TeaCider
Well-known member
We invented the game, it's a holdover from that.
Newcastle penalty...
- Thread starter ChrisTheRed
- Start date
We invented the game, it's a holdover from that.
Tryasize10
Well-known member
What I don't get, is that if the new law (is it a law or an interpretation of the law, or a initiative) is how it is, then why in both the instance of the decision against Spurs and Palace did "Stockley Park" refer it back to the ref on the pitch?
The ball clearly struck the arm / hand in both instances so surely SP should have made the decision and taken it out if the referees hands?
The ball clearly struck the arm / hand in both instances so surely SP should have made the decision and taken it out if the referees hands?
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Thanks for posting the link but doesn’t it say on there that former referees are on the panel or have I misread?
DCI_Gene_Hunt
Well-known member
But your post was worded so that you were saying current referees had the way with all to change the rules
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Hey I’m only putting a personal opinion on a football forum.I was assuming the current refs do have influence but only in the sense that they are part of the refereeing fraternity. I based this on the telly commentators mentioning ex refs being in charge when complaining about VAR decisions. I may be wrong in that but I would be amazed if they weren’t in the loop somewhere. If they aren‘t then the game is in even more of a mess than I thought. Are you a ref? If so, what is the situation.
DCI_Gene_Hunt
Well-known member
I'm certainly not a ref
And I wasn't having a dig at you but just responding to the thread, if it came across that way it certainly wasn't meant to be.
I was pointing out that your comment that "refs as a collective body to sort out their own mess." (which was clearly referring to Premier League refs) was impossible as it is up to IFAB to manage the rules of the game and that Premier League refs alone couldn't resolve the issue.
IFAB is a global organisation and meets once a year to consider possible rule changes so it is not going to change anything in the short term just because the Premier League is having to come in line with how everyone else does things.
There was an interesting stat on MOTD2 the other day that showed the amount of penalties awarded in the previous season for handball was something like 50 in Spain and Italy and single figures in the Premier League ( I can't remember the numbers exactly). The amount of penalties awarded so far this season for handball will now be similar to the other European leagues assuming the trend continues.
FIFA are on a mission to ensure the game is refereed equally hence their directive that the rule is applied the same throughout the leagues.
HolgateCorner
Well-known member
Yes see what you are saying, thanks for clarifying, I would be interested to know how much discussion and consultation goes on, or if, as you infer, it is a very top down ‘you will do this’ type approach. If there is no consultation and debate with the domestic refs then it’s scandalous.I'm certainly not a ref
And I wasn't having a dig at you but just responding to the thread, if it came across that way it certainly wasn't meant to be.
I was pointing out that your comment that "refs as a collective body to sort out their own mess." (which was clearly referring to Premier League refs) was impossible as it is up to IFAB to manage the rules of the game and that Premier League refs alone couldn't resolve the issue.
IFAB is a global organisation and meets once a year to consider possible rule changes so it is not going to change anything in the short term just because the Premier League is having to come in line with how everyone else does things.
There was an interesting stat on MOTD2 the other day that showed the amount of penalties awarded in the previous season for handball was something like 50 in Spain and Italy and single figures in the Premier League ( I can't remember the numbers exactly). The amount of penalties awarded so far this season for handball will now be similar to the other European leagues assuming the trend continues.
FIFA are on a mission to ensure the game is refereed equally hence their directive that the rule is applied the same throughout the leagues.
DCI_Gene_Hunt
Well-known member
FIFA were very much in the "you will do this" at the start of the season but maybe this morning there's some kick back? Be interesting to see how FIFA respond.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...-more-lenient-in-handball-decisions-bpn3lrt8l
This rule will change the way teams attack now and people will play to win penalties off the hand. Why wouldn't you as a penalty almost always leads to a goal.
I played a bit of hockey in the past, and when you're in the box and you havent got a clear chance of a goal you hit the ball off a players foot and win a penalty (the defender has to protect their feet but once off balance the opportunity arises easy enough). The only difference here is players have to have their hands away from the body- which once off balance the opportunity is fairly easy to create. It's much easier to create a penalty I think than it is to have to create a goal in many situations.
I played a bit of hockey in the past, and when you're in the box and you havent got a clear chance of a goal you hit the ball off a players foot and win a penalty (the defender has to protect their feet but once off balance the opportunity arises easy enough). The only difference here is players have to have their hands away from the body- which once off balance the opportunity is fairly easy to create. It's much easier to create a penalty I think than it is to have to create a goal in many situations.
No they won't, and I explained why earlier:
Anyone suggesting strikers or players crossing the ball will aim for a players hand, rather than aiming for their target is being silly.
It's hard enough to hit the target, or pick out a man, what chance do they have of hitting someone's hand versus losing the ball?
I can just see it now:
Manager: "You squared the ball to four of their defenders and keeper, rather than trying to cut it back to your striker?"
Crosser: "I was trying to kick it at the defenders hand guv"
Manager: "But it's a an area 1/3rd of the ball size, 10 yards away from you?"
Striker: "You can't hit a barn door lad, never mind some guys arm"
Manager: "Sub, get warmed up and show this to$$er how to play football"
Crosser: "But gov...."
Manager: "It's the 5th time you've done it lad, and you missed each one, and they scored three counter attacks from it"
Fan1: "that crosser is ****, he's not picked his man out all day"
Fan2: "maybe he was trying to hit the defenders hand?"
Fan1: "don't be so f-ing stupid"
You obviously didn't play a lot of hockey, and not to any sort of high standard. Trying to win a short (penalty corner) isn't really something the pro's do, but it does happen a lot in regional/ local/ school hockey where attackers and defenders don't have much skill or control to beat a man conventionally.
But hockey is also not like football, hockey players are not hitting the ball at a player 10 feet away trying to hit their feet, and just because it does hit the foot doesn't mean it's automatically a short corner. It should only be a short if the defender is gaining an advantage, so not if the ball was going out, or going to another defender etc (although in most cases they have gained an advantage so is given as a short, or incorrectly given as a short when there was no advantage (bad umpiring), often caused by players not knowing the rules either).
The most common method of trying to win a short is not by striking/ crossing the ball, it's normally turning/ pushing the ball into a players foot, with a push/ under control, but the odds of this being successful are quite high, as the ball is on the ground and so is the defenders foot, and the attacker can try and win a short without really risking losing possession. Equally the rest of shorts are caused by a defender messing up, or a striker messing up and getting lucky.
With football, if a player is one on one, they're not going to hook the ball up from floor level to hand level, to try and win a penalty, so it can only really come from a cross (when in possession), which then relies on extreme accuracy (beyond what a player is typically capable of) and is massive risk of loosing the ball.
In other words it's something you would take, as a striker, but it's certainly not something you're going to try and win, not if you're smart anyway, as the risk of losing the ball and being countered far exceeds the gain of winning a penalty.
Yes, teams might try and cross more as there's a better chance of winning a pen, but how many crosses hit a hand, 1 in 50? How may of those were given before? 1 in 2? How many would be given now? 2 in 3? That's a change from 1% success rate, to 1.33% success rate. Teams won't risk losing the ball for a 0.33% gain on a cross, which may then lead to a pen which is not a guaranteed goal.
Rofesleg
Well-known member
So you think 60% of interceptions in a teams own box will result in a goal via a counter attack? That sort of puts everything else you so confidently talk about in perspective. Also you just made your 1% v 1.33% figures up. And don't forget the controversial penalties have not been the result of crosses from 10 yards away. They are from much closer. Which is why they are controversial. Well within the capabilites of a skilled professional footballer to take advantage of.
No, I don't. It was a light hearted example, which went over your head, obviously.
Again, it was an example, based on 1 in 50 crosses hitting a hand (plucked from the air), and 1 in 2 of those 1 in 50, is effectively where the 1% came from, as the probability is the same. 2/3 of 1 in 50 is 2/3 of 2%, so 1.33%. Hence the 0.33% difference.
But, putting a little thought into it, to help you out:
The mid table side in the premiership last year had 700 crosses, that's about 18 per game. So if you say two sides per game then that's 36 crosses per game, and there isn't a hand ball penalty every game, probably not even every 2.5 games. So the probability difference could even be half of my extremely basic example.
Then how many of those hand balls would not even be in the box? Half again? You could be near 1 in 200!
I was on about any cross, players 10 yards away could be the average, so to speak.
You seriously think an attacker has the ability to hit a moving arm/ hand target, with a lesser sized area than the ball, when he can't predict the players direction, movement or hand movements? Jesus, even if the target was not moving and from a dead ball he probably wouldn't hit it 20% of the time from 5 yards, never mind 10 yards. Hitting the hand from 5 or 10 yards when both players, the hands and ball are moving is luck, every single time.
Like I keep saying, the probability of getting something has increased, marginally, but you're risking losing the ball a hell of a lot more, to try and gain something that practically doesn't exist (ie it's a stupid idea). It's like trying to win an extra finger by risking your arms.
Last edited: