On 2023-06-07 14:10, MH wrote:
> On 2023-06-07 10:51, Real Mardin wrote:
>> Fortuna Arena, Prague. Kickoff 8pm GMT, 9PM CET.
>>
>> It's the 1960/61 European Cup Winners' Cup winners against the 1964/65
>> European Cup Winners' Cup and 1999 Intertoto Cup winners.
>>
>> I know this competition is in its infancy but so far it's not
>> delivering finals featuring the sort of third tier sides the
>> tournament was supposed to benefit. Given their collective European
>> experience and wealth (particularly considering West Ham sleep under
>> the money tree that is the Premier League), these feel like two Europa
>> League level teams to me. The odd thing is the two stadiums used for
>> the finals so far have a distinct third tier feel to them - last
>> year's venue the Air Albania Stadium in Tirana has a capacity of 22500
>> and tonight's venue holds 19370 - but something about the structure of
>> the tournament seems to be preventing the third tier sides from
>> getting through. Alas, my dreams of a HJK Helsinki v FK Sarajevo final
>> will have to wait until another year.
>>
>> Early reports are there has been trouble in Prague with Fiorentina
>> fans allegedly attacking West Ham fans and dozens of arrests.
>>
>> RM
>
> Bit of an ill tempered match so far.  Fiorentina players flopping all
> over the place early on, with very little contact. West Ham players let
> that and the fact they were being outplayed get under their skin and
> they have been pretty poor so far.  Lots of gesticulation and a few bad
> tempered challenges.
>
> Fans have been misbehaving at the West Ham end. Throwing plastic glasses
> at players taking corners.  Resulted in  cut to Biraghi ?  who was
> bleeding profusely from the back of his head.  I wonder will that result
> in the match being replayed if West Ham win (unlikely as that seems at
> this stage).  There is precedent - Celtic- Austria Wien in the mid 80s
> for instance. Also Real Madrid Inter the same year.  Funnily enough the
> decisions were different in the  two cases.

Wrong Wien - it was Rapid, who ended up going all the way to the final.
However, Everton gave them no chance in the final and won comfortably.
That was a very good Everton side who came close to a treble of sorts
(lost FA cup final to Man united), winning the league while using an
astonishingly small number of players (even for those days). Very
consistent and well integrated line-up.

I'd disagree. West Ham is at least a third-tier English side at this point.

If you really want a third-tier Euro competition of that ilk, you keep the big Euro leagues out of it.

Mike

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 1:30:22 PM UTC-7, Real Mardin wrote:
> 62 minutes - West Ham take the lead with a VAR handball penalty smashed away by Benrahma. The sort of decision I can't understand - accidental handball by Biraghi as he ran to chase a loose ball - I know "accidental" isn't part of the test anymore but the body being in an unnatural position is. In the context of the player running toward the ball, an outstretched arm is surely a natural body position?

Irrelevant. The hand actually pushes the ball away from a massive scoring chance. You not only call the penalty there, but that's a card of some color.

Mike

On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 7:42:32 PM UTC+1, Michael Falkner wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 1:30:22 PM UTC-7, Real Mardin wrote:
> > 62 minutes - West Ham take the lead with a VAR handball penalty smashed away by Benrahma. The sort of decision I can't understand - accidental handball by Biraghi as he ran to chase a loose ball - I know "accidental" isn't part of the test anymore but the body being in an unnatural position is. In the context of the player running toward the ball, an outstretched arm is surely a natural body position?
> Irrelevant. The hand actually pushes the ball away from a massive scoring chance. You not only call the penalty there, but that's a card of some color.

It's not irrelevant, it's the rules of the game:

https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#direct-free-kick

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Handling the ball

For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. **Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence.**

It is an offence if a player:

deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball

**touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger**. **A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation.** By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised

scores in the opponents’ goal:

directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. However, if the offence is playing the ball a second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offence stops a promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You'll see from the above that an "accidental" handball is only an offence where the player has made their body unnaturally bigger. Where the position of the hand is a consequence of the player's body movement in a particular situation, there is no offence.

In the position being debated, Biraghi's arm was in the position it was in as he was running toward the loose ball, hence it was a consequence of his body movement in that particular situation and the penalty shouldn't have been given.

RM

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:02:16 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:49:27 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:28:12 PM UTC+2, Blueshirt wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, the VAR call was right by the law as it stands, the hand clearly
> > > > moved the ball... but that law around unintentional hand ball isn't
> > > > really fair and it needs to be changed.
> > >
> > > I have absolutely no qualms regarding the penalty. The ball was in front of Biraghi and
> > > if he hadn't punched it out of the air....
> >
> > He didn't "punch" the ball, his hand and the ball collided as he ran toward it.
> Which had what effect on the ball? Something like being punched?
> > Obviously as a defender he has to run toward the ball, that's his job.
> >
> > > It's Biraghi's job as a professional defender to know where the ball is and where his hands
> > > are, not the referee's job to read Biraghi's mind to see whether he handled it unintentionally.
> >
> > No, but the referee is supposed to make a determination as to whether Biraghi's body was in an unnatural position and at the risk of sounding like a broken record
> > in the context of a player running I don't see how you can say his body was in an unnatural position.
> >
> > We can agree to disagree about the decision, but I hope we can all agree the current handball rules are nonsense and need reforming.
> What reforms would you suggest?

I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a judgement as to whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.

Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:

1) Player picks up the ball

2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.

3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.

4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.

Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if accidental that should be an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.

RM

On 2023-06-07 16:20, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:02:16 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
>> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:49:27 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:28:12 PM UTC+2, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, the VAR call was right by the law as it stands, the hand clearly
>>>> moved the ball... but that law around unintentional hand ball isn't
>>>> really fair and it needs to be changed.
>>>
>>> I have absolutely no qualms regarding the penalty. The ball was in front of Biraghi and
>>> if he hadn't punched it out of the air....
>>
>> He didn't "punch" the ball, his hand and the ball collided as he ran toward it.
>
> Which had what effect on the ball? Something like being punched?
>
>> Obviously as a defender he has to run toward the ball, that's his job.
>>
>>> It's Biraghi's job as a professional defender to know where the ball is and where his hands
>>> are, not the referee's job to read Biraghi's mind to see whether he handled it unintentionally.
>>
>> No, but the referee is supposed to make a determination as to whether Biraghi's body was in an unnatural position and at the risk of sounding like a broken record
>> in the context of a player running I don't see how you can say his body was in an unnatural position.
>>
>> We can agree to disagree about the decision, but I hope we can all agree the current handball rules are nonsense and need reforming.
>
> What reforms would you suggest?

What about taking consequences into consideration? If the effect of
contact of hand/arm with the ball (whether apparently intentional or
not) is to:
1. Bring the ball under the control of the defender or his team-mates
2. Deflect a pass or shot that was plausibly going towards the goal or a
team mate. so that it does not reach its intended goal.
3. Cause the team previously in possession of the ball (attacking team
if you will) to lose possession or forgo a legitimate chance of
keeping/regaining possession.
Then it should be penalized (no matter where it happens on the pitch).

>
> I can tell you what I don't want to see - players flailing their arms around willy-nilly, safe in the knowledge they'll have plausible
> deniability if they can claim that they didn't aim for the ball - e.g. on occasion of a free-kick a player in the wall facing away from the ball,
> but raising his arms as high as he can.
>
> So how would you phrase a handball rule that encompasses that? Ideally without recurring to 'intent' and so necessitating mind-reading
> powers on part of the referees? And we all know if there's a loophole in the rules, savvy players will find it.
>
> My suggestion that I've already repeated a couple of times here would be to punish *all* handballs where the ball has travelled
> more than 9.15m/10 yards (distance between free-kick location and wall), before hitting an arm - something that VAR could determine -
> which should leave enough time for any defender to get his extremities out of the way, and punish only the most egregious
> cases when the distance is less. But that's just a first thought.
>
>
> Ciao,
> Werner

On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 3:02:50 PM UTC-7, Real Mardin wrote:

> I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a judgement as to whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
>
> Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
>
> 1) Player picks up the ball
>
> 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
>
> 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
>
> 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net..

Problem is, under #3, I still think you call this handball. Otherwise you have a real problem determining intent.

Mike

On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> What reforms would you suggest?

I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:47:08 AM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > What reforms would you suggest?
> I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.

A better solution is to award direct FKs from the spot of the handball (or foul for that matter). The only handballs and fouls that result in PKs should be the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity (i.e. what is currently a red card).

Giving a team a 75-80% chance of scoring because of a minor infringement in the far reaches of the penalty area seems like cruel and unusual punishment. It sounds like something an Englishman with a handlebar mustache thought of in 1863 and no one has had the common sense to challenge it since.

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 5:27:21 PM UTC+1, Al Kamista wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:47:08 AM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.
> A better solution is to award direct FKs from the spot of the handball (or foul for that matter). The only handballs and fouls that result in PKs should be the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity (i.e. what is currently a red card).
>
> Giving a team a 75-80% chance of scoring because of a minor infringement in the far reaches of the penalty area seems like cruel and unusual punishment. It sounds like something an Englishman with a handlebar mustache thought of in 1863 and no one has had the common sense to challenge it since.

Agreed, implementing this would be progress in my view. Never really understood why an accidental handball just inside the penalty area while numerous defenders are behind the ball should result in a chance to score one on one against the keeper.

RM

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 11:42:35 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 5:27:21 PM UTC+1, Al Kamista wrote:
> > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:47:08 AM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > > I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.
> > A better solution is to award direct FKs from the spot of the handball (or foul for that matter). The only handballs and fouls that result in PKs should be the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity (i.e. what is
> > currently a red card).
> >
> > Giving a team a 75-80% chance of scoring because of a minor infringement in the far reaches of the penalty area seems like cruel and unusual punishment. It sounds like something an Englishman with a
> > handlebar mustache thought of in 1863 and no one has had the common sense to challenge it since.
>
> Agreed, implementing this would be progress in my view. Never really understood why an accidental handball just inside the penalty area while numerous defenders are behind the ball should result in a chance to
> score one on one against the keeper.

You could ask the very same question for any foul that's not DOGSO.

Ciao,
Werner

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 6:27:21 PM UTC+2, Al Kamista wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:47:08 AM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.
> A better solution is to award direct FKs from the spot of the handball (or foul for that matter). The only handballs and fouls that result in PKs should be the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity (i.e. what is currently a red card).
>
> Giving a team a 75-80% chance of scoring because of a minor infringement in the far reaches of the penalty area seems like cruel and unusual punishment. It sounds like something an Englishman with a handlebar
> mustache thought of in 1863

Northern Irishman, and 1890. You're quite correct about the moustache.
https://epicchq.com/story/william-mccrum-the-irish-inventor-of-the-penalty-kick/

> and no one has had the common sense to challenge it since.

The English came around because of a proto-Suárez.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Hendry_(footballer,_born_1867)

Ciao,
Werner

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 4:47:08 PM UTC+2, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > What reforms would you suggest?
>
> I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.

I daresay they already are. I do feel that for some reason it's much more often a defender than an attacker that's 'unintentionally' handling a ball in the box.

Ciao,
Werner

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:02:16 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:49:27 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:28:12 PM UTC+2, Blueshirt wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, the VAR call was right by the law as it stands, the hand clearly
> > > > > moved the ball... but that law around unintentional hand ball isn't
> > > > > really fair and it needs to be changed.
> > > >
> > > > I have absolutely no qualms regarding the penalty. The ball was in front of Biraghi and
> > > > if he hadn't punched it out of the air....
> > >
> > > He didn't "punch" the ball, his hand and the ball collided as he ran toward it.
> > Which had what effect on the ball? Something like being punched?
> > > Obviously as a defender he has to run toward the ball, that's his job..
> > >
> > > > It's Biraghi's job as a professional defender to know where the ball is and where his hands
> > > > are, not the referee's job to read Biraghi's mind to see whether he handled it unintentionally.
> > >
> > > No, but the referee is supposed to make a determination as to whether Biraghi's body was in an unnatural position and at the risk of sounding like a broken record
> > > in the context of a player running I don't see how you can say his body was in an unnatural position.
> > >
> > > We can agree to disagree about the decision, but I hope we can all agree the current handball rules are nonsense and need reforming.
>
> > What reforms would you suggest?
>
> I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a
> judgement as to whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of
> ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
>
> Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
>
> 1) Player picks up the ball
>
> 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
>
> 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
>
> 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net..
>
> Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if
> accidental that should be an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.

I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not 'deliberately' handling it,
should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your above suggestions would that be forbidden.

Ciao,
Werner

On 2023-06-09 15:42, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 5:27:21 PM UTC+1, Al Kamista wrote:
>> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:47:08 AM UTC-4, Futbolmetrix wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
>>>> What reforms would you suggest?
>>> I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.
>> A better solution is to award direct FKs from the spot of the handball (or foul for that matter). The only handballs and fouls that result in PKs should be the denial of a clear goalscoring opportunity (i.e. what is currently a red card).
>>
>> Giving a team a 75-80% chance of scoring because of a minor infringement in the far reaches of the penalty area seems like cruel and unusual punishment. It sounds like something an Englishman with a handlebar mustache thought of in 1863 and no one has had the common sense to challenge it since.
>
> Agreed, implementing this would be progress in my view. Never really understood why an accidental handball just inside the penalty area while numerous defenders are behind the ball should result in a chance to score one on one against the keeper.

One of many rules in sports that do not really make sense. Baseball
still has quite a few oddities, some of which have a purpose (infield
fly rule) and others which don't (the whole foul tip business and the
different treatment of that on a third strike). Rugby does as well -
although they have tried to fix the scoring to give more weight to tries
over the years, it makes no sense to me that a penalty is worth the same
as a dropped goal, given that the latter is much harder to execute. They
should band kicking tees, in my view. And the whole 50-22 rule (quite
new) is not logical at all.
>
> RM

On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 4:39:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:02:16 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:49:27 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:28:12 PM UTC+2, Blueshirt wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, the VAR call was right by the law as it stands, the hand clearly
> > > > > > moved the ball... but that law around unintentional hand ball isn't
> > > > > > really fair and it needs to be changed.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have absolutely no qualms regarding the penalty. The ball was in front of Biraghi and
> > > > > if he hadn't punched it out of the air....
> > > >
> > > > He didn't "punch" the ball, his hand and the ball collided as he ran toward it.
> > > Which had what effect on the ball? Something like being punched?
> > > > Obviously as a defender he has to run toward the ball, that's his job.
> > > >
> > > > > It's Biraghi's job as a professional defender to know where the ball is and where his hands
> > > > > are, not the referee's job to read Biraghi's mind to see whether he handled it unintentionally.
> > > >
> > > > No, but the referee is supposed to make a determination as to whether Biraghi's body was in an unnatural position and at the risk of sounding like a broken record
> > > > in the context of a player running I don't see how you can say his body was in an unnatural position.
> > > >
> > > > We can agree to disagree about the decision, but I hope we can all agree the current handball rules are nonsense and need reforming.
> >
> > > What reforms would you suggest?
> >
> > I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a
> > judgement as to whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of
> > ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
> >
> > Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
> >
> > 1) Player picks up the ball
> >
> > 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
> >
> > 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
> >
> > 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.
> >
> > Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if
> > accidental that should be an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.
> I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not 'deliberately' handling it,
> should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your above suggestions would that be forbidden.
>
> Ciao,
> Werner

In that instance the ref would have to watch the replay and make a judgment call as to whether the position of the hand was deliberate. I guess it would depend what position the hands were raised in. If someone turns away from the ball I don't really know why their hands would be raised in front of them so I guess I'd call that as deliberate and give the handball, but it depends on the video.

RM

On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 6:54:49 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 4:39:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:02:16 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:49:27 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:28:12 PM UTC+2, Blueshirt wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yeah, the VAR call was right by the law as it stands, the hand clearly
> > > > > > > moved the ball... but that law around unintentional hand ball isn't
> > > > > > > really fair and it needs to be changed.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have absolutely no qualms regarding the penalty. The ball was in front of Biraghi and
> > > > > > if he hadn't punched it out of the air....
> > > > >
> > > > > He didn't "punch" the ball, his hand and the ball collided as he ran toward it.
> > > > Which had what effect on the ball? Something like being punched?
> > > > > Obviously as a defender he has to run toward the ball, that's his job.
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's Biraghi's job as a professional defender to know where the ball is and where his hands
> > > > > > are, not the referee's job to read Biraghi's mind to see whether he handled it unintentionally.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, but the referee is supposed to make a determination as to whether Biraghi's body was in an unnatural position and at the risk of sounding like a broken record
> > > > > in the context of a player running I don't see how you can say his body was in an unnatural position.
> > > > >
> > > > > We can agree to disagree about the decision, but I hope we can all agree the current handball rules are nonsense and need reforming.
> > >
> > > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > >
> > > I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a
> > > judgement as to whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of
> > > ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
> > >
> > > Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
> > >
> > > 1) Player picks up the ball
> > >
> > > 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
> > >
> > > 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
> > >
> > > 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.
> > >
> > > Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if
> > > accidental that should be an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.
> > I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not 'deliberately' handling it,
> > should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your above suggestions would that be forbidden.
> >
> > Ciao,
> > Werner
>
> In that instance the ref would have to watch the replay and make a judgment call as to whether the position of the hand was
> deliberate. I guess it would depend what position the hands were raised in. If someone turns away from the ball I don't really
> know why their hands would be raised in front of them

To increase the chances of blocking the ball.

> so I guess I'd call that as deliberate and give the handball, but it depends on the video.

So the referee would need to make a judgement call depending on whether he thinks it was a deliberate movement?
Where's the difference to the rule as it is?

Ciao,
Werner

On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 11:37:17 AM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 4:47:08 PM UTC+2, Futbolmetrix wrote:
> > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 6:21:01 PM UTC-4, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > What reforms would you suggest?
> >
> > I'm OK with going back to the referees doing mind reading. And if some players are really good at flailing their arms and make it look unintentional, good for them.
> I daresay they already are. I do feel that for some reason it's much more often a defender than an attacker that's 'unintentionally' handling a ball in the box.

But that's just part of the dynamics of the game, no? Most of the time an attacker strikes the ball in the direction of the goal, and the defender will generally try to place himself between the ball and the goal. On the other hand, defenders will generally try to strike the ball away from the goal and away from the attacker.

Under the current interpretation of the rules, defenders don't benefit at all from flailing their hands around, and in fact are penalized far too often for completely natural movements.

On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 12:04:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 6:54:49 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 4:39:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, June 8, 2023 at 12:02:16 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 10:49:27 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:28:12 PM UTC+2, Blueshirt wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yeah, the VAR call was right by the law as it stands, the hand clearly
> > > > > > > > moved the ball... but that law around unintentional hand ball isn't
> > > > > > > > really fair and it needs to be changed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have absolutely no qualms regarding the penalty. The ball was in front of Biraghi and
> > > > > > > if he hadn't punched it out of the air....
> > > > > >
> > > > > > He didn't "punch" the ball, his hand and the ball collided as he ran toward it.
> > > > > Which had what effect on the ball? Something like being punched?
> > > > > > Obviously as a defender he has to run toward the ball, that's his job.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > It's Biraghi's job as a professional defender to know where the ball is and where his hands
> > > > > > > are, not the referee's job to read Biraghi's mind to see whether he handled it unintentionally.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, but the referee is supposed to make a determination as to whether Biraghi's body was in an unnatural position and at the risk of sounding like a broken record
> > > > > > in the context of a player running I don't see how you can say his body was in an unnatural position.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We can agree to disagree about the decision, but I hope we can all agree the current handball rules are nonsense and need reforming.
> > > >
> > > > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > > >
> > > > I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a
> > > > judgement as to whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of
> > > > ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
> > > >
> > > > Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
> > > >
> > > > 1) Player picks up the ball
> > > >
> > > > 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
> > > >
> > > > 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
> > > >
> > > > 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.
> > > >
> > > > Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if
> > > > accidental that should be an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.
> > > I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not 'deliberately' handling it,
> > > should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your above suggestions would that be forbidden.
> > >
> > > Ciao,
> > > Werner
> >
> > In that instance the ref would have to watch the replay and make a judgment call as to whether the position of the hand was
> > deliberate. I guess it would depend what position the hands were raised in. If someone turns away from the ball I don't really
> > know why their hands would be raised in front of them
> To increase the chances of blocking the ball.
> > so I guess I'd call that as deliberate and give the handball, but it depends on the video.
> So the referee would need to make a judgement call depending on whether he thinks it was a deliberate movement?
> Where's the difference to the rule as it is?
>
> Ciao,
> Werner

I agree the two rules are similar in so far as the ref has to make a judgement call, but what they're being asked to judge is different. Whether someone deliberately handled the ball is different and I think easier to ascertain than the current test of whether the body is an unnatural position, which is almost impossible given that two different people will have different postures, mannerisms, jumping styles etc.

RM

On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 11:12:31 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 12:04:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 6:54:49 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 4:39:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental
> > > > > handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a judgement as to
> > > > > whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team
> > > > > being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
> > > > >
> > > > > Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) Player picks up the ball
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
> > > > >
> > > > > 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the
> > > > > ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if accidental that should be
> > > > > an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the
> > > > > attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.
> > > >
> > > > I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not
> > > > 'deliberately' handling it, should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your
> > > > above suggestions would that be forbidden.
> > >
> > >
> > > In that instance the ref would have to watch the replay and make a judgment call as to whether the position of the hand
> > > was deliberate. I guess it would depend what position the hands were raised in. If someone turns away from the ball I
> > > don't really know why their hands would be raised in front of them.
> > >
> > To increase the chances of blocking the ball.
> >
> > > so I guess I'd call that as deliberate and give the handball, but it depends on the video.
> >
> > So the referee would need to make a judgement call depending on whether he thinks it was a deliberate movement?
> > Where's the difference to the rule as it is?
>
> I agree the two rules are similar in so far as the ref has to make a judgement call, but what they're being asked to judge is
> different. Whether someone deliberately handled the ball is different and I think easier to ascertain than the current test of
> whether the body is an unnatural position, which is almost impossible given that two different people will have different
> postures, mannerisms, jumping styles etc.

I guess that's where we disagree - I see it as a much more difficult, nigh impossible, proposition
to determine 'intent' rather than 'unnatural position' (although admittedly that's not easy either).

And we still haven't touched the issue of willful negligence - is it really OK to handle the ball if
I deliberately don't care whether or not I'm handling the ball? You seem to think yes, IFAB (and me)
definitely think no.

I always like to bring up the very comparable example of the foot rule in field hockey - in
the FIH rules it says (9.11)

'Field players must not stop, kick, propel, pick up, throw or carry the ball with any part of their body.'

And in the clarifications to this rule:

'It is not always an offence if the ball hits the foot, hand or body of a field player. The player only
commits an offence if they gain an advantage or if they position themselves with the intention of
stopping the ball in this way.'

What it boils down to is that it's become part and parcel of any field hockey player to possess
the skill to not touch the ball with anything except his stick, especially when it travels towards
goal, and if necessary simply get out of the way, in order to avoid penalty corners, or even penalty
strokes.

And for large parts, it works that way well, even though field hockey is a much faster sport than
football. So I really don't think it's too much to ask of professional football defenders either.

Incidentally, when the handball rule was last changed in 2021 IFAB executives explicitly alluded
to field hockey's foot rule, saying that 'going to the extreme of the hockey foot rule, where any
time the ball hits the foot it's an offence' would be the only way to stop perceived inconsistencies,
but also stating that IFAB deliberately didn't want to go there - accepting instead that the price of a
certain amount of subjective judgement will always remain a problem.

Ciao,
Werner

On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 12:32:53 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 11:12:31 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 12:04:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 6:54:49 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 4:39:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental
> > > > > > handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a judgement as to
> > > > > > whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team
> > > > > > being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1) Player picks up the ball
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the
> > > > > > ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if accidental that should be
> > > > > > an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the
> > > > > > attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.
> > > > >
> > > > > I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not
> > > > > 'deliberately' handling it, should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your
> > > > > above suggestions would that be forbidden.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In that instance the ref would have to watch the replay and make a judgment call as to whether the position of the hand
> > > > was deliberate. I guess it would depend what position the hands were raised in. If someone turns away from the ball I
> > > > don't really know why their hands would be raised in front of them.
> > > >
> > > To increase the chances of blocking the ball.
> > >
> > > > so I guess I'd call that as deliberate and give the handball, but it depends on the video.
> > >
> > > So the referee would need to make a judgement call depending on whether he thinks it was a deliberate movement?
> > > Where's the difference to the rule as it is?
> >
> > I agree the two rules are similar in so far as the ref has to make a judgement call, but what they're being asked to judge is
> > different. Whether someone deliberately handled the ball is different and I think easier to ascertain than the current test of
> > whether the body is an unnatural position, which is almost impossible given that two different people will have different
> > postures, mannerisms, jumping styles etc.
> I guess that's where we disagree - I see it as a much more difficult, nigh impossible, proposition
> to determine 'intent' rather than 'unnatural position' (although admittedly that's not easy either).
>
> And we still haven't touched the issue of willful negligence - is it really OK to handle the ball if
> I deliberately don't care whether or not I'm handling the ball? You seem to think yes, IFAB (and me)
> definitely think no.
>
>
> I always like to bring up the very comparable example of the foot rule in field hockey - in
> the FIH rules it says (9.11)
>
> 'Field players must not stop, kick, propel, pick up, throw or carry the ball with any part of their body.'
>
> And in the clarifications to this rule:
>
> 'It is not always an offence if the ball hits the foot, hand or body of a field player. The player only
> commits an offence if they gain an advantage or if they position themselves with the intention of
> stopping the ball in this way.'
>
> What it boils down to is that it's become part and parcel of any field hockey player to possess
> the skill to not touch the ball with anything except his stick, especially when it travels towards
> goal, and if necessary simply get out of the way, in order to avoid penalty corners, or even penalty
> strokes.
>
> And for large parts, it works that way well, even though field hockey is a much faster sport than
> football. So I really don't think it's too much to ask of professional football defenders either.
>

Interesting. Is a similar rule workable in football though? Given a football is considerably bigger than a hockey ball and the tendency for the ball to be kicked at a height similar to a player's hand.

RM

On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 12:15:23 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 12:32:53 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 11:12:31 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > On Monday, June 12, 2023 at 12:04:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 6:54:49 PM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 4:39:39 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 12:02:50 AM UTC+2, Real Mardin wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wednesday, June 7, 2023 at 11:21:01 PM UTC+1, Werner Pichler wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What reforms would you suggest?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm afraid my view is intent needs to be a crucial element of handball calls. Eg, there would be no more accidental
> > > > > > > handball calls. If that entails a referee having to analyse VAR footage for a few minutes to make a judgement as to
> > > > > > > whether a player's body position suggests the handball was intentional then so be it. I'd much prefer that than a team
> > > > > > > being handed (excuse the pun) a European trophy because of the sort of ridiculous decision we saw yesterday.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Essentially the only handball decisions that should be called are:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) Player picks up the ball
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2) Player deliberately controls the ball with his hands, eg if he is on the ground following a tackle.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3) Players uses hands to deliberately swat away an aerial ball.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4) Player deliberately uses hands to stop the ball going into his own net.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thinking of 4, I think that would be the only situation where I'd allow an accidental handball to given as a penalty. If the
> > > > > > > ball is clearly about to go into the net but for contact with the defender's hand, then even if accidental that should be
> > > > > > > an offence. I'd even go as far as removing the requirement for a penalty in those situations and simply award the
> > > > > > > attacking team a goal, much like the goal tending rule in basketball.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I gave a concrete example - player in a free-kick wall, raising his hands, but turning away from the ball, so not
> > > > > > 'deliberately' handling it, should the shot indeed go off his arms. Would that be OK with you? Because nowhere in your
> > > > > > above suggestions would that be forbidden.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In that instance the ref would have to watch the replay and make a judgment call as to whether the position of the hand
> > > > > was deliberate. I guess it would depend what position the hands were raised in. If someone turns away from the ball I
> > > > > don't really know why their hands would be raised in front of them.
> > > > >
> > > > To increase the chances of blocking the ball.
> > > >
> > > > > so I guess I'd call that as deliberate and give the handball, but it depends on the video.
> > > >
> > > > So the referee would need to make a judgement call depending on whether he thinks it was a deliberate movement?
> > > > Where's the difference to the rule as it is?
> > >
> > > I agree the two rules are similar in so far as the ref has to make a judgement call, but what they're being asked to judge is
> > > different. Whether someone deliberately handled the ball is different and I think easier to ascertain than the current test of
> > > whether the body is an unnatural position, which is almost impossible given that two different people will have different
> > > postures, mannerisms, jumping styles etc.
> > I guess that's where we disagree - I see it as a much more difficult, nigh impossible, proposition
> > to determine 'intent' rather than 'unnatural position' (although admittedly that's not easy either).
> >
> > And we still haven't touched the issue of willful negligence - is it really OK to handle the ball if
> > I deliberately don't care whether or not I'm handling the ball? You seem to think yes, IFAB (and me)
> > definitely think no.
> >
> >
> > I always like to bring up the very comparable example of the foot rule in field hockey - in
> > the FIH rules it says (9.11)
> >
> > 'Field players must not stop, kick, propel, pick up, throw or carry the ball with any part of their body.'
> >
> > And in the clarifications to this rule:
> >
> > 'It is not always an offence if the ball hits the foot, hand or body of a field player. The player only
> > commits an offence if they gain an advantage or if they position themselves with the intention of
> > stopping the ball in this way.'
> >
> > What it boils down to is that it's become part and parcel of any field hockey player to possess
> > the skill to not touch the ball with anything except his stick, especially when it travels towards
> > goal, and if necessary simply get out of the way, in order to avoid penalty corners, or even penalty
> > strokes.
> >
> > And for large parts, it works that way well, even though field hockey is a much faster sport than
> > football. So I really don't think it's too much to ask of professional football defenders either.
> >
>
> Interesting. Is a similar rule workable in football though? Given a football is considerably bigger than a hockey ball and the
> tendency for the ball to be kicked at a height similar to a player's hand..

It might be? But don't get me wrong - I absolutely agree that that would be excessive and against
the spirit of the game.

But the underlying main question remains - should a defender be obliged to actively and at all times
try to avoid handball, even if it interferes with the actions and movements he wants to make in order
to best defend his net?

Personally I think yes, that should be a necessary skill, and it's what Biraghi did not do against West
Ham.

Ciao,
Werner