No doubt about it ...the current handball rule is a total farce.
Take a look at Sandy's complaints.....
1. Firsty it was not even a foul
**he right on that!
2. Carroll and at least one other were offside
***No, offside was checked first using VAR and everyone was marginally onside, very close I admit.
4. Dier was getting pushed when he went up for the ball
***** Yes that is true.
3. How are you supposed to stop the ball hitting you if you have your back to the ball.
***** Yes, Dier was facing the opposite direction and never saw the ball.
"So with all that in mind, the referee fecked up on everything, cowardly hiding behind the ridiculous VAR."
*** Sandy should explain what it is he thinks the referee can do about it?
**** Seems the Ref is forced to apply the silly rule.
Sandy goes on ......"There is no longer any enjoyment in football, knowing that every time a ball goes into the box, a penalty could be given for absolutely nothing."
******* Agree. Football will soon become a game of getting FKs awarded around the penalty area, and then kicking the ball into the box with the intention of getting it to strike a defender on the arm.
The current handball rule is absolute rubbish, we all agree on that.
For as long as I can remember handball and offside rules have been a pain in the ass.
Which is why they keep on getting changed!
NOW HERE'S THE QUESTION:
So...How would you change the current handball rule?
Write your own handball rules here......Please!
How Would You Change the HandBall Rule?
posted on 28/9/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 17 seconds ago
"then the attacking team has still been unfairly impacted because that shot could have led to a goal"
Why is it unfair if it hits the arm but not unfair if it hits him on the nose?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because football doesn't run on a basic principal that you cannot use your nose...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It doesn't (or didn't) run on the principle that the ball can't cannon off your hand either.
Forget the law for a minute and just stop to think.
What actual difference is there between me punting a ball at you, you not having time to react, and it hitting your arm vs your face?
In reality there's none.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because I'm allowed to "face" a ball whereas one of the basic principles of the modern game of football is that players cannot handle the ball.
posted on 28/9/20
It's never been a basic principle that the ball can't whack against the arm.
And as usual, you're failing to actually grasp the point.
Just try and open your mind up a little bit.
If you were starting from scratch and wanted to make the game 'fair' why would you create a law where if someone boots the ball at you, you're punished if it hits your arm but not your face?
What possible benefit does that do for the game?
posted on 28/9/20
Because it's been part of the laws of the game that players are not allowed to use any part of their arms/hands since basically the day football began?
Did you honestly disregard the laws of the game to try and prove a point?
Also agreeing on 90/100 decisions is still not best practice though because you'd want to agree on 100/100, that's one of the reasons why VAR was brought in so that the correct decisions could be reached. If you have too much subjectivity in a decision, how would you ever be "certain" the correct decision is made. There has to be a balance between subjectivity and a black and white rule. You can't have the extreme of "if it hits a players hands its a penalty" because practically that wouldn't work.
Hence why I've suggested, if the ball hits the arm/hand of the opposition player that gives a disadvantage to the opponent, then its a foul.
posted on 28/9/20
JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
Eh?
It's not part of the laws of the game that if someone boots the ball at you and it hits your arm, then it's a foul.
So I'm not disregarding anything. I'm asking you what the value of punishing people for that is. How does it improve the game?
"You can't have the extreme of "if it hits a players hands its a penalty" because practically that wouldn't work."
That is basically what we have now, though.
posted on 28/9/20
I didn't make the rules of football mate, you're about a century too late for that but if you really want to argue that point, write to the FA, UEFA and FIFA if you wish asking what value of punishing people for a ball hitting an arm over a nose is. You're, once again, arguing for the sake of arguing about something. Handball is illegal in football, that is FACT. I don't know why it was, I don't particularly care why it was, but it is.
No its not basically what we have because I'm pretty sure there were 2/3 other handball shouts during the Spurs - Newcastle game that were looked at and it was deemed not a foul, so we aren't anywhere near that actually.
posted on 28/9/20
JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
What are you going on about?
I was trying to have a decent conversation with you.
"if you wish asking what value of punishing people for a ball hitting an arm over a nose is."
But that isn't the rule and it never has been.
But that's where it's heading - that's my point. We're starting to punish people for the ball hitting their arm, with absolutely no intent.
I'm asking you to stop and ask yourself how that helps the game?
posted on 28/9/20
Winston I aren't even going to bother because it will soon become another classic 600 page article of you arguing the toss over absolutely anything and everything you can think. It's not worth my time.
Cue some backchat response about how you've won the argument because I haven't answered you back.
posted on 28/9/20
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 54 seconds ago
Winston I aren't even going to bother because it will soon become another classic 600 page article of you arguing the toss over absolutely anything and everything you can think. It's not worth my time.
Cue some backchat response about how you've won the argument because I haven't answered you back.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow.
Okay - I was genuinely just trying to have a decent debate.
Not sure why you became personal and insulting, and it's a long long time since any of those silly arguments that you reference.
Think you've got the wrong end of the stick. Shame.
posted on 28/9/20
There is nothing "decent" about asking me how the ball hitting someone's arm over their nose for whatever reason you said benefits the game, or whatever you were on about. You're literally referencing things that was not needed.
"Why can you block something with your nose and not your arm?" The most irrelevant thing to ever bring up because we are talking about how to improve the actual handball rule, not the principles of how that law does anything to the game. I literally cba going that far into it mate.
posted on 28/9/20
JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
I'm just trying to explain my view, that's all. Difficult to do on a forum sometimes, would be easier over a beer.
It's not irrelevant - perhaps I've just not explained myself very well. No need to get personal though.