United (N) | FA Cup Final | Post-Match Thread

[city wright winger]

This is my whole point. Even asking this question none of us have given the same answer, which proves the interpretation & opinion conundrum. \0/

I'll thrown another spanner in the works if I may... Who judges if the flight & trajectory of the ball was affected & if an advantage was lost or gained?

Again this will be down to the interpretations & opinions of the side making the pass/cross/shot, the team trying to stop the pass/cross/shot, the referee & VAR officials.

As you've said which highlights the issue:



As you can see, herein lies the problem. One man's "opinion" on handball is another man's it should have gone this way, or that & "The ref's a corrupt twat with an agenda against us!", or "He's a decent ref for making the correct call (which I just happen to agree with)..."

How do we resolve this to cover EVERYONE'S opinion/interpretation? \0/

The question is a natural position of the hands depends on the situation if a ball is coming at your face with pace the Nature thing is to raise your hands to protect your face and like jack said his arms where there to gain height as he jumps and is airborne so for balance as well the ball didn’t come from a cross it came from a miss placed header from a yard away that scrapped his hand . The ref had a good view of it in normal time and didn’t think it was anything and played on
So no need for VAR to get involved as the hand ball wasn’t deliberate so wasn’t an obvious mistake by the referee
CORRUPT to the core

 

[fournineteen]

I don't watch the Rags unless we play them mate, such is my utter hatred for them, so I can't comment on that one.

There will always be an element of interpretation. Handball is handball, however if the arm is down & the ball hit with power from short range, I've seen calls like that correctly ruled out because of the close proximity.

However, who determines what "close proximity" is & what a "power shot/pass" is? Again this is where interpretation & opinion come in.

Having said this, the arm being away from the body in an unnatural position is probably the closest we'll get to a resolution where there's more for this rule than against it.

But again as pointed out by Grealish, how's he supposed to jump & keep his arms down whilst trying to gain leverage?

It's unfair as Grealish evidently didn't intentionally intend to handle the ball, but I'll give you a scenario if you can be so kind as to give me your considered opinion...

So when keepers are faced with an onrushing player preparing to shoot, goalies are told to make themselves as big as possible to provide a block. I think on this one we can all agree.

Now as someone commented earlier, all handball's should be judged on intent, which is all about interpretation & opinion. But here's a scenario...

A defender (just like a keeper) makes himself big to block a chance which strikes his outstretched arm. He knows a cross or shot is coming, he makes himself big & turns to the side so he's not looking at the ball & the ball strikes his outstretched arm, blocking a cross or shot.

A. Is that handball?

B. Is it intentional?

C. Is it unintentional?

All makes sense, but as well as intent, I think officials need to look at context; as in what did that handball prevent from happening?
if it deflects a shot on goal, or stops an attacking move in its tracks, then it's an advantage to the defender's team and a fair shout for a pen.
In yesterday's incident, AWB's header would have gone harmlessly to Ortega, so the ball brushing Jack's fingers gained NO advantage for City and it should have been play on, regardless of where his arms were.

TBF, the pen we got v Leipzig was if anything, even more ridiculous, and UEFA criteria for what constitutes a handball are even more cockeyed than PGMOL's.
Fingers crossed we don't end up on the wrong end of one next weekend.

 

[Dribble]

The question is a natural position of the hands depends on the situation if a ball is coming at your face with pace the Nature thing is to raise your hands to protect your face and like jack said his arms where there to gain height as he jumps and is airborne so for balance as well the ball didn’t come from a cross it came from a miss placed header from a yard away that scrapped his hand . The ref had a good view of it in normal time and didn’t think it was anything and played on
So no need for VAR to get involved as the hand ball wasn’t deliberate so wasn’t an obvious mistake by the referee
CORRUPT to the core

Agreed. But as we've seen, one man's natural position, is another man's making himself big, with his arm being raised, whether it was to gain leverage when jumping or not.

In a crucial match, you'll get differing opinions based on how the decision affects your team.

As soon as opinions & interpretations come into it, so do accusations of ref's being bent & PiGMOL having an agenda against City.

I've no idea how we overcome this to everyone's satisfaction... \0/

 

[Lovebitesandeveryfing]

Well, it's weird, but I now need to watch the match. And I was there. I mean watch it properly, to see how it really panned out.
Without the huge filter of being in a) a semi-manic state, because of the sheer anxiety, and it has to be said, the phenomenal atmosphere our end was creating b) this standing up lark for a whole game, which I think is a little bit beyond me, now c) being in the final rows of level 5, which sort of makes you feel as though you're watching football from outer space.

Don't get me wrong. Hugely privileged to have been there yesterday. To see your team beat your bitterest rivals on the biggest stage? Who arrogantly thought that they would never have to eat such humble pie. Who wouldn't want that?
But I now need to watch a football match, to see how it really was. Settle down with a nice mug of tea and some biscuits, and City+ here I come.

 

[Andouble]

Surprised at the lack of gear the Club Shop is carrying, suppose they’re waiting until next week for potential treble merchandise, but those Kings of the Cup shirt some of the players were wearing afterward were smart. Only a keychain and a coffee mug on the official shop.

 

[Sheik Battle and Goal]

The question is a natural position of the hands depends on the situation if a ball is coming at your face with pace the Nature thing is to raise your hands to protect your face and like jack said his arms where there to gain height as he jumps and is airborne so for balance as well the ball didn’t come from a cross it came from a miss placed header from a yard away that scrapped his hand . The ref had a good view of it in normal time and didn’t think it was anything and played on
So no need for VAR to get involved as the hand ball wasn’t deliberate so wasn’t an obvious mistake by the referee
CORRUPT to the core

That’s exactly my view. He was running backwards so where was he supposed to put his hand when he jumped. It wasn’t clear and obvious. Nothing to see and move unless of course it’s a chance to even up a final and make it interesting for tv. So glad justice was eventually done.

 

[kaz7]

My asda delivery driver brought my drunk ordering order from last night , he is brighton fan but his brother is a blue , he was there last night and he will be at the cl final, small world

Meanwhile i am staring at a huge choc cakeand squirty cream thinking if only i wasnt on keto ish diet ! Will give it to next door pronto , lol

 

[Dribble]

All makes sense, but as well as intent, I think officials need to look at context; as in what did that handball prevent from happening?
if it deflects a shot on goal, or stops an attacking move in its tracks, then it's an advantage to the defender's team and a fair shout for a pen.
In yesterday's incident, AWB's header would have gone harmlessly to Ortega, so the ball brushing Jack's fingers gained NO advantage for City and it should have been play on, regardless of where his arms were.

TBF, the pen we got v Leipzig was if anything, even more ridiculous, and UEFA criteria for what constitutes a handball are even more cockeyed than PGMOL's.
Fingers crossed we don't end up on the wrong end of one next weekend.

So now you can see the problem facing the rule makers of the game. \0/

I've asked for anyone to give me a solution to these handball conundrums in a sentence, & as of yet no one has. All I've had is even more opinions/interpretations muddying the waters even further.

How does football resolve this to the satisfaction of the majority? I've no idea mate...

 

[OB1]

So there goes the 'Was it intentional or not" out the window. The player made himself big, turned his head with there being a good chance the ball strikes his arm.

However, as per many opinions & interpretations expressed since yesterday, because he didn't intentionally handle the ball & wasn't even looking at it, it shouldn't be handball.

Do you have any solutions to offer? I really can't think of one which is a one size fits all solution to suit everyone, hence the interpretation/opinion debates still raging on...

I mentioned Terry because he very clearly intentionally made himself big with the idea of using any part of his body to block shots. He did it on a regular basis and was not penalised often enough.

That very obviously was not what Jack did yesterday. If you look at the right video angle you see Jack has his eyes closed and didn’t see the ball, wasn’t making himself big or doing anything unnatural.

Neither situation is difficult to interpret correctly.

If you go back to first principles, handball has to be deliberate and that has to extend to not deliberately keeping your arm out of the way / taking evasive action where you can.

I believe that referee’s should make judgements on that, they make judgements on other rules. The issue is, and long has been, having referees who are competent at making those decisions.

I hate VAR with a passion, but making big decisions (in the box) should be even easier with access to multiple video angles etc.

 

[Chi-town blues]

My asda delivery driver brought my drunk ordering order from last night , he is brighton fan but his brother is a blue , he was there last night and he will be at the cl final, small world

Meanwhile i am staring at a huge choc cakeand squirty cream thinking if only i wasnt on keto ish diet ! Will give it to next door pronto , lol

I love mine with squirty cream toppings too.

 

[chesterbells]

Surprised at the lack of gear the Club Shop is carrying, suppose they’re waiting until next week for potential treble merchandise, but those Kings of the Cup shirt some of the players were wearing afterward were smart. Only a keychain and a coffee mug on the official shop.

lol, mate if you’re looking for some gear, I’m not sure the Club Shop is the best place to look.

 

[Dribble]

I mentioned Terry because he very clearly intentionally made himself big with the idea of using any part of his body to block shots. He did it on a regular basis and was not penalised often enough.

That very obviously was not what Jack did yesterday. If you look at the right video angle you see Jack has his eyes closed and didn’t see the ball, wasn’t making himself big or doing anything unnatural.

Neither situation is difficult to interpret correctly.

If you go back to first principles, handball has to be deliberate and that has to extend to not deliberately keeping your arm out of the way / taking evasive action where you can.

I believe that referee’s should make judgements on that, they make judgements on other rules. The issue is, and long has been, having referees who are competent at making those decisions.

I hate VAR with a passion, but making big decisions (in the box) should be even easier with access to multiple video angles etc.

Agreed. Now if Terry was still clattering people today at Stamford Bridge & on hearing this decided to modify his making himself big tactic to include "Where am I supposed to put my arms when jumping, & I wasn't even looking at the ball", what then?

Who judges if his arms were in an unnatural position & if there was intent? Terry & his team mates are claiming there was no intent & Terry wasn't even looking at the ball, but knowing the new rule, Terry now modifies making himself big to be on the right side of the interpretation, even though he now trains for this every day?

 

[Chi-town blues]

It would’ve been difficult if sir rashford had played yesterday.

 

[Lovebitesandeveryfing]

On the penalty only this to say. Virtually no-one in my block had even noticed that there was anything untoward.
The law as it stands requires that the penalty is given. The law as it stands is absolutely stupid, and must be changed in very short order. To say that if any part of the hand or arm is hit, from whatever distance, with the ball travelling at whatever speed, with the “offending” player having no agency in that incident whatsoever,it is to be sanctioned by a penalty is an utter nonsense and it's genuinely spoiling the game. I can honestly say, hand on heart, that if that penalty had been given at the other end, in our favour, I would have felt pretty ashamed.

 

[Protein Junkie]

It would’ve been difficult if sir rashford had played yesterday.

Is that why some folk call him Pope Find Us. ?

 

[Andouble]

lol, mate if you’re looking for some gear, I’m not sure the Club Shop is the best place to look.

You’re right, but I’ve created a tradition of grabbing a scarf for every trophy we’ve won, online shop sold out of the Premier League Champions scarfs the same day they went on sale, and FA Cup stock is minimal. Price of our own success!

 

[Brooklands Blue]

It looks like a North Korean political rally.

The north Korean regime and the rags are very similar. Both deluded cults with dead men (almost in the case of Ferguson) as head of the organisation.

 

[CTID1977]

 

[AliBobbyJ]

People saying City didn't play well but they could have been 4-0 up before the "penalty." Three minutes after Gundogan scored his first Dias(?) put a free header wide from a KDB free kick, Haaland went sliding in and was inches away from getting his boot on the ball right in front of goal, then Haaland turned his man outside the penalty area, ran five yards and blasted the ball over the bar. Utd were in disarray till VAR put City off their stride and induced rage & brief despair here.

 

[OB1]

Agreed. Now if Terry was still clattering people today at Stamford Bridge & on hearing this decided to modify his making himself big tactic to include "Where am I supposed to put my arms when jumping, & I wasn't even looking at the ball", what then?

Who judges if his arms were in an unnatural position & if there was intent? Terry & his team mates are claiming there was no intent & Terry wasn't even looking at the ball, but knowing the new rule, Terry now modifies making himself big to be on the right side of the interpretation, even though he now trains for this every day?

The officials have to judge, and I’m fine with that. I think you can write guidance that helps avoid stupid decisions. Penalties for handball for example must only be given for offences that, if they are not clear cut infractions of the laws, have significantly adversely affected the attacking team.

You can’t turn referees into robots. They have to use their judgment. We had a classic example of the ref getting that horribly wrong yesterday when he penalised Akanji for almost getting his ankle broken by Casemiro, who should have had an “orange” card.

We also saw judgement that could be questioned when KDB was not awarded a pen because ref and VAR decided. that Fred had not impeded him. I’m not sure they got that one right but I’m not adamant that they didn’t. I do think it was more of a pen than the Grealish handball.