Jump to content

2019/20 - Other Games


Batman

Recommended Posts

Does a 2 card yellow sending off suspension apply to the next league match? I know a straight red does, but not sure if a 2 yellow does.

 

Either way, a second yellow would be most welcome.

 

I might be wrong but I’m sure I heard cards were now competition specific. So no sending off would affect our game against them. Injury’s though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clash of the tools tonight - Blades versus Hammers.

 

I reckon Sheff Utd have already got too many points to get sucked into the relegation battle, so a win for them tonight to take points off WHU would be very welcome.

Agreed. All sorts of reasons to hope for a Blades win. Billy Sharp (sharp blade? [emoji23]) McGoaldrought, West Ham fans going into meltdown along with their media fanclub.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another injury for Bournemouth

 

 

 

Yet another ACL by the looks. Is it footwear? Types of training, or speed of the game? There are millions more than there used to be and it’s a far more dangerous injury than fractures as we saw with J Rod.

 

Very bad news for Bournemouth if Chelsea activate the buy back on Ake if they shift Christiansen.

 

Fabinaski is also very bad news for West Ham, even the keeper they are trying to sign is injured now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VAR again, Sheffield United have their revenge for Tevezgate. That’s them safe and shuts me up that they can still be dragged in to the relegation battle.

 

Also shows how lucky we were that the Djenepo handball wasn’t spotted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the table, I still think it’ll be a high points total for survival this season, late 30s. But our recent form has really given us a great chance of a mid-table finish - for survival alone I think we only need 4 more wins and a draw or two. Sounds completely doable and a world away from where we were just a couple of months ago. Yes we’re only five points from safety, but clubs down there have their own problems. Of course, we could regress with an injury or two...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you see that handball given you wonder how the bloody hell that Toby handball was not given for us v Spurs!
It's the ridiculous rule that any contact by the scoring player is handball but for a defender it isn't. Don't ask me what the criteria are for handball by a defender. I haven't a clue. And why, ffs, is it different for attackers and defenders?

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the ridiculous rule that any contact by the scoring player is handball but for a defender it isn't. Don't ask me what the criteria are for handball by a defender. I haven't a clue. And why, ffs, is it different for attackers and defenders?

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

It’s not ridiculous, it means you can’t score from any handball and you can’t concede a penalty from an accidental handball. Makes prefect sense to me, I don’t see the problem.

 

Do you think it’s right that Henry scored against Ireland?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you see that handball given you wonder how the bloody hell that Toby handball was not given for us v Spurs!

 

It's because, according to the current rules ANY handball - deliberate or otherwise - by an attacking player in the lead up to a goal is handball whereas handball by a defender - if deemed accidental - is not handball. Toby defending Rice attacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the ridiculous rule that any contact by the scoring player is handball but for a defender it isn't. Don't ask me what the criteria are for handball by a defender. I haven't a clue. And why, ffs, is it different for attackers and defenders?

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

The rule is ludicrous. The defender headed it onto the attacker’s nothing he could do when it’s come at him like that.

 

Saints got away with the Djenepo. But the Toby handball and further back that ridiculous Watford goal a few years ago were clear handballs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's because, according to the current rules ANY handball - deliberate or otherwise - by an attacking player in the lead up to a goal is handball whereas handball by a defender - if deemed accidental - is not handball. Toby defending Rice attacking.

 

Should also mention that if the attacker plays for Liverpool then the definition of "lead up" can be adjusted to ensure the handball did not occur during the lead up to the goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not ridiculous, it means you can’t score from any handball and you can’t concede a penalty from an accidental handball. Makes prefect sense to me, I don’t see the problem.

 

Do you think it’s right that Henry scored against Ireland?

Henry against Ireland was deliberate. Your argument is ridiculous.

 

What's the difference between scoring after an accidental handball and conceding a penalty after an accidental handball?

 

The handball law has to be consistent fir all players in all situations.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henry against Ireland was deliberate. Your argument is ridiculous.

 

What's the difference between scoring after an accidental handball and conceding a penalty after an accidental handball?

 

The handball law has to be consistent fir all players in all situations.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

The offside law isn’t consistent for all situations. It changes for a goal kick or a throw in because it suits the game better. Red cards are different too. If you trip a player in the oppositions penalty box it’s just a free kick to them, if you commit the same foul when a player is through on goal it’s a straight red.

 

Supposing McC pulls off an absolute worldy save tomorrow in injury time when it’s 0-0. Vardy is stood a yard away and the ball rebounds off his hand and back into the net. Completely accidental, so the goal should stand, correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s not ridiculous, it means you can’t score from any handball and you can’t concede a penalty from an accidental handball. Makes prefect sense to me, I don’t see the problem.

 

Do you think it’s right that Henry scored against Ireland?

 

Henry's handball was deliberate so it should have been given irrespective of whether a goal was scored as a result. If the same handball has been committed by a defender that should also have been given.

 

How is it right that a completely different interpretation is now applied for handball depending on whether a goal is scored or not? The new rule is utterly stupid and needs binning at the earliest opportunity.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule is ludicrous. The defender headed it onto the attacker’s nothing he could do when it’s come at him like that.

 

Saints got away with the Djenepo. But the Toby handball and further back that ridiculous Watford goal a few years ago were clear handballs.

 

As long as the rule is consistently applied I don't mind it. It's the lack of consistency with the VAR rulings which does my head in Though unintentional, the Rice handball did allow the ball to cushion nicely into his path allowing him to set up Snodgrass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as the rule is consistently applied I don't mind it. It's the lack of consistency with the VAR rulings which does my head in Though unintentional, the Rice handball did allow the ball to cushion nicely into his path allowing him to set up Snodgrass.
The rule change is not consistent though is it? An unintentional handball by a defender that stops a goal is not penalised whereas an unintentional handball by an attacker that results in a goal is penalised. I don't particularly want to go down that road but it would make more sense if they go the whole hog and say anything that hits the hand or arm is handball full stop.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FT Blades win 1-0. Puts them on 32 points with 16 still to play. They're safe.

 

West Ham, on the other hand. Lost their keeper to a potential long term injury and are still in big trouble despite their new manager bounce.

 

What a season Sheffield United are having. I had them pegged for certain relegation but they have been excellent so far. As for West Ham, I would love it, love it if they went down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rule change is not consistent though is it? An unintentional handball by a defender that stops a goal is not penalised whereas an unintentional handball by an attacker that results in a goal is penalised. I don't particularly want to go down that road but it would make more sense if they go the whole hog and say anything that hits the hand or arm is handball full stop.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

 

Yes, it's applied equally to both teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new rule makes perfect sense and is a good improvement on handball IMO.

 

Strict liability for defenders would be a nonsense as it would be easy to manufacture penalties and it’s not always clear whether the defender has gained an advantage. One further refinement could be to introduce strict liability where it is a shot on target but not in any other situation.

 

Strict liability for attackers where a goal is scored makes perfect sense as clearly an advantage has been gained that has led to a goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I'd like the law to be simplified:

 

Ref deems it to be deliberate - handball. Yellow card.

 

Ref deems it to be accidental: if in the ref's opinion, the accidental handball helps the offending team in any way, handball and freekick/penalty.

 

If the accidental handball helps the opposition or makes no material difference, play on.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I'd like the law to be simplified:

 

Ref deems it to be deliberate - handball. Yellow card.

 

Ref deems it to be accidental: if in the ref's opinion, the accidental handball helps the offending team in any way, handball and freekick/penalty.

 

If the accidental handball helps the opposition or makes no material difference, play on.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Surely it was simpler before this rule change was introduced?

 

Intentional handball - free kick/pen

Accidental - play on

 

I'm just not comfortable with applying different rules for the same action depending on what follows afterwards. Seems illogical to me.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new rule makes perfect sense and is a good improvement on handball IMO.

 

Strict liability for defenders would be a nonsense as it would be easy to manufacture penalties and it’s not always clear whether the defender has gained an advantage. One further refinement could be to introduce strict liability where it is a shot on target but not in any other situation.

 

Strict liability for attackers where a goal is scored makes perfect sense as clearly an advantage has been gained that has led to a goal.

 

Yep, which was the case last night when Rice gained an advantage for his assist from the unintentional hand ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Totally illogical that there is one rule for defensive situations and the complete opposite for attacking ones !

None of the above arguments against this hold weight for me, it's downright nonsense IMHO.

This has been a retrograde step and offers nothing but controversy. Hell, VAR is dodgy enough without having this rule adding to the outrage....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You either go back to how it was or just say anytime the ball hits a hand it's a foul. The current law is ridiculous.
Agreed. Personally I would prefer going back to the rule as it was and then using VAR to eliminate obvious howlers by the officials such as the Henry handball Vs Ireland and the Watford "goal" against us. That is after all what VAR was supposed to be about.

 

Sent from my moto g(7) play using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ref deems it to be accidental: if in the ref's opinion, the accidental handball helps the offending team in any way, handball and freekick/penalty.

 

Vardy blasts the ball at Stephens from a yard away and it flicks off his hand accidentally - Penalty, in your opinion?

 

Totally illogical that there is one rule for defensive situations and the complete opposite for attacking ones !

 

Vardy trips Stephens when we're defending - Free kick and no card

Stephens trips Vardy when through on goal - Free kick and a straight red

 

Is that not a different rule for the same foul?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vardy blasts the ball at Stephens from a yard away and it flicks off his hand accidentally - Penalty, in your opinion?

 

 

 

Vardy trips Stephens when we're defending - Free kick and no card

Stephens trips Vardy when through on goal - Free kick and a straight red

 

Is that not a different rule for the same foul?

 

In the first instance, no penalty unless the flick diverted the ball in such a way to give the defence a clear advantage.

 

In the second it isn't totally the same offence. With Vardy through on goal it's denial of goal-scoring opportunity. We have a law for that. It may sometimes be the ref's subjective call, but I think it works.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new rule makes perfect sense and is a good improvement on handball IMO.

 

Strict liability for defenders would be a nonsense as it would be easy to manufacture penalties and it’s not always clear whether the defender has gained an advantage. One further refinement could be to introduce strict liability where it is a shot on target but not in any other situation.

 

Strict liability for attackers where a goal is scored makes perfect sense as clearly an advantage has been gained that has led to a goal.

A bit off the wall........Was the goal being ruled out last night manufactured by the Blades defender?

If you look at the decision against WH again, and the proximity of Baldocks (?) head as he stretches to get his head on the ball is very un-natural Did he have the presence of mind to think Rice is pumping his arms as he runs “If I can just get my head on it there is a damn good chance the ball will hit his hand so any goal will be ruled out by VAR, if I miss the ball I’m bringing him down and they get a less dangerous free kick”

It will no doubt be re run umpteen times cos it’s good ole West Am, the defensive header is a real do or die effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the first instance, no penalty unless the flick diverted the ball in such a way to give the defence a clear advantage.

 

In the second it isn't totally the same offence. With Vardy through on goal it's denial of goal-scoring opportunity. We have a law for that. It may sometimes be the ref's subjective call, but I think it works.

 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

First instance - Supposing it was a cross and there was another striker waiting in the middle but the deflection off the hand takes it away from him.

 

Second instance - It's not the same offence for penalties either. There's a huge difference between accidentally scoring a goal via a handball and accidentally denying a scoring opportunity. That's what the rule is about - making sure no goal is scored from an accidental handball, either for or against, which is fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with the incident last night is that the accidental handball was well outside the penalty area and Rica and Snodgrass had to perform well to create/score the chance. I can see the logic of the attackers not profiting from an accidental handball in the penalty area but not when the 'handball' could happen somewhere around the halfway line (or even theoretically deep in the other half). I think the rule should be modified to make it clear that the accidental handball rule only applies in the penalty area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with the incident last night is that the accidental handball was well outside the penalty area and Rica and Snodgrass had to perform well to create/score the chance. I can see the logic of the attackers not profiting from an accidental handball in the penalty area but not when the 'handball' could happen somewhere around the halfway line (or even theoretically deep in the other half). I think the rule should be modified to make it clear that the accidental handball rule only applies in the penalty area.

 

Yeh but the argument I suppose is that the handball gave the attacker an advantage, it allowed him to basically control the ball and move forward, without it the attack is not happening and therefore the goal is not.

 

I mean they look at fouls around the halfway line as in some cases someone can win the ball with a foul, gain an advantage, the other team is in transition and 1-2 passes you are in for a chance at goal. Someone could accidentally handball the ball around the player closing them down inside their own half and that creates the space to play a ball over the top which the striker then scores from, even though the handball is in the other half it's played a huge role in allowing the player to set up the chance.

 

I think you can only do it in phases IMO, if it's part of the same phase of play and the attacker gains an advantage from it they wouldn't have had without the handball then it gets ruled of regardless of where it is.

 

I saw Steve Bruce moaning about an incorrect corner given to the opposition and that VAR should have ruled that out, but then his team had two chances to clear the ball and didn't, so it's nonsense to suggest that led to the goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})