Jump to content

sportscene disgrace


WATPWATP

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, BigDak said:

When people create these things do they send them through to the person who’s making a tit of himself, i.e. Michael Stewart? I’d love to see what his response to this is.

Hey you 

He must have spent the whole day studying up on that too

 To be fair,  he fits right in at BBC Scotland 

An inbred cunt if ever there was one 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Biofuckinmechanics or not, if you go to ground and your arm rises and stops a shot that's on target then its handball and free-kick/penalty every time it happens.  The only issue here is not whether it was handball or not, but whether it was a booking offence.  I have a little sympathy because when you're throwing yourself about your arms can end up anywhere.

Said it loads of times, adopt the simple black and white version... if it hits your hand, accidentally or not then its a foul.  Same as hockey if the ball hits your feet.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, coopsleftboot said:

Said it loads of times, adopt the simple black and white version... if it hits your hand, accidentally or not then its a foul.  Same as hockey if the ball hits your feet.  

Didn't a league try that somewhere and it ended up with players trying to chip the ball onto an opponent's hand? I was watching La Liga once and the commentators mentioned it. Not sure if it was Spain that tried it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So here's the rules on it....

HANDLING THE BALL

Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm.

The following must be considered:

the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)

the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)

the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence

The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. Inside their penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any related sanction but can be guilty of handling offences that incur an indirect free kick.

=========

The defender approached the ball, forward movement, (with arms attached to his body ?) to close the shot. Strike 1.

It was not a minimal distance or deflection, it was a purposeful action by the defender to approach the ball and place his body in the way of the shot. Strike 2 

"the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence". Nor does it rule out the offence. And specifically it doesn't mention biomechanics being a permitted factor for ruling out any offence.?. Strike 3.

And you're out Michael Stewart, twat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OhW said:

Didn't a league try that somewhere and it ended up with players trying to chip the ball onto an opponent's hand? I was watching La Liga once and the commentators mentioned it. Not sure if it was Spain that tried it.

Possibly.  But it doesn't need to be a penalty or direct free. Indirect free,  even in the box.  But I suppose that's where the "deliberate" part comes into play for the referee. Point is, handball, even accidental would be a foul...then down to the ref whether it was intentional (or arm in unnatural position).

Hockey players try to hit other players feet.

Link to post
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.   Restore formatting

  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.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 21 April 2024 14:00 Until 16:00
      0  
      Rangers v Hearts
      Hampden Park
      Scottish Cup
×
×
  • Create New...