we really all are just mugs.

And, I am sure we could find many incidents were handball HAS been given for similar situations, and there has been no outcry about the decision.

Well, they (correctly imo) were of a different opinion to you. I believe they ruled along the lines of your 2nd sentence - in bold.
It does strike me as a bit farcical to have the 3rd clause without similar 'protection' from such a situation as happenned.

 

[Swango1980]

Well, they (correctly imo) were of a different opinion to you. I believe they ruled along the lines of your 2nd sentence - in bold.
It does strike me as a bit farcical to have the 3rd clause without similar 'protection' from such a situation as happenned.

To clarify, you believe the rules (as they are now apparently) should allow those incidents to be legal?

If so, interesting. If you were to go back and analyse any awarded handball ever given, or review any that happen from now, I bet very few could be considered deliberate. Very few will result in that player directly scoring. Very few the player would have put their hand in an unnatural position to increase chances of using arm. So, if intent was a strict primary criteria for handball, then theoretically handballs should be rarely ever given.

I find it crazy a players hand could be stretched about as far away from their body (even if they hadn't positioned it deliberately), the ball strikes their hand, puts the ball in their path and allows them to play a simply ball across goal for their player to score goal. Not considered handball. Yet, if the player shot themselves and scores, it IS handball. Surely it is either bloomin handball or it isn't.

 

[Hobbit]

A day away, but still gobsmacked about how these, presumably well paid, officials are doing to the game, and their decisions on handball. A rule that is updated regularly, so they think watertight decisions can be made using VAR.

It is a farce, as others have said. The justification: it was accidental and someone else scores. That is the biggest insult to fans, they must think we are naive.

Genuinely, how many handball are deliberate? I remember Diego Maradona, Thierry Henry for France and Suarez for Uruguay. More often than not, it is accidental and the player has just got themselves into a bad position. Deliberate handball should have no relevance, except for whether a player is carded or not.

The key factor HAS to be whether the hand ball made a significant difference in the move. In Utd game, if ball had brushed his arm near his side, and it didn't make much difference to the move, then I could accept the goal standing. However, it is clear to all the ball hitting his hand made a big difference (imagine he was closer to goal line, and ball was about to go out of play until it hit his hand, and VAR allowed the goal to stand). The officials are paid enough, so they should be able to made responsible for making subjective calls. I mean, they need to anyway for fouls and red cards. By trying to make handball so black and white (where millions of handball scenarios can potentially exist), they just look like fools.

Also, if the ref had given the handball immediately, do you think he would have been roundly criticised for giving it? Or, would his bosses say he was absolutely correct in giving the handball decision? I suspect they would rightly back him 100%, which would just go to show what a farce it is.

The other big issue with this is that I think the referee will instinctively NOT give an infringement in a very dangerous situation, and assume VAR will clear things up. The ref might have seen the handball, and simply given it 10 years ago. But, now they are frightened of giving it, and then possibly.be shown to be wrong and criticised for not letting VAR do its job. The ref might have seen this on Friday. If so, he should be allowed to let play continue, but once goal is scored, clarify to VAR he thinks there was a handball, and ask VAR if he can review it. If he did miss it, then VAR should ask him to review it.

I think most of your post typifies what is wrong with the current rule, i,e. It’s full of subjectivity. And the problem with subjectivity is there will always be some that think otherwise.

Just picking two bits from your post, “made a big difference…“ The use of ”big” is subjective. How big is big? “Brushed his arm near his side…” is that a 4” gap, a 5” gap or a 6” gap? We’re back to subjectivity and one person thinking differently than the next.

I agree that the ref does have to make subjective calls, was it a foul, is it a yellow/red, but why not make some things easy for him by making it black or white. Did the ball hit the arm/hand? Yes = handball. Never mind if the arm was against the body or not — if it hits the arm, wherever it is, the direction of the ball is changed.

On Friday night the ref made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. VAR made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. Ian Wright made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. Roy Keane made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. And Danny Mills on MOTD has just said it’s a goal. Their interpretation of the new rule. Are they right or are you right? It’s a subjective opinion, and you’re both right but the one person whose opinion matters is the ref.

I think they got it right but I think the rule is awful. In terms of fairness and natural justice, it’s appalling.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I think most of your post typifies what is wrong with the current rule, i,e. It’s full of subjectivity. And the problem with subjectivity is there will always be some that think otherwise.

Just picking two bits from your post, “made a big difference…“ The use of ”big” is subjective. How big is big? “Brushed his arm near his side…” is that a 4” gap, a 5” gap or a 6” gap? We’re back to subjectivity and one person thinking differently than the next.

I agree that the ref does have to make subjective calls, was it a foul, is it a yellow/red, but why not make some things easy for him by making it black or white. Did the ball hit the arm/hand? Yes = handball. Never mind if the arm was against the body or not — if it hits the arm, wherever it is, the direction of the ball is changed.

On Friday night the ref made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. VAR made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. Ian Wright made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. Roy Keane made a subjective call, and said it’s a goal. And Danny Mills on MOTD has just said it’s a goal. Their interpretation of the new rule. Are they right or are you right? It’s a subjective opinion, and you’re both right but the one person whose opinion matters is the ref.

I think they got it right but I think the rule is awful. In terms of fairness and natural justice, it’s appalling.

What’s funny Bri is the same people who whined about the old rule whine about the new rule.

The change was brought in after the amount of complaints about the old rule.

Not sure if you remember this from last season:

 

[Foxholer]

To clarify, you believe the rules (as they are now apparently) should allow those incidents to be legal?
...

That's what they currently do!!
As it happens, I too believe such incidents should be made a breach, But that would require a rule amendment! Referees must make rulings according to facts and the current rules, not through some sort of invented justification. It's up to a different area of the game to consider whether rule changes are required. Don't blame Refs for applying currently!

...
If so, interesting. If you were to go back and analyse any awarded handball ever given, or review any that happen from now, I bet very few could be considered deliberate. Very few will result in that player directly scoring. Very few the player would have put their hand in an unnatural position to increase chances of using arm. So, if intent was a strict primary criteria for handball, then theoretically handballs should be rarely ever given.
...

That's your opinion. Lobby the appropriate authorities for a rule change, but don't complain about the correct application of existing ones!

...
I find it crazy a players hand could be stretched about as far away from their body (even if they hadn't positioned it deliberately), the ball strikes their hand, puts the ball in their path and allows them to play a simply ball across goal for their player to score goal. Not considered handball. Yet, if the player shot themselves and scores, it IS handball. Surely it is either bloomin handball or it isn't.

See my comment immediately above!
I'm pretty certain, with no actual evidence, that that clause was added because of a previous incident. I've suggested another (any time it strikes a hand in the opponent's Penalty Area is handball) that would cover the one under discussion.

Just don't lambast Refs for applying existing rules correctly!