The PGMOL Apologies Thread

Stephen230 said:
Can you recall any incidents over the last few years involving any team where the ball has hit a players hand above the shoulder and a penalty not been given?

It’s a genuine question. I’m sure it must have happened somewhere. But I honestly can’t recall seeing one.
Click to expand...
Not off the top of my head, but my memory isn’t the best these days!

Genuine question, do you think that would’ve been given if it was the other way round?
 
Ric said:
Not off the top of my head, but my memory isn’t the best these days!

Genuine question, do you think that would’ve been given if it was the other way round?
Click to expand...

I mean, I try and keep away from ‘what if’ arguments. Because ultimately there’s no way of ever knowing, so they seem a bit pointless.

I’ll certainly concede that United get more than their fair share of 50/50 decisions.

But on this specifically, as neither of us can recall any similar incident not been penalised, I’d have to say the likelihood is that it would have been.
 
Stephen230 said:
Can you recall any incidents over the last few years involving any team where the ball has hit a players hand above the shoulder and a penalty not been given?

It’s a genuine question. I’m sure it must have happened somewhere. But I honestly can’t recall seeing one.
Click to expand...
Yes, on Saturday, Romero for Spurs.

IMG-0085.jpg

(Photo taken from this ESPN VAR Review.)
 
Stephen230 said:
You seem to be arguing something completely different to the post you were replying to.

I didn’t offer an opinion on what is and isn’t a natural position in that post.

Just stating a fact that ( virtually) all cases of the ball touching a defending players hand, while it’s above shoulder height, have resulted in a penalty for several years.
Click to expand...
What you actually said was;
"But I don’t think it’s an unreasonable starting point to suggest a hand being at head height as Grealish’s was is ever a natural position."
Which is different from "didn't offer an opinion on what is and isn't a natural position".
 
danielwood5 said:
What you actually said was;
"But I don’t think it’s an unreasonable starting point to suggest a hand being at head height as Grealish’s was is ever a natural position."
Which is different from "didn't offer an opinion on what is and isn't a natural position".
Click to expand...

That came later. The post he was replying to pretty much just said…I can’t remember any not given when the ball has hit a hand above shoulder height.
 
Stephen230 said:
I’m not being complicit. I very rarely give my own opinion on here on what I would like the law to be. Because it’s pretty pointless.

If the ball hits a player on the hand above shoulder height, then yes it is a penalty, virtually every single time. That is fact. It explicitly says it is in the laws of the game.

That’s all I was commenting on, in reply to whoever it was who originally said it was a poor decision.

I’m not saying we can’t talk about how wrong we think the laws are. Or move for them to be charged. But nothing is going to change the fact that at this moment in time the Grealish incident was a handball every time and the easiest decision a VAR will have had last season, once he’d established the ball had touched his hand.
Click to expand...
There's a lot of wrong statements of fact in that post. Here's the actual handball rules from the Laws of the Game 22/23;

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 bolded part is the important bit for this discussion.
The laws/guidance about a player having their hand above shoulder height was actually removed at the end of the 19/20 season after outcry over the ridiculous handball decisions thay were given because a player was jumping and the ball hit their arm when they weren't even looking at the ball (sound familiar?).
In the 21/22 season the handball guidance was moved back to unnatural position/deliberately moving a hand toward ball bwimg the major influence on handball decisions.
There has been nothing in the Laws of the Game or the guidance for the last two seasons that justified that penalty being given, especially as referees are supposed to take into account a players proximity to the ball when it is hit by their opponent.
There was certainly no justification whatsoever for VAR to call for a penalty as it wasn't a "clear and obvious error" and it wasn't a handball according to the rules.
That is fact.
 
Stephen230 said:
If that’s how you see it mate. But to my eyes that isn’t the ball hitting the hand above shoulder height.
Click to expand...
Leaving out you are talking to yourself ( ;-) ), you would be the only eyes seeing it that way, including those in the ESPN VAR Review team’s head.

Romero’s hand is most definitely above his shoulder and the ball hits it.

No penalty was given because of “proximity”, even though other similar handballs have been given that were as close or closer to the player striking the ball.
 
danielwood5 said:
There's a lot of wrong statements of fact in that post. Here's the actual handball rules from the Laws of the Game 22/23;

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 bolded part is the important bit for this discussion.
The laws/guidance about a player having their hand above shoulder height was actually removed at the end of the 19/20 season after outcry over the ridiculous handball decisions thay were given because a player was jumping and the ball hit their arm when they weren't even looking at the ball (sound familiar?).
In the 21/22 season the handball guidance was moved back to unnatural position/deliberately moving a hand toward ball bwimg the major influence on handball decisions.
There has been nothing in the Laws of the Game or the guidance for the last two seasons that justified that penalty being given, especially as referees are supposed to take into account a players proximity to the ball when it is hit by their opponent.
There was certainly no justification whatsoever for VAR to call for a penalty as it wasn't a "clear and obvious error" and it wasn't a handball according to the rules.
That is fact.
Click to expand...
This is fact, @Stephen230.

If you are going to base your entire argument that VAR is consistent based on the laws of the game, you may want to confirm what the current laws of the game are.
 
danielwood5 said:
There's a lot of wrong statements of fact in that post. Here's the actual handball rules from the Laws of the Game 22/23;

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 bolded part is the important bit for this discussion.
The laws/guidance about a player having their hand above shoulder height was actually removed at the end of the 19/20 season after outcry over the ridiculous handball decisions thay were given because a player was jumping and the ball hit their arm when they weren't even looking at the ball (sound familiar?).
In the 21/22 season the handball guidance was moved back to unnatural position/deliberately moving a hand toward ball bwimg the major influence on handball decisions.
There has been nothing in the Laws of the Game or the guidance for the last two seasons that justified that penalty being given, especially as referees are supposed to take into account a players proximity to the ball when it is hit by their opponent.
There was certainly no justification whatsoever for VAR to call for a penalty as it wasn't a "clear and obvious error" and it wasn't a handball according to the rules.
That is fact.
Click to expand...
Excellent post. That backs up my view. Grealish was not looking at the ball and his arm was justifiably high because he was jumping. To make matters worse the ball was headed away from the goal itself. I can understand those sort of decisions when the ball is heading for the net. There was no way he was trying to make himself bigger to block any shot. He had no idea where the ball was.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
Excellent post. That backs up my view. Grealish was not looking at the ball and his arm was justifiably high because he was jumping. To make matters worse the ball was headed away from the goal itself. I can understand those sort of decisions when the ball is heading for the net. There was no way he was trying to make himself bigger to block any shot. He had no idea where the ball was.
Click to expand...

But it was a desperate and critical decision by PIGMOL's representative, because there was no other way the twats would have scored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top