An arm away from losing

[CANARYKING 708]

That offside was very, very close, need to up our game for Good Friday

[Fiery Zac 1,066]

Offside is offside, and it was his head as well as his arm.

Also never should have been a pen

[Ian 1,211]

Equally it was never a pen against Godfrey.

Would expect changes for Friday.

[JF 694]

Two big decisions, one right, one wrong. It was never a Penalty but credit to the linesman who could have easily missed the finest of margins for that offside 

[CanaryChris 147]

A tale of two arms?

Offside was a tight call. Penalty was a disastrous decision.

[Van wink 2,994]

Amazing that arms play such an important part in football

[westcoastcanary 173]

It was a penalty. Have none of you read the perfectly explicit recent clarification of the handball rule? There was a lot of discussion of it following the PSG v Man Utd game in the Champions League. Referee was well-placed to see exactly what happened and made the correct call.

Actually this was very similar to the PSG/Man U penalty. The ball struck Godfrey's leg and and diverted onto his outstretched arm. His arm was in a position such as to be outside normal body shape/outline while attempting to block the shot (which is precisely what the clarification of the rule is about). 

[westcoastcanary 173]

2 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Amazing that arms play such an important part in football

Not to mention heads VW -- including big ones, and cool ones etc. 

[JF 694]

4 minutes ago, westcoastcanary said:

It was a penalty. Have none of you read the perfectly explicit recent clarification of the handball rule? There was a lot of discussion of it following the PSG v Man Utd game in the Champions League. Referee was well-placed to see exactly what happened and made the correct call.

Actually this was very similar to the PSG/Man U penalty. The ball struck Godfrey's leg and and diverted onto his outstretched arm. His arm was in a position such as to be outside normal body shape/outline while attempting to block the shot (which is precisely what the clarification of the rule is about). 

Wrong...

[westcoastcanary 173]

Just now, JF said:

Wrong...

Go on then. 

[Van wink 2,994]

5 minutes ago, westcoastcanary said:

It was a penalty. Have none of you read the perfectly explicit recent clarification of the handball rule? There was a lot of discussion of it following the PSG v Man Utd game in the Champions League. Referee was well-placed to see exactly what happened and made the correct call.

Actually this was very similar to the PSG/Man U penalty. The ball struck Godfrey's leg and and diverted onto his outstretched arm. His arm was in a position such as to be outside normal body shape/outline while attempting to block the shot (which is precisely what the clarification of the rule is about). 

Not sure its a clarification, its a different interpretaion for Champions league

[Well b back 3,605]

6 minutes ago, westcoastcanary said:

It was a penalty. Have none of you read the perfectly explicit recent clarification of the handball rule? There was a lot of discussion of it following the PSG v Man Utd game in the Champions League. Referee was well-placed to see exactly what happened and made the correct call.

Actually this was very similar to the PSG/Man U penalty. The ball struck Godfrey's leg and and diverted onto his outstretched arm. His arm was in a position such as to be outside normal body shape/outline while attempting to block the shot (which is precisely what the clarification of the rule is about). 

I will stand to be corrected but I thought the clarification was that if the ball was on target and hit your arm penalty. Haven’t seen it yet as on coach but if it hit his leg first it could no longer be on target ?

[JF 694]

5 minutes ago, Well b back said:

I will stand to be corrected but I thought the clarification was that if the ball was on target and hit your arm penalty. Haven’t seen it yet as on coach but if it hit his leg first it could no longer be on target ?

I also believe that it’s just clarification for the champions league alone. Whatever way you look at it, it’s never a penalty. Sky said afterwards that next season the clarification is that isn’t a Penalty, Farkes reply was “well that doesn’t help us now”!

[westcoastcanary 173]

7 minutes ago, Well b back said:

I will stand to be corrected but I thought the clarification was that if the ball was on target and hit your arm penalty. Haven’t seen it yet as on coach but if it hit his leg first it could no longer be on target ?

No it was still heading towards the goal. The referee was perfectly in line to see the trajectory. But I'm not sure that matters; the shot itself was on target, and Godfrey dived in to try and block it, with his arm outstretched. The rule does not require a separate intention to use the hand/arm; only that the player's intention is to block the shot.

[JF 694]

Never a Penalty if Var was inplay. The referee only gives it because he sees it hits his hand, he doesn’t see the deflection off his leg

[westcoastcanary 173]

27 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Not sure its a clarification, its a different interpretaion for Champions league

The impression that it simply applies to the Champions League arose from the fact that the first explicit public mention of it was in the UEFA statement following the PSG/Man U match. But if you read that statement, it was actually confirming that the decision was in accordance with the protocol for the use of VAR in the Champions League. The bit about the handball itself is not part of the protocol except in so far as it is a rule of the game which VAR is intended to uphold. That's my understanding anyway.

Edited April 14, 2019 by westcoastcanary
Typo

[westcoastcanary 173]

5 minutes ago, JF said:

Never a Penalty if Var was inplay. The referee only gives it because he sees it hits his hand, he doesn’t see the deflection off his leg

How on earth do you know that JR? The referee was perfectly placed to see what happened.

[JF 694]

Just now, westcoastcanary said:

How on earth do you know that JR? The referee was perfectly placed to see what happened.

Because if he’s seen it hit his leg and deflected upwards onto his arm he wouldn’t have given it. Do you think the Cardiff one yesterday was a Penalty as well?

[Ian 1,211]

Law 12

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-12---fouls-and-misconduct

HANDLING THE BALL

Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm.

The following must be considered:

• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
• the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence

 

Is this law now out of date then, as it explicitly seems to refer to deliberate handball?

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

37 minutes ago, westcoastcanary said:

It was a penalty. Have none of you read the perfectly explicit recent clarification of the handball rule? There was a lot of discussion of it following the PSG v Man Utd game in the Champions League. Referee was well-placed to see exactly what happened and made the correct call.

Actually this was very similar to the PSG/Man U penalty. The ball struck Godfrey's leg and and diverted onto his outstretched arm. His arm was in a position such as to be outside normal body shape/outline while attempting to block the shot (which is precisely what the clarification of the rule is about). 

As far as I can see in the Man Utd case the ball was not deflected on to the PSG's player's arm, and so the Godfrey case is not very similar.

[JF 694]

West coast is literally the only person that thinks it’s a penalty 

[westcoastcanary 173]

Just now, JF said:

West coast is literally the only person that thinks it’s a penalty 

Wrong again JF! Me and the person whose judgement is the only one that matters -- the referee. But it's early days; plenty of time to hear from other witnesses 

[Surfer 1,547]

If the referee saw it - and he was right there only a few feet away - and if these two points still apply

• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)

Then it was not a penalty. However it was given, and there is nothing we can do about it. We just had to score 2 goals rather than the one. 

[westcoastcanary 173]

21 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

As far as I can see in the Man Utd case the ball was not deflected on to the PSG's player's arm, and so the Godfrey case is not very similar.

I've seen countless replays of it Purple, and IMO it did glance off his thigh.

Edited April 14, 2019 by westcoastcanary
Typo

[Ian 1,211]

Westcoast, please refer to the FA law that indicates it was a handball. My links are obviously out of date because it clearly refers to deliberate movement of hand to ball, and the "unexpected ball" according to distance of the ball from the man.

[westcoastcanary 173]

6 minutes ago, Surfer said:

If the referee saw it - and he was right there only a few feet away - and if these two points still apply

• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)

Then it was not a penalty. However it was given, and there is nothing we can do about it. We just had to score 2 goals rather than the one. 

On the contrary Surfer, those two points DO apply in this case, the first because Godfrey clearly dives in, arm outstretched, in an attempt to block the on-target shot, the second because it wasn't a case of the shot being such that Godfrey couldn't avoid inadvertently handling it. 

Edited April 14, 2019 by westcoastcanary

[westcoastcanary 173]

3 minutes ago, Ian said:

Westcoast, please refer to the FA law that indicates it was a handball. My links are obviously out of date because it clearly refers to deliberate movement of hand to ball, and the "unexpected ball" according to distance of the ball from the man.

See my reply to Surfer Ian. Just to repeat, there don't have to be TWO actions (1) e.g. diving in to try and block the shot with legs, head or body, and (2) additionally blocking it with your hand. If you go in to block the ball with your arm outstretched, as Godfrey did, that isall the intention needed, and all the "movement towards the ball" required. The rule doesn't require that you set out to punch the ball away or divert it with your hand. That's my understanding anyway. The ref knows the rules, and was perfectly positioned: he gave the penalty.

[Ian 1,211]

1 minute ago, westcoastcanary said:

See my reply to Surfer Ian. Just to repeat, there don't have to be TWO actions (1) e.g. diving in to try and block the shot with legs, head or body, and (2) additionally blocking it with your hand. If you go in to block the ball with your arm outstretched, as Godfrey did, that isall the intention needed, and all the "movement towards the ball" required. The rule doesn't require that you set out to punch the ball away or divert it with your hand. That's my understanding anyway. The ref knows the rules, and was perfectly positioned: he gave the penalty.

So to clarify, you believe it was a deliberate handball? 

[westcoastcanary 173]

1 minute ago, Ian said:

So to clarify, you believe it was a deliberate handball? 

Yes, by the rules. 

[JF 694]

How can anyone believe that Godfrey deliberately handled that ball. A ball hit from one metre away with venomous force that takes a deflection and changes trajectory onto his arm??