Handball

[Redwhiteandblue 3,330]

I know we benefited from the new handball rules today, but I think we can all agree that the old rule was better. There was a reason why people without the benefit of tv replays put in that "it must be a deliberate handball" and that is because in real time, its only obvious to spot deliberate handballs.

The last deliberate handball I can remember was in the world cup game with Uruguay and (I want to say ivory coast?) an African team who played in white. The last before that was Whittaker (I think again) which I think still went in so he never got sent off (or was it Burke or Broadfoot??). And the last before then was when the ball was deliberately caught in the EPL when it was just as easy to score, I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about so won't darken this post with his name.

ANYWAY...point being, ITV's very very rare that there is a deliberate handball in the professional game and the ball does on many occasions ACCIDENTALY touch a players hand. Does this REALLY deserve a penalty against? And with this being Scotland, who do we think will suffer from this ridiculous rule the most? Especially this season. 

Have the "laws of the game" ever been changed mid-season before? I ask because it would obviously set a precedent and allow those of us who believe that the rule as it stands is bloody ridiculous. It seems that every season they feel some sort of need to change the laws of the game we all love. The game (refereeing-wise) is a different game from the one I grew up watching (fuck I sound old) its almost a non contact sport now. I wouldn't recognise the game our founders played and with the way things are going, I don't think I will recognise the game my grandchildren will grow up watching. 

 

All these little things like, the first touch of the ball must be forward (kick off) the ball must leave the penalty box from goal kicks all seem like small things at the time, but they add up. If you went into a coma in 1999 and woke up today, you wouldn't recognise the game as its played now. Especially down south. 

Am I just being xenaphobe, or does anyone else have worries similar to mine? If you do, what's changed that is driving you nuts? And does anyone else agree that this new handball rule is nuts? If so, can we get it changed? (I refer you back to my precedent comment).

[The Specky Forum Organiser 64,730]

Nobody is reading a post that long from you mate

[berkshirebear 2,771]

6 minutes ago, Redwhiteandblue said:

I know we benefited from the new handball rules today, but I think we can all agree that the old rule was better. There was a reason why people without the benefit of tv replays put in that "it must be a deliberate handball" and that is because in real time, its only obvious to spot deliberate handballs.

The last deliberate handball I can remember was in the world cup game with Uruguay and (I want to say ivory coast?) an African team who played in white. The last before that was Whittaker (I think again) which I think still went in so he never got sent off (or was it Burke or Broadfoot??). And the last before then was when the ball was deliberately caught in the EPL when it was just as easy to score, I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about so won't darken this post with his name.

ANYWAY...point being, ITV's very very rare that there is a deliberate handball in the professional game and the ball does on many occasions ACCIDENTALY touch a players hand. Does this REALLY deserve a penalty against? And with this being Scotland, who do we think will suffer from this ridiculous rule the most? Especially this season. 

Have the "laws of the game" ever been changed mid-season before? I ask because it would obviously set a precedent and allow those of us who believe that the rule as it stands is bloody ridiculous. It seems that every season they feel some sort of need to change the laws of the game we all love. The game (refereeing-wise) is a different game from the one I grew up watching (fuck I sound old) its almost a non contact sport now. I wouldn't recognise the game our founders played and with the way things are going, I don't think I will recognise the game my grandchildren will grow up watching. 

 

All these little things like, the first touch of the ball must be forward (kick off) the ball must leave the penalty box from goal kicks all seem like small things at the time, but they add up. If you went into a coma in 1999 and woke up today, you wouldn't recognise the game as its played now. Especially down south. 

Am I just being xenaphobe, or does anyone else have worries similar to mine? If you do, what's changed that is driving you nuts? And does anyone else agree that this new handball rule is nuts? If so, can we get it changed? (I refer you back to my precedent comment).

Great read.

[Dennis Reynolds 1,329]

I don’t think either handball today had anything to do with the new rule, the first one the boy literally punched it away. 

[British_Empire 9,648]

6 minutes ago, Dennis Reynolds said:

I don’t think either handball today had anything to do with the new rule, the first one the boy literally punched it away. 

Same. I keep hearing this new rule mentioned, which is being disingenuous to us. Both were penalties.

The problem is, they are rarely given - that's why folk think they're either soft or a surprise - but they are penalties.

To be fair - I thought Motherwell should have had one of their own for Helander's tackle on one of their players.

[bluenoz 30,843]

Two stonewallers. End of...

 

[andyhrfc 2,242]

Both penalties correctly given under the current interpretation of the law.  
 

Whether we agree with the law or not is another matter. We benefitted today but could equally lose out in another game. 

[Redwhiteandblue 3,330]

10 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

Same. I keep hearing this new rule mentioned, which is being disingenuous to us. Both were penalties.

The problem is, they are rarely given - that's why folk think they're either soft or a surprise - but they are penalties.

To be fair - I thought Motherwell should have had one of their own for Helander's tackle on one of their players.

Point being, if that was a different ref today, we don't get 2 penalties and they get 1. Guaranteed. It may have benefited us today, but I guarantee it won't over the course of a season. 

[ForeverAndEver 71,502]

46 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

Same. I keep hearing this new rule mentioned, which is being disingenuous to us. Both were penalties.

The problem is, they are rarely given - that's why folk think they're either soft or a surprise - but they are penalties.

To be fair - I thought Motherwell should have had one of their own for Helander's tackle on one of their players.

No chance, some tackle.

[The Librarian 234]

2 hours ago, British_Empire said:

Same. I keep hearing this new rule mentioned, which is being disingenuous to us. Both were penalties.

The problem is, they are rarely given - that's why folk think they're either soft or a surprise - but they are penalties.

To be fair - I thought Motherwell should have had one of their own for Helander's tackle on one of their players.

Helander's tackle was never a damn penalty.

[British_Empire 9,648]

1 minute ago, The Librarian said:

Helander's tackle was never a damn penalty.

Might not have been Helander then, but there was one I thought they were unlucky not to get.

 

[The Librarian 234]

1 minute ago, British_Empire said:

Might not have been Helander then, but there was one I thought they were unlucky not to get.

 

Honestly can't think of one they should have had.

[Robmc1 4,741]

9 minutes ago, British_Empire said:

Might not have been Helander then, but there was one I thought they were unlucky not to get.

 

Think it was Kamara who checked their player in our box. As expected he made the most of it and went down, seen similar given but would have been soft imo. Watt should have been booked for his ‘penalty claim’, with Helander, it was a ridiculous blatant dive when shown from the front...

[British_Empire 9,648]

2 minutes ago, Robmc1 said:

Think it was Kamara who checked their player in our box. As expected he made the most of it and went down, seen similar given but would have been soft imo. Watt should have been booked for his ‘penalty claim’, with Helander, it was a ridiculous blatant dive when shown from the front...

Might have been that one I'm thinking about then, because I know they had 2 shouts, but 1 of them I thought to myself Madden probably can't wait to even things up a bit.

[Robmc1 4,741]

Just now, British_Empire said:

Might have been that one I'm thinking about then, because I know they had 2 shouts, but 1 of them I thought to myself Madden probably can't wait to even things up a bit.

Yeh, I was expecting the whistle in our box at some point during the course of the game but credit to him for doing his job properly, all we ask for...

[McEwan's Lager 30,524]

6 minutes ago, Robmc1 said:

Think it was Kamara who checked their player in our box. As expected he made the most of it and went down, seen similar given but would have been soft imo. Watt should have been booked for his ‘penalty claim’, with Helander, it was a ridiculous blatant dive when shown from the front...

I thought Kamara's one was possibly a penalty. Mainly because he made no attempt to play the ball and it was a bit forceful. It would have been soft but I think he was lucky it wasn't given. 

I really hate when players do things like that in the box as it gives refs a choice. The boy was going nowhere too.

[McEwan's Lager 30,524]

To answer the OPs point I think the handball rule is nuts for things like the Newcastle penalty today. I still haven't seen the Palace incident from yesterday though.

But I think in some instances its better than what it was before. Take our first one today. Under the old rules it may have been judged accidental but the guy is facing the ball with his arm outstretched and its denying us a chance at goal even if it is accidental. At the opposite end accidental handball rules a goal out now so it should go the other way if it stops a potential one.

 

[hawkfalcons 2,303]

the only reason its an issue all of a sudden is because the Rangers benefited, if it was the scum wouldn't have heard a peep 

[bluenose48 951]

The way I read the new rule is, it must be deliberate or if accidental the player or his team get an advantage from the hand ball, it is a free kick or penalty to the opposition.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

4 hours ago, Redwhiteandblue said:

I know we benefited from the new handball rules today, but I think we can all agree that the old rule was better. There was a reason why people without the benefit of tv replays put in that "it must be a deliberate handball" and that is because in real time, its only obvious to spot deliberate handballs.

The last deliberate handball I can remember was in the world cup game with Uruguay and (I want to say ivory coast?) an African team who played in white. The last before that was Whittaker (I think again) which I think still went in so he never got sent off (or was it Burke or Broadfoot??). And the last before then was when the ball was deliberately caught in the EPL when it was just as easy to score, I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about so won't darken this post with his name.

ANYWAY...point being, ITV's very very rare that there is a deliberate handball in the professional game and the ball does on many occasions ACCIDENTALY touch a players hand. Does this REALLY deserve a penalty against? And with this being Scotland, who do we think will suffer from this ridiculous rule the most? Especially this season. 

Have the "laws of the game" ever been changed mid-season before? I ask because it would obviously set a precedent and allow those of us who believe that the rule as it stands is bloody ridiculous. It seems that every season they feel some sort of need to change the laws of the game we all love. The game (refereeing-wise) is a different game from the one I grew up watching (fuck I sound old) its almost a non contact sport now. I wouldn't recognise the game our founders played and with the way things are going, I don't think I will recognise the game my grandchildren will grow up watching. 

 

All these little things like, the first touch of the ball must be forward (kick off) the ball must leave the penalty box from goal kicks all seem like small things at the time, but they add up. If you went into a coma in 1999 and woke up today, you wouldn't recognise the game as its played now. Especially down south. 

Am I just being xenaphobe, or does anyone else have worries similar to mine? If you do, what's changed that is driving you nuts? And does anyone else agree that this new handball rule is nuts? If so, can we get it changed? (I refer you back to my precedent comment).

I'm not sure how the new handball rules will pan out long term but if they had been in place last season Rangers wouldn't have been denied a penalty because of the wind. I think it was Clancy that told Goldson that no penalty was being awarded because the wind blew it onto the hand of the opposition player, even though it didn't look that way.

[72barca 1,788]

4 hours ago, Redwhiteandblue said:

Point being, if that was a different ref today, we don't get 2 penalties and they get 1. Guaranteed. It may have benefited us today, but I guarantee it won't over the course of a season. 

Whoever the referee was today he'll be relegated to division 2 matches only.

[GOAT 30,449]

Kamara’s was a penalty, the one with Helander was a blatant dive and he should have been booked for diving.  I love how no one mentions that btw.

[DrLaudrup 4,606]

The fact it’s already caused Motherwell and Michael Stewart to have meltdowns demanding immediate rule changes means it’s brilliant rule and should stay. Apparently the only penalty should have been against us. Walloper. 

[Leftpegcoopz11 4,746]

7 hours ago, Redwhiteandblue said:

I know we benefited from the new handball rules today, but I think we can all agree that the old rule was better. There was a reason why people without the benefit of tv replays put in that "it must be a deliberate handball" and that is because in real time, its only obvious to spot deliberate handballs.

The last deliberate handball I can remember was in the world cup game with Uruguay and (I want to say ivory coast?) an African team who played in white. The last before that was Whittaker (I think again) which I think still went in so he never got sent off (or was it Burke or Broadfoot??). And the last before then was when the ball was deliberately caught in the EPL when it was just as easy to score, I'm sure you all know who I'm talking about so won't darken this post with his name.

ANYWAY...point being, ITV's very very rare that there is a deliberate handball in the professional game and the ball does on many occasions ACCIDENTALY touch a players hand. Does this REALLY deserve a penalty against? And with this being Scotland, who do we think will suffer from this ridiculous rule the most? Especially this season. 

Have the "laws of the game" ever been changed mid-season before? I ask because it would obviously set a precedent and allow those of us who believe that the rule as it stands is bloody ridiculous. It seems that every season they feel some sort of need to change the laws of the game we all love. The game (refereeing-wise) is a different game from the one I grew up watching (fuck I sound old) its almost a non contact sport now. I wouldn't recognise the game our founders played and with the way things are going, I don't think I will recognise the game my grandchildren will grow up watching. 

 

All these little things like, the first touch of the ball must be forward (kick off) the ball must leave the penalty box from goal kicks all seem like small things at the time, but they add up. If you went into a coma in 1999 and woke up today, you wouldn't recognise the game as its played now. Especially down south. 

Am I just being xenaphobe, or does anyone else have worries similar to mine? If you do, what's changed that is driving you nuts? And does anyone else agree that this new handball rule is nuts? If so, can we get it changed? (I refer you back to my precedent comment).

You should have just said what Roy Hodgson said.. Would have saved you about 4 paragraphs and 500 sentences 

[soulboy 2,518]

Ginger pubes on sportscene said the 1st one wasnt a pen as the player was trying to get his hands back by his side. Well you twat that means it's a pen as your hands are away from your body.