Guest firetotheworks Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 There is no way that is a pen Ball struck about 25mph from 1 yard away, arm in a normal position when jumping. Take his arm away and it'd of hit his torso anyway. Think people need reminding the rule is that handball must be deliberate. There is no way he deliberately moved his arm to stop the ball then. The 'natural sway of your arm' argument doesn't really work when you're diving in to block the ball. He makes a situation where his arm is out away from his body when he knows the ball is coming his way, it's his choice. He didn't deliberately stop the ball with his arm, so it's not a penalty. There is no way in that short distance with the ball travelling that fast he'd have the time to think and put his arm in front of the ball (also noting his arm was stationary throughout and didn't move towards the ball). There is no argument here, it's just simply not a penalty. no argument. From Graham Poll Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position. So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him? If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand. The rules are nowhere near as simple as you're making out like, otherwise there would literally never be a penalty given for handball. From the FA's website: http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct#WQQIIAOeJPSscHJY.99 Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. It was not deliberate. The following must be considered: - The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) There was absolutely zero movement of the hand towards the ball. - The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) There was about 2 yards between Colback and the ball when it was struck - The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Which means the position of Colback's arm is irrelevant - Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation - Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation Because "refs have given them before" doesn't make it a penalty, or mean it should even be discussed as one. Previous bad calls do not set a precedent to start giving penalties. The laws of the game in this situation are pretty clear, there is absolutely no reason to give a penalty in that situation. It's not even close to being a penalty. Christ almighty, so because the rules are as you interpret them, despite there being numerous examples of professional referees interpreting them differently to you, there's no argument and no discussion despite this being an argument and this being a discussion. Also known as the 'la la la not listening' method. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackyboy Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Monk said the penalty was a critical moment. He said the word critical in nearly every sentence. Choked him to give any praise to a far superior side who always seem to me to have plenty in hand if they need to step up a gear Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 There is no way that is a pen Ball struck about 25mph from 1 yard away, arm in a normal position when jumping. Take his arm away and it'd of hit his torso anyway. Think people need reminding the rule is that handball must be deliberate. There is no way he deliberately moved his arm to stop the ball then. The 'natural sway of your arm' argument doesn't really work when you're diving in to block the ball. He makes a situation where his arm is out away from his body when he knows the ball is coming his way, it's his choice. He didn't deliberately stop the ball with his arm, so it's not a penalty. There is no way in that short distance with the ball travelling that fast he'd have the time to think and put his arm in front of the ball (also noting his arm was stationary throughout and didn't move towards the ball). There is no argument here, it's just simply not a penalty. no argument. From Graham Poll Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position. So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him? If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand. The rules are nowhere near as simple as you're making out like, otherwise there would literally never be a penalty given for handball. From the FA's website: http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct#WQQIIAOeJPSscHJY.99 Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. It was not deliberate. The following must be considered: - The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) There was absolutely zero movement of the hand towards the ball. - The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) There was about 2 yards between Colback and the ball when it was struck - The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Which means the position of Colback's arm is irrelevant - Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation - Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation Because "refs have given them before" doesn't make it a penalty, or mean it should even be discussed as one. Previous bad calls do not set a precedent to start giving penalties. The laws of the game in this situation are pretty clear, there is absolutely no reason to give a penalty in that situation. It's not even close to being a penalty. Christ almighty, so because the rules are as you interpret them, despite there being numerous examples of professional referees interpreting them differently to you, there's no argument and no discussion despite this being an argument and this being a discussion. Also known as the 'la la la not listening' method. It's not how the rules are interpreted, it's how the rules are clearly written and enforced. We cant start changing the rules of the games because people decide Leeds should have had a penalty. What have I said above that is wrong? From the rules that we play to, what makes the decision even remotely debateable? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altamullan Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 The rules for hand ball, as kindly presented by Figures for our perusal, do seem pretty clear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyn davies Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Leeds were never at the races make you wonder how on earth they have managed to win the last 5 games Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeyt Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Leeds were never at the races make you wonder how on earth they have managed to win the last 5 games Playing worse teams than us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Yes, those handballs have been given, but 9/10 they are not. It's blatantly not a penalty, not even worth discussing. We would have won anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Not a pen. havent we been denied very obvious pens this season? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Leeds were never at the races make you wonder how on earth they have managed to win the last 5 games I can't see them making the play offs tbh, so it was understandable that Monk wanted to make the most of his 15 mins of fame I suppose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altamullan Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Our fans' comeback to the "Fuck all, you've never won..." Baiting, with "Fuck all, you'll never win, fuck all" does seem to the point re Leeds's current quality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawK Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Leeds were never at the races make you wonder how on earth they have managed to win the last 5 games We made them look bad. Remember how ordinary Brighton looked against us? But alongside us, they're currently taking this division at a canter as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
U2 Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Yeah, our high press killed any momentum Leeds could have before it begun. Coupled that with our superior ball retention, we utterly dominated the ball for the first 30 minutes. Fair enough, we got lucky to score, but we were never in danger of conceding and making the odd chance here and there. After the goal, we did the typical Rafa thing of shutting the game down and seeing it out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Willow Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Such a professional performance, everyone working hard and in the end making it look easy (apart from that period just before HT) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 There is no way that is a pen Ball struck about 25mph from 1 yard away, arm in a normal position when jumping. Take his arm away and it'd of hit his torso anyway. Think people need reminding the rule is that handball must be deliberate. There is no way he deliberately moved his arm to stop the ball then. The 'natural sway of your arm' argument doesn't really work when you're diving in to block the ball. He makes a situation where his arm is out away from his body when he knows the ball is coming his way, it's his choice. He didn't deliberately stop the ball with his arm, so it's not a penalty. There is no way in that short distance with the ball travelling that fast he'd have the time to think and put his arm in front of the ball (also noting his arm was stationary throughout and didn't move towards the ball). There is no argument here, it's just simply not a penalty. no argument. From Graham Poll Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position. So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him? If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand. The rules are nowhere near as simple as you're making out like, otherwise there would literally never be a penalty given for handball. From the FA's website: http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct#WQQIIAOeJPSscHJY.99 Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. It was not deliberate. The following must be considered: - The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) There was absolutely zero movement of the hand towards the ball. - The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) There was about 2 yards between Colback and the ball when it was struck - The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Which means the position of Colback's arm is irrelevant - Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation - Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation Because "refs have given them before" doesn't make it a penalty, or mean it should even be discussed as one. Previous bad calls do not set a precedent to start giving penalties. The laws of the game in this situation are pretty clear, there is absolutely no reason to give a penalty in that situation. It's not even close to being a penalty. Christ almighty, so because the rules are as you interpret them, despite there being numerous examples of professional referees interpreting them differently to you, there's no argument and no discussion despite this being an argument and this being a discussion. Also known as the 'la la la not listening' method. Aye, anyone who's followed football over the past 3 year or whatever it is since the rules were 'changed' would have seen that referees give penalties for non-deliberate handballs all the time and they're never punished or picked up on it. Only pundits and fans arguing about what or what isn't 'deliberate handball' as it's obviously not the literal definition. In the game we've just watched for example Hayden was given handball near the end for the ball bouncing up off his hand Talking about interpretation, I like Firgures' interpretation of "The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement", somehow taking it to mean "the position of [the] arm is irrelevant." I would personally say the position of Colback's hand was highly relevant tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 There is no way that is a pen Ball struck about 25mph from 1 yard away, arm in a normal position when jumping. Take his arm away and it'd of hit his torso anyway. Think people need reminding the rule is that handball must be deliberate. There is no way he deliberately moved his arm to stop the ball then. The 'natural sway of your arm' argument doesn't really work when you're diving in to block the ball. He makes a situation where his arm is out away from his body when he knows the ball is coming his way, it's his choice. He didn't deliberately stop the ball with his arm, so it's not a penalty. There is no way in that short distance with the ball travelling that fast he'd have the time to think and put his arm in front of the ball (also noting his arm was stationary throughout and didn't move towards the ball). There is no argument here, it's just simply not a penalty. no argument. From Graham Poll Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position. So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him? If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand. The rules are nowhere near as simple as you're making out like, otherwise there would literally never be a penalty given for handball. From the FA's website: http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct#WQQIIAOeJPSscHJY.99 Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. It was not deliberate. The following must be considered: - The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) There was absolutely zero movement of the hand towards the ball. - The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) There was about 2 yards between Colback and the ball when it was struck - The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Which means the position of Colback's arm is irrelevant - Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation - Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation Because "refs have given them before" doesn't make it a penalty, or mean it should even be discussed as one. Previous bad calls do not set a precedent to start giving penalties. The laws of the game in this situation are pretty clear, there is absolutely no reason to give a penalty in that situation. It's not even close to being a penalty. Christ almighty, so because the rules are as you interpret them, despite there being numerous examples of professional referees interpreting them differently to you, there's no argument and no discussion despite this being an argument and this being a discussion. Also known as the 'la la la not listening' method. It's not how the rules are interpreted, it's how the rules are clearly written and enforced. We cant start changing the rules of the games because people decide Leeds should have had a penalty. What have I said above that is wrong? From the rules that we play to, what makes the decision even remotely debateable? You haven't taken into account the fact that in practice decisions aren't made within a clearly written and enforceable way, they're made within the infinitely possible scenarios that occur in a match. If it was as black and white as you're making out there would never be any contentious decisions and everything would be consistent, but there are contentious decisions every week that are largely inconsistent, because it's not always as simple is this is a penalty and this is not, even the same referee won't always make the same decision twice in similar situations, (Colback no hand ball, Hayden hand ball today for example) and that's before taking referee errors into account. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Our fans' comeback to the "Fuck all, you've never won..." Baiting, with "Fuck all, you'll never win, fuck all" does seem to the point re Leeds's current quality. Both are stupid double negatives anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Hayden used his arm/hand to control the ball because he lost control of it ffs That is so different from the situation we observed with Colback. As for the rest of your post, I've already answered it several times and you're not understanding - it simply isn't handball in any situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Err, I am understanding. I just disagree, which you ironically cannot seem to understand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Hayden used his arm/hand to control the ball because he lost control of it ffs That is so different from the situation we observed with Colback. As for the rest of your post, I've already answered it several times and you're not understanding - it simply isn't handball in any situation. Quoted for posterity. You're being arrogant and ignorant tbh, not to mention patronising, but I'm sure there'll be no penalties given this season in similar situations to Colback's, so you've nothing to worry about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stottie Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Can't say I'd be too interested in Gary Monk's thoughts on anything tbh. I didn't see the interview but assuming there wasn't one, a question about how Shelvey played might have a decent wind up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 There is no way that is a pen Ball struck about 25mph from 1 yard away, arm in a normal position when jumping. Take his arm away and it'd of hit his torso anyway. Think people need reminding the rule is that handball must be deliberate. There is no way he deliberately moved his arm to stop the ball then. The 'natural sway of your arm' argument doesn't really work when you're diving in to block the ball. He makes a situation where his arm is out away from his body when he knows the ball is coming his way, it's his choice. He didn't deliberately stop the ball with his arm, so it's not a penalty. There is no way in that short distance with the ball travelling that fast he'd have the time to think and put his arm in front of the ball (also noting his arm was stationary throughout and didn't move towards the ball). There is no argument here, it's just simply not a penalty. no argument. From Graham Poll Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position. So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him? If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand. The rules are nowhere near as simple as you're making out like, otherwise there would literally never be a penalty given for handball. From the FA's website: http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct#WQQIIAOeJPSscHJY.99 Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. It was not deliberate. The following must be considered: - The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) There was absolutely zero movement of the hand towards the ball. - The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) There was about 2 yards between Colback and the ball when it was struck - The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Which means the position of Colback's arm is irrelevant - Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation - Hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement Doesn't apply in this situation Because "refs have given them before" doesn't make it a penalty, or mean it should even be discussed as one. Previous bad calls do not set a precedent to start giving penalties. The laws of the game in this situation are pretty clear, there is absolutely no reason to give a penalty in that situation. It's not even close to being a penalty. Christ almighty, so because the rules are as you interpret them, despite there being numerous examples of professional referees interpreting them differently to you, there's no argument and no discussion despite this being an argument and this being a discussion. Also known as the 'la la la not listening' method. You are wrong KI. It wasn't a penalty, simple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Hayden used his arm/hand to control the ball because he lost control of it ffs That is so different from the situation we observed with Colback. As for the rest of your post, I've already answered it several times and you're not understanding - it simply isn't handball in any situation. Quoted for posterity. You're being arrogant and ignorant tbh, not to mention patronising, but I'm sure there'll be no penalties given this season in similar situations to Colback's, so you've nothing to worry about. Even if penalties are given in the exact same situation, it makes no difference - it still isn't a penalty and would just be an incorrect decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Just seen the result, fucking hell we're absolutely pissing this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HaydnNUFC Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 Hayden used his arm/hand to control the ball because he lost control of it ffs That is so different from the situation we observed with Colback. As for the rest of your post, I've already answered it several times and you're not understanding - it simply isn't handball in any situation. Quoted for posterity. You're being arrogant and ignorant tbh, not to mention patronising, but I'm sure there'll be no penalties given this season in similar situations to Colback's, so you've nothing to worry about. Even if penalties are given in the exact same situation, it makes no difference - it still isn't a penalty and would just be an incorrect decision. You are right. The law says it wasn't a pen. I hate this, "I've seen them given", bullshit. It was as much a pen as the second goal was offside. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now