The Rules

[SingYourHeartsOut]

I know this isnt going to be a popular opinion but in my interpretation of law 12 it was a penalty. When the deflection handball rule change came into force this was the clarification statement given by the PL when IFAB changed the rule:

View attachment 37487

As Gomes hand was neither "close to his body" as well as clearly "making his body unnaturally bigger" so he doesnt get a free pass.

This is Law 12

View attachment 37488
What puzzles me is that those rules are quite easy to find and have to be learned and updated by 14 year old refs every year. And yet we have pundits on the TV paid a lot of money who clearly have no idea what they are talking about.

You need the guidance on interpretation though.

Handball | IFAB

Handball

www.footballrules.com

What happens when a player heads/kicks the ball and it then hits their own hand/arm?

This is not handball (unless the ball goes directly into the opponents’ goal or the player scores immediately afterwards, in which case a direct free kick is awarded to the other team).

 

[Darvo]

I have no problem with referees taking their time to get decisions correct but the time it takes is unacceptable and insufferable.VAR was meant to be for the clear and obvious but it has developed into psycho analysis with forensic research to come up with reasons why goals shouldn’t be awarded resulting in the negative rather than the positive side of football.We all grew up in different eras and we can all remember contentious decisions but we all moved on but since the advent of wall to wall tv coverage,social media and ultimately VAR we all have opinions based on subjectively .My love of the game that I grew up with has waned massively.Maybe our current misfortunes and travails just highlight the injustices of football in my eyes and I doubt I will ever get that love back .

That’s a real shame mate. Unfortunately, you’re not alone.

 

[lobodelsur]

I know this isnt going to be a popular opinion but in my interpretation of law 12 it was a penalty. When the deflection handball rule change came into force this was the clarification statement given by the PL when IFAB changed the rule:

View attachment 37487

As Gomes hand was neither "close to his body" as well as clearly "making his body unnaturally bigger" so he doesnt get a free pass.

This is Law 12

View attachment 37488
What puzzles me is that those rules are quite easy to find and have to be learned and updated by 14 year old refs every year. And yet we have pundits on the TV paid a lot of money who clearly have no idea what they are talking about.

It was so much easier in the days of 'Was it ball to hand or hand to ball' ?

 

[Jefe]

Is it cynical of me to suggest the rules have been made more nebulous, subjective and labyrinthine precisely for the reason that it creates inconsistency from referee to referee, and therefore drives controversy, debate and engagement? English Football is pure product - even down to the laws of the game.

 

[bod101]

Just had a scoot through the FAs official rules after the 'deflected handball penalty' given against us today.

They've removed a few specific words that were included in the past, which have totally made it a matter of opinion, rather than any level of consistency... (replacing "did" with "deemed to have..." for example)... it's clearly as ambiguous as possible so they can always claim they are right.

Basically a total **** show.


What I was surprised to see is that the goalkeeper 6 second rule, is still a rule! An indirect free kick should be awarded if a goalie controls the ball with their arm or hand for 6 seconds or more.

Can anyone tell me the last time they saw that enforced?

 

[fev123]

As explained by the ex players on TV, his arm is in a natural position. It may have been high, but it was natural for the actions he was taking. Therefore it shouldn't have been a penalty.
Even the refs on TV have said it shouldn't have been a penalty.

Now it's been fully explained and accepted that I was totally right and those goons on match of the day were totally wrong I'm just here for my apology. Made my point perfectly, lots of angry little football fans that have never reffed a game or done the course shouting at people that have.

The VAR Review: Making sense of Romero, Gomes, Gordon handballs; Nketiah red

In this week's VAR Review: Looking at handball decisions involving Tottenham, Wolverhampton Wanderers and Newcastle United, plus a possible red card for Eddie Nketiah.

www.espn.com

 

[WeAreTheWolvesII]

Now it's been fully explained and accepted that I was totally right and those goons on match of the day were totally wrong I'm just here for my apology. Made my point perfectly, lots of angry little football fans that have never reffed a game or done the course shouting at people that have.

The VAR Review: Making sense of Romero, Gomes, Gordon handballs; Nketiah red

In this week's VAR Review: Looking at handball decisions involving Tottenham, Wolverhampton Wanderers and Newcastle United, plus a possible red card for Eddie Nketiah.

www.espn.com

Those articles are pointless.

If the ref hadn't given a penalty would they have criticised him for a mistake? Of course not.

The ESPN journalist, and yourself seemingly, have found a way to justify it. It doesn't mean it was the correct decision. The rules could also be applied to say it wasn't a penalty. They get it both ways.

I do not believe we will see another penalty given following a deflection onto the arm all season.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Now it's been fully explained and accepted that I was totally right and those goons on match of the day were totally wrong I'm just here for my apology. Made my point perfectly, lots of angry little football fans that have never reffed a game or done the course shouting at people that have.

The VAR Review: Making sense of Romero, Gomes, Gordon handballs; Nketiah red

In this week's VAR Review: Looking at handball decisions involving Tottenham, Wolverhampton Wanderers and Newcastle United, plus a possible red card for Eddie Nketiah.

www.espn.com

If you take the time to debate the point with Dale on X, he basically admits the rules are rubbish and the application of them entirely subjective. He simply makes some judgements about whether Gomes blocked or played the ball, and whether Gomes’s arm was in a natural position or not, to reach the conclusion that the officials were correct. Change any of those subjective decisions, and it wasn’t handball.

As he explained it, the rules allow a player to deliberately kick the ball onto their hand/arm in an unnatural position, and it will not be given as hand ball based on the strict application of the current rules. There is even a photo of a Liverpool player in the IFAB rules to make this clear! Oh the irony. So a clever player can use this rule if they need to use their hand to control the ball in a tight situation, as long as they kick the ball first. They just have to make it appear accidental so that the officials apply the appropriate subjective judgement to apply this provision. But, should a player try to play the ball, like Gomes, and his foot make contact, but not sufficient to “control the ball” (in the opinion of the ref) then even an accidental brush against the hand may be deemed handball.

So the handball rules, as currently drafted and in certain circumstances, aid players who deliberately to handle the ball, but punish those who touch the ball accidentally. It’s like something out of 1984, or something Kafka might have written. Utter nonsense.

 

[Fenrir_]

Now it's been fully explained and accepted that I was totally right and those goons on match of the day were totally wrong I'm just here for my apology. Made my point perfectly, lots of angry little football fans that have never reffed a game or done the course shouting at people that have.

The VAR Review: Making sense of Romero, Gomes, Gordon handballs; Nketiah red

In this week's VAR Review: Looking at handball decisions involving Tottenham, Wolverhampton Wanderers and Newcastle United, plus a possible red card for Eddie Nketiah.

www.espn.com

Well this is the rule as per IFAB



If you're trying to make a full stretch block, your arm is naturally going up in the air, Gomes' arm was therefore in a natural position and a consequence of the action he was making in an attempt to block the ball with his foot

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

I mean it would be nice to actually be able to just find the law, what we get now is people saying 'here's the law' and then finding someone else saying 'oh but here's a caveat' oh and then the PGMOL added their own clarification to what IFAB said, and oh no, that was last week, since then they've clarified it again oh and in the end none of the laws matter because, guess what, just in the same way it was hard to show 'intent', it turns out that 'natural position' is just as much a judgement.

So it was a possible interpretation of a law which is clearly ridiculous and therefore not a clear and obvious error. Common sense goes out of the window and us poor punters just have to shrug and move on.

 

[bigbluewolf]

Blocking the ball or playing the ball.

One is legally using your body to make sure the ball goes in a certain direction.
One is legally using your body to make sure the ball goes in a certain direction.

Which is which?

 

[fev123]

I mean it would be nice to actually be able to just find the law, what we get now is people saying 'here's the law' and then finding someone else saying 'oh but here's a caveat' oh and then the PGMOL added their own clarification to what IFAB said, and oh no, that was last week, since then they've clarified it again oh and in the end none of the laws matter because, guess what, just in the same way it was hard to show 'intent', it turns out that 'natural position' is just as much a judgement.

So it was a possible interpretation of a law which is clearly ridiculous and therefore not a clear and obvious error. Common sense goes out of the window and us poor punters just have to shrug and move on.

But there's the problem. Just get the laws of the game, as an app even, its totally free. Its in black and white what the laws are, anything else is just fiction. We went through five years of John Terry blocking everything star shaped like Peter Schmeichel with his hands, so what can you do if your IFAB, basically say your F'ed if your hands in the air, which he was.

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

But there's the problem. Just get the laws of the game, as an app even, its totally free. Its in black and white what the laws are, anything else is just fiction. We went through five years of John Terry blocking everything star shaped like Peter Schmeichel with his hands, so what can you do if your IFAB, basically say your F'ed if your hands in the air, which he was.

Yes, it's in black and white, but this is also guidance from IFAB to explain the laws.

Handball | IFAB

Handball

www.footballrules.com

There's no mention of that in the simple laws, but apparently it doesn't cover Gomes, because he didn't kick the ball, it just hit him.

Then the whole thing is just a ref's interpretation of what makes a natural position anyway. Anyone who thinks Gomes has his hand up there in the hope that he might block the cross with it is daft. So it's just a natural thing for a stretching player to do to balance, an ounce of common sense would get anyone there, but because the ref's allowed that ridiculous interpretation the VAR doesn't overrule it. It's a farce.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

Yes, it's in black and white, but this is also guidance from IFAB to explain the laws.

View attachment 37593

Handball | IFAB

Handball

www.footballrules.com

There's no mention of that in the simple laws, but apparently it doesn't cover Gomes, because he didn't kick the ball, it just hit him.

Then the whole thing is just a ref's interpretation of what makes a natural position anyway. Anyone who thinks Gomes has his hand up there in the hope that he might block the cross with it is daft. So it's just a natural thing for a stretching player to do to balance, an ounce of common sense would get anyone there, but because the ref's allowed that ridiculous interpretation the VAR doesn't overrule it. It's a farce.

Of course it is, and that’s why the “independent review” in ESPN is equally a farce. All they did was make some assumptions about blocking vs playing, natural vs unnatural arm position, and close vs not too close from playing kicking the ball, to arrive at the decision that the refs decision should have stood after VAR review. Change any of those entirely subjective opinions, and the rules state it wasn’t a handball.

What PGMOL and ESPN don’t seem to acknowledge is that the intent of these rules and clarifications is to codify whether handballs are avoidable or intentional - whether by actively handling the ball or making your body bigger so that your hands/arms might block the ball. Almost every pundit and fan, including Luton’s, agrees that Gomes did not intentionally handle the ball through either approach. So the intent of the rules has not been honoured, and hence it feels an unjust decision.