I haven't seen it, but if it wasn't deliberate and his arm wasn't in an unnatural position so as to be easily hit by the ball and it went in off his arm by accident, by the rules of the game it should have stuck.
Show me a photo of it hitting his hand. They have the incident on camera, it shouldn't be hard to prove.
You do realise that handball includes the arm don't you? http://www.skysports.com/football/n...s-verdict-on-dominic-solankes-disallowed-goal
Solanke has actually admitted that theball hit his hand and that he was very unlucky. Personally I think if a referee sees the ball coming off the arms or hands it is difficult for him to give the goal. Whether deliberate or not. I would have very unhappy (as many here) if we had conceded in similar circumstances.
So it's just refs discretion, same as it's always been. Sanchez has had two handball goals allowed vs Chelsea last year and Hull this year.
There is a big difference though. Ball hitting upper arm is less to be perceived as deliberate than hand. Hitting upper arm where it joins the body is usually unavoidable. You said it hit his hand, which is deliberately incorrect.
Sorry everyone... I have now found proof that Tobes is correct and it hit his hand not his arm. My apologies.
No he didn't admit that, he said he tried to chest it and it clipped his arm. Yes arm is considered hand in this but saying it hit his hand is wrong
I said it was handball, which it was, as he 'scored' using his arm. Beyond pedantic this ffs. They say these things come in 3's so I can't wait to see how Bournemouth supposedly goose you out of points at the weekend lol. Sky will need counselling
If you actually took notice of what I wrote, I said that I accept it struck his arm, but that picture doesn't prove it at all. It just shows they were in line - the ball could have been 2 feet beyond him and it would look the same. Anyway, I'm sick of trying to have a sensible debate with people who just want to hammer home their point of view regardless of evidence. That applies to some of our fans too, btw.
“It went on to my chest, I tried to chest it in and it has clipped my arm. The referee disallowed it but it’s very unlucky. I thought he had given it. I was celebrating. I don’t know what changed his mind but he did. I thought I’d won it. It’s not nice when you are celebrating and it gets disallowed.” #pedantic
Not your video but i have seen it. He tries to chest it which he does, it then hits his arm (as foster moves in the direction of the ball where it was chested) and it gets diverted past him. The point was, that because it wasn't a "deliberate" handball (presumably because he didn't have enough time to react?), then i'm sure all these strikers who accidentally chest the ball into their arms due to bad judgement shouldn't be penalised either as their original though isn't to control it with their hands which would make it deliberate.
look bobby... the ball took a deflection, it was accidental handball but he gained an advantage the offical rule is: Law 12 HANDLING THE BALL Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. The following must be considered: the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an offence hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an offence The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. Inside their penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any related sanction but can be guilty of handling offences that incur an indirect free kick. It is clear that the linesman who saw the offense (given the ref was signalling a goal before changing mind) felt it was deliberate so thats the final call. the point should be... the guy is expecting the ball to come. a) he's not moved to the ball b) the defection is close to him. c) his hand position is actually not particularly relevant d) the throwing objects is irrelevant The ball deflects, bounces up and hits his arm. He gains an advantage however the rule is clear... there is nothing wrong with getting an advantage so refs do the following: "If the ball plays the hand, no offense, but if the hand plays the ball, it is an offense." The question here is what is deliberate? Did the ball hit him or did he hit the ball.
