Jump to content

This Seasons Captain


Recommended Posts

For the attn of 17/03/13:

Former Premier League referee David Elleray said the referee's interpretation depends on whether the hand or arm is in an "unnatural" position at the point of contact.

_41117044_elleray203.jpg

Referees often consult their assistants on decisions

"Referees look at two specifics - did the hand or arm go towards the ball or in a manner which would block the ball, or is the hand in a position where it would not normally be?" Elleray told BBC Sport.

"The challenging decisions are if the defending player spreads their arms to make themselves bigger.

"If the ball hits the arm then the referee must decide whether this action was to deliberately block the ball or whether the player has raised their arms to protect themselves - especially if the ball is hit at speed."

For the first bit , YES ,IT IS .

For the second bit , why else was his arm there , certainly NOT to protect himself.

Cameron was using all the experience he had to gain an advantage.

Both bits, no
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Ffs Colin Cameron is Mystic Meg shocker!! You guys actually think before the corner was took, he put his hand on the post so that he could handle the ball?!

lol your logic is class

At corners and free kicks all players may aswell stand like star fish on the goal line won't be a pen just aslong as they don't plan to handball it before it's taken lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol your logic is class

At corners and free kicks all players may aswell stand like star fish on the goal line won't be a pen just aslong as they don't plan to handball it before it's taken lol

No because now they will be deliberately doing it to cheat. Do u see now?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out the following explanation given by referees association as guidance for referees on "intent" and you should change your mind.

Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position.

So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him?

If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand.

Let's say it was unnatural, read 2nd sentence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I ask all you Pierluigi Collinas, when isn't it a handball then?

If the players hand wasn't in the position it was in, what would have happened.....that is what I would be thinking about if I was the ref.

So if a player is covering his balls or face with his hand and the ball hits his hand it wouldn't be hand ball, because if his hand wasn't there, it would hit the player anyway.

If a players hand is away from their body, it should always be considered from the view point that the player is trying to gain an unfair advantage - and the referee would need to be absolutely convinced that he wasn't not to award a foul.

In other words, guilty until convinced innocent. What you are suggesting is to assume the players innocence unless absolutely convinced of his guilt. This would result in hardly any handballs given because you could always think of legitimate "reasons" why the players hand was in that position - for example that they are told to do it by coaches!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back on topic...

Thommo is captain, and that won't change. He's prime captain material. I don't think he should be starting every game, however (it's just not fair on him if we have to rely on him all the time). Still, he's club captain and that's all there is to it.

Excellent post, Ulysses and I admire your attempt to get the thread back on topic. thumbup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the players hand wasn't in the position it was in, what would have happened.....that is what I would be thinking about if I was the ref.

So if a player is covering his balls or face with his hand and the ball hits his hand it wouldn't be hand ball, because if his hand wasn't there, it would hit the player anyway.

If a players hand is away from their body, it should always be considered from the view point that the player is trying to gain an unfair advantage - and the referee would need to be absolutely convinced that he wasn't not to award a foul.

In other words, guilty until convinced innocent. What you are suggesting is to assume the players innocence unless absolutely convinced of his guilt. This would result in hardly any handballs given because you could always think of legitimate "reasons" why the players hand was in that position - for example that they are told to do it by coaches!

1st para- That not what the refs are told to look for

2nd para- It doesn't matter where the ball is headed

3rd & 4th para- Its the other way round & in my opinion there is too many fouls given for handball in modern game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...