Match Thread: Island Games - August 13, 2020 - Forge v Cavalry

[SpursFlu]

I actually think that was a handball

[grande]

1 minute ago, SpursFlu said:

I actually think that was a handball

It hit him in the side as he was moving away, what more can he do?

[Big_M]

lol they give shot of the game to bekker when novak scored maybe one of the goals of the tournament

[SpursFlu]

Just now, grande said:

It hit him in the side as he was moving away, what more can he do?

I only saw 1 replay but for me he put his hands up and the ball hit the bottom of his biceps. That's what I saw

[Cheeta]

Subs or no, yeah, looking ragged pretty early into the 2nd there.

Think a lot of players will be in the tub late and to bed early tonight.

[Cheeta]

BOBBY!.  Take my money.  Take my car.  Just don't hurt me!

[grande]

3 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

I only saw 1 replay but for me he put his hands up and the ball hit the bottom of his biceps. That's what I saw

That is absolutely not what I saw, but I'm a tipsy Forge fan, so maybe I should reserve judgement until tomorrow...

But for now, this is the GREATEST INJUSTICE HAMILTON HAS FACED SINCE THE 2014 GREY CUP.

[narduch]

The debate is settled 

 

[SpursFlu]

I dont care too much but I'm not a fan of the digital stadium. How do I put this... but to me it seems... weird

Edited August 14, 2020 by SpursFlu

[SthMelbRed]

11 minutes ago, narduch said:

The debate is settled 

 

As a referee, I never give that as a penalty. It's unclear whether it even hit his arm, even in slow motion. You'd have to take a harsh view of every aspect under consideration in order to justify making that call.

[jonovision]

I'm not going to shed any tears for Forge getting the short end of the stick on a referee's decision.

[Senorpopps]

I re-watched the video of the handball on One Soccer's twitter page like 50 times and it is 100% a handball. If you look at the final spin and direction of the ball, it has a backspin and has a downward trajectory - the pure physics of which means it must have hit a surface much more parallel to the ground, like an outstretched arm, rather than a perpendicular surface like the side of his body. Had it not have hit his arm, the ball would have bounced back away from Forge goal rather than bounce towards the ground. Great call Mr. Referee!

Edited August 14, 2020 by Senorpopps

[SpursFlu]

That was my thought.. if the ball didn't hit his arm there is no way it would go in that direction 

[grande]

It hit his side first.

[jonovision]

Forgive my ignorance, and I don't think the image above clearly proves one side or the other, but does it matter if the ball hits another body part before the player handles it? Is this spelled out in the rules?

[SthMelbRed]

6 minutes ago, jonovision said:

Forgive my ignorance, and I don't think the image above clearly proves one side or the other, but does it matter if the ball hits another body part before the player handles it? Is this spelled out in the rules?

Yes. In the guidelines issued last year after the LotG were tweaked with regards to Handball, it is a consideration if the ball deflects onto the hand/arm from another part of the body. 

[SpursFlu]

7 minutes ago, SthMelbRed said:

Yes. In the guidelines issued last year after the LotG were tweaked with regards to Handball, it is a consideration if the ball deflects onto the hand/arm from another part of the body. 

Is that true? Now if the ball deflects off a body part on to your arm it's not a handball now?

[SthMelbRed]

9 minutes ago, SpursFlu said:

Is that true? Now if the ball deflects off a body part on to your arm it's not a handball now?

It's a consideration. One of many.

[SthMelbRed]

Handling the ball

For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit.

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball

•  scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

• after the ball has touched their or a team-mate’s hand/arm, even if accidental, immediately:

• scores in the opponents’ goal • creates a goal-scoring opportunity

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close. Except for the above offences, it is not an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)

• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close

•  if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger

• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body

The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. However, if the offence is playing the ball a second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offence stops a promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.

[SthMelbRed]

So, in order for the referee to give the penalty, he must have either ignored the fact that the ball struck the defender's torso first, and/or felt that the defender had deliberately handled or that he had extended his arms away from his body to make himself unnaturally bigger. Personally, I don't think it should have been given.

[kacbru]

This is the kind of thing where VAR is absolutely no help.  It is all based on a judgement call - doesn't matter if it is the ref in real time or people staring at a monitor, striking up a committee, to set up a workshop, to come to a solution about interpreting the intent of the player while we all go take a piss and grab another beer waiting for an announcement that we will disagree about anyways!

[BradMack]

I think according to those rules posted, it could either have been judged that the player made himself unnaturally bigger, or that his arm was above his shoulders (which I would say it is slightly)... Its still very harsh but I think technically a hand ball. In real time I did think it was a handball. Its super harsh though. 

[dyslexic nam]

7 hours ago, kacbru said:

This is the kind of thing where VAR is absolutely no help.  It is all based on a judgement call - doesn't matter if it is the ref in real time or people staring at a monitor, striking up a committee, to set up a workshop, to come to a solution about interpreting the intent of the player while we all go take a piss and grab another beer waiting for an announcement that we will disagree about anyways!

I disagree. Without VAR the ref is forced to make a decision in realtime based on what s/he saw one time, from one angle, as the play moved at game-speed.  VAR won’t eliminate the exercise of discretion where a play is subject to interpretation, but it has other benefits that can assist and inform that exercise of discretion.

[fil]

Forge looked shaky at first. Chonoire looked good and should be a starter. What a letdown of an ending...

 

Guess Forge fans will have to wipe away the tears away with a potato...

 

[SpursFlu]

Watching the highlite package with a slow mo replay. I'm not sure how that's not a penalty. His arms are raised up at his shoulders and the ball clearly strikes his arm. I'm a neutral so whatever, I'm just saying it looks obvious to me