VAR and the latest handball rules

[Cal]

This is a nice thread on the interpretation of this handball rule and VAR https://twitter.com/DaleJohnsonESPN/sta ... 8792035331.

Goes over how things went at the WC and on the continent in the first seasons using the official interpretation while the PL held onto a softer version, and what we might be able to expect unless teams adapt quickly.

[originallad]

I love the new rules. Sick of this accidental bull****. Hits your arm in the penalty area, it's a penalty. End of.

[Colly]

I love the new rules. Sick of this accidental bull****. Hits your arm in the penalty area, it's a penalty. End of.

That's not the rule though, otherwise Lascelles would have conceded one. If your arm is still in a natural position which isn't making your body bigger it isn't handball.

Cal's right to recommend Dale Johnson, he's incredibly good at explaining these issues and is quite responsive too, I've had a couple of quick back and forths with him. He's actually just tweeted his VAR thread for this week which covers all the defensive handballs.

[Blue & Maroon]

I love the new rules. Sick of this accidental bull****. Hits your arm in the penalty area, it's a penalty. End of.

That's completely mental .

[Captain Obvious]

I love the new rules. Sick of this accidental bull****. Hits your arm in the penalty area, it's a penalty. End of.

Do you think there's an argument that it could be advantageous for players, certainly defenders, to actually chop their arms off?

[Colly]

I love the new rules. Sick of this accidental bull****. Hits your arm in the penalty area, it's a penalty. End of.

Do you think there's an argument that it could be advantageous for players, certainly defenders, to actually chop their arms off?

Probably not for goalkeepers.

[bodacious benny]

Do you think there's an argument that it could be advantageous for players, certainly defenders, to actually chop their arms off?

Probably not for goalkeepers.

[Sir Bobby]

Think they should at the least add a clause that it should only be a penalty if the arm blocks the ball from going at goal/to an attacking player. Seems ridiculous that a ball could be destined to hit a defender in the hip but because their arm is outstretched it hits that first and so would be a penalty

[originallad]

I love the new rules. Sick of this accidental bull****. Hits your arm in the penalty area, it's a penalty. End of.

That's not the rule though, otherwise Lascelles would have conceded one. If your arm is still in a natural position which isn't making your body bigger it isn't handball.

Cal's right to recommend Dale Johnson, he's incredibly good at explaining these issues and is quite responsive too, I've had a couple of quick back and forths with him. He's actually just tweeted his VAR thread for this week which covers all the defensive handballs.

Fair enough.

I wish it was though. Hits the arm in the box, penalty.

They've changed the rule to favour the penalty but not enough in my opinion. Should be black and white.

Take everybody complaining about a nipple or eyelash offside. "Not offside!" It is offside though! Clear cut rules are the way forward.

[krully]

It means more goals tho

[Colly]

It means more goals tho

Is that really a good thing? Is a game by default better if there's loads of goals and cards, even if they're penalties for nonsense like this?

[Remember Colo]

Think they should at the least add a clause that it should only be a penalty if the arm blocks the ball from going at goal/to an attacking player. Seems ridiculous that a ball could be destined to hit a defender in the hip but because their arm is outstretched it hits that first and so would be a penalty

That's where I stand too. I think there should be some context considered, so that if your arm is in an unnatural position, and accidental or not it hits the ball and prevents a scoring chance (like the second Ward review in the Palace match), then penalize it. But one like ours where it hitting Dier really didn't do anything to obstruct a chance for us, it seems like overkill. I know that leaves subjectivity, but that seems inevitable.

[bodacious benny]

Well, it created drama and entertainment for us in an otherwise dreadful game...and football is supposed to be about entertainment.

The rules are still bollocks though

[jpg]

No other sports loves a contentious decision quite like football. You’re never going to get complete consistency as so many ‘laws’ are open to interpretation.

Surely it just comes down to referees using common sense and penalising based on the wider context of the handball in play; has player used hand intentionally to play the ball and gain an unfair advantage?

[bodacious benny]

Part of the problem is that rules are changing so often, it's impossible for referees to keep up. Something like 100+ have been changed in the last 3-4 years. Can't remember the exact number but they were talking about it on 606 at the weekend. Whichever industry you work, if rules, regulations etc. changed at that rate then we'd all struggle.

[biggeordiedave]

91 penalties were awarded last season and we've had 20 so far. The highest total in one PL season is 106 (which has happened twice) and we're on course for 271ish if my maths are correct (20 pens awarded in 28 fixtures so far = 0.714 penalties per match, multiplied by 380 matches = 271.42)

This is obviously skewed by Leicester getting three stonewall penalties in one match, but even if you take that match out of the equation, it's still more than double the previous highest total.

[bodacious benny]

Vardy to be top scorer again based on pens alone.

[Colly]

Part of the problem is that rules are changing so often, it's impossible for referees to keep up. Something like 100+ have been changed in the last 3-4 years. Can't remember the exact number but they were talking about it on 606 at the weekend. Whichever industry you work, if rules, regulations etc. changed at that rate then we'd all struggle.

In fairness to the refs, in this case they have kept up. Much as I think the new interpretation of the law (and the rules on attacking handball brought in last year) is a crock of s***, they've applied it very consistently over the last few weeks, as Johnson's twitter threads have shown.

[bodacious benny]

Part of the problem is that rules are changing so often, it's impossible for referees to keep up. Something like 100+ have been changed in the last 3-4 years. Can't remember the exact number but they were talking about it on 606 at the weekend. Whichever industry you work, if rules, regulations etc. changed at that rate then we'd all struggle.

In fairness to the refs, in this case they have kept up. Much as I think the new interpretation of the law (and the rules on attacking handball brought in last year) is a crock of s***, they've applied it very consistently over the last few weeks, as Johnson's twitter threads have shown.

Agree entirely that the consistency in implementing the rules has been excellent.

It is ridiculous that the hand ball rule for the attacking team is different to that of the defending team.

[Colly]

I love the fact there isn't really a cutoff either, so if you accidentally handball it on the halfway line you might as well just hoof it out for a throwin since your team can't score anytime soon...