How many times ..

[Badger 8,819]

Accidental handball rule needs changed. Its worked for us more often than not domestically by virtue of us having a lot of the ball and hitting a lot of crosses - but that handball today and a few we've won too - they're not fair, as player knew nothing about it nor did anything unreasonable.

Make accidental handball an indirect offence. Foul but indirect free kick.

[five stars 1,739]

I don't think the penalty rule is that complicated. All it requires is a bit of common sense and the intention to be as fair as possible.

If someone hits the ball off your arm from a few feet away and there's nothing you can do about it then it's not a penalty unless you're arm in an unusual position or you've intentionally made your body bigger by how you position your arms.

Colek's arm was in the normal position for jumping and he has his back to the ball.

 

[five stars 1,739]

59 minutes ago, GOAT said:

The laws a joke, it needs to be set in stone.  None of this open to interpretation pish.  Hits someones hand in the box unless hes defending himself its a penalty.  Should be that simple.

Terrible idea, players will then intentionally try and hit the ball off a defender's hand.

[superallysbears 7,844]

4 minutes ago, five stars said:

Terrible idea, players will then intentionally try and hit the ball off a defender's hand.

They are already doing that 🤣

[NeoGeo7 10,627]

2 hours ago, GOAT said:

It was a penalty though.  I know what people are going to say "whats he supposed to do" etc etc but its a penalty by the letter of the law.  I dont have any complaints about that, just the ridiculous amount of late tackles he let thistle away with was a joke, some he didnt even give us the foul for.  guys a wanker. 

So wasn’t the letter of the law that we get a penalty when their player had his arms round sands at the corner kick in  the second half?

VAR is never going to be consistently applied because of different officials on the park and different officials manning VAR but during the same game it’s not unreasonable to expect consistency.

[GOAT 30,449]

1 minute ago, NeoGeo7 said:

So wasn’t the letter of the law that we get a penalty when their player had his arms round sands at the corner kick in  the second half?

VAR is never going to be consistently applied because of different officials on the park and different officials manning VAR but during the same game it’s not unreasonable to expect consistency.

Your turning it into a different argument, I remember shouting about that incident.  Would like to see that back, but looked a penalty to me tbh, soft but still a penalty.  Pretty much a Mahe on Tony Vidmar type moment from what I could see and that was a penalty 24 years ago so why not now?

 

[NeoGeo7 10,627]

Just now, GOAT said:

Your turning it into a different argument, I remember shouting about that incident.  Would like to see that back, but looked a penalty to me tbh, soft but still a penalty.  Pretty much a Mahe on Tony Vidmar type moment from what I could see and that was a penalty 24 years ago so why not now?

 

All I’m saying is what the hell are the VAR team doing? You get a corner like that and there is a clear infringement on an attacking player and by the letter of the law that’s a penalty. They found Colak to have handled the ball so why not that sands was infringed.

Its the worst part of VAR, if the ref made real time decisions you accept (reluctantly) they’ll make mistakes but with VAR you can easily see what happened to ensure the right outcome so why can’t they get it right closer to 100% of the time?

[Straight-Edge-Loyal 6,696]

If that's a pen and it probably was the one that the thistle defender blocked from Kents effort should have been too.

 

 

[GOAT 30,449]

5 minutes ago, Straight-Edge-Loyal said:

If that's a pen and it probably was the one that the thistle defender blocked from Kents effort should have been too.

 

 

Pretty sure that was outside the box tbh.

[Straight-Edge-Loyal 6,696]

Just now, GOAT said:

Pretty sure that was outside the box tbh.

I thought it was in the box but either way it wasn't given as a free kick anyway 

[GOAT 30,449]

1 minute ago, Straight-Edge-Loyal said:

I thought it was in the box but either way it wasn't given as a free kick anyway 

I'm certain it was a good bit outside the box, otherwise IMO it would have been reviewed.  Would like to see it again mind you.

[.Williamson. 83,744]

Just now, GOAT said:

I'm certain it was a good bit outside the box, otherwise IMO it would have been reviewed.  Would like to see it again mind you.

It was inside the box 

[.Williamson. 83,744]

10 minutes ago, Straight-Edge-Loyal said:

If that's a pen and it probably was the one that the thistle defender blocked from Kents effort should have been too.

 

 

Wasn’t even remotely a penalty the one they got.

It’s an absolutely brain dead decision from the referee, as in he clearly was told to look at it and he switched his brain off and decided this must be a penalty because I have to look 

[GOAT 30,449]

Just now, .Williamson. said:

It was inside the box 

Well from my position it's a penalty, but again I've not seen enough of it to know where his hand position actually is.

[.Williamson. 83,744]

Just now, GOAT said:

Well from my position it's a penalty, but again I've not seen enough of it to know where his hand position actually is.

I think it would have been harsh but the one Colak had given against him was so far off being a penalty I think we should have given penalties randomly all day after it 

[.Williamson. 83,744]

I’m not even convinced Tillman is inside the box when contact is made for his penalty but sure it was penalties for all 

[GOAT 30,449]

 

1 minute ago, .Williamson. said:

I think it would have been harsh but the one Colak had given against him was so far off being a penalty I think we should have given penalties randomly all day after it 

It's not a penalty because you don't like and are ignoring the handball rule though, otherwise it's a penalty.  I hate it when I read people saying it's not a penalty because it is.  People should say it SHOULDN'T be penalty.  That I can sort of get, he has no chance of moving his hand out the way, infact he probably knows little about it by time it's hit off him and cleared away.

[.Williamson. 83,744]

Just now, GOAT said:

 

It's not a penalty because you don't like and are ignoring the handball rule though, otherwise it's a penalty.  I hate it when I read people saying it's not a penalty because it is.  People should say it SHOULDN'T be penalty.  That I can sort of get, he has no chance of moving his hand out the way, infact he probably knows little about it by time it's hit off him and cleared away.

Colak’s?

He is just coming down out of the air and the ball is hit against him from at best a yard away. You don’t come down out of a heading challenge with your arms straight by your side, not sure how he could have avoided it.

If you mean the Kent effort that struck their player I can’t remember much about arm positioning etc I just felt looking at it that it would be harsh 

[GOAT 30,449]

1 minute ago, .Williamson. said:

Colak’s?

He is just coming down out of the air and the ball is hit against him from at best a yard away. You don’t come down out of a heading challenge with your arms straight by your side, not sure how he could have avoided it.

If you mean the Kent effort that struck their player I can’t remember much about arm positioning etc I just felt looking at it that it would be harsh 

No colaks.  As I said it's a penalty, soft, but the law is it's a penalty.  Should it be a penalty is the real question here, the laws are a joke.

[LaaRFC 4,863]

There’s a really good angle of our pen that only got shown once after the game and it shows that Tillman was kicked outside of the box, however he is also having his sleeve pulled pretty much until he hits the deck. So for me the foul continued into the area based on the shirt pulling. So it’s a pen. 

[docspiderman 1,259]

Regardless of the right and wrongs of the decisions, what is wrong is that 2 out of 8 ties have VAR. For the famous sporting integrity it should really be all or none and allowing clubs to decide whether to have it in cup games or not is rediculous as is the fact that clubs gave to foot the bill.

[LaaRFC 4,863]

Tillmans left sleeve being pulled and his foots on the line = pen 

[.Williamson. 83,744]

7 minutes ago, GOAT said:

No colaks.  As I said it's a penalty, soft, but the law is it's a penalty.  Should it be a penalty is the real question here, the laws are a joke.

I don’t think anyone knows the current rules for handballs and I think that’s a real issue because it’s at a stage I don’t think referees know what they’re looking at on a screen anymore either 

[BlueboyG 5,311]

The VAR guys had plenty of opportunities to look at other things but chose not to, there was even a replay where one of their defenders had his arms wrapped around one of our players at a corner and threw him to the ground, nothing, then there was the melee in the box at Tillmans goal, why wasnt the keeper booked for the two handed push on Tillman, why did VAR not tell the ref to book him or review it.

[.Williamson. 83,744]

2 minutes ago, BlueboyG said:

The VAR guys had plenty of opportunities to look at other things but chose not to, there was even a replay where one of their defenders had his arms wrapped around one of our players at a corner and threw him to the ground, nothing, then there was the melee in the box at Tillmans goal, why wasnt the keeper booked for the two handed push on Tillman, why did VAR not tell the ref to book him or review it.

Nobody mentions the stamp on Tillmans ankle anymore that was literally moments before he took the ball and put it in their net.

Whole game was a comedy sketch