Just before the shot both his arms were away from his body. He did his best to get them inside his body outline. If that is given as a penalty I think the law is ridiculous.
That’s why I hate having hope because you’re right and it’s not even being arrogant to say there are only a select amount of teams considerably better than us now. He’s kept his word so far and not joined an English club. So it leaves: Spain: Barca, Real and Atleti. Germany: Bayern (maybe Dortmund). Italy: Juve. France: PSG. I think he has/ had his heart set on Real. Perez wants him, the fans voted for him over Pogba in a poll but Zidane wants Pogba. Hopefully Zidane sticks to his guns and insists it’s Pogba or nothing. If Real don’t sign him, I think there may be a chance of convincing him to stay and sign a new deal, even if it involves a relatively low release clause to those in Europe (£60m-£70m?) but I just know that in the back of my mind it’ll end in heartbreak and he’ll join someone on or near the European deadline
A day or two ago I noticed two sites using the same Times article to create drastically different stories: SpursWeb used it to say he's possibly going to sign a new contract, HITC said it means he'll be off sooner rather than later I'm guessing it wasn't particularly well-written if people can't agree what the article actually said...
Our version of the highlights: It's just the goals. Much better commentator than Villa's pair, but far worse footage and uploaded a lot later.
He puts his right arm out over his left shoulder. That's not tucking it into his body. It's a completely unnatural position and it makes his profile larger, resulting in the ball hitting it when it wouldn't normally do so.
That was the outcome but you try crossing your arms quickly and guaranteeing that no part ends up outside your outline. There was no intent at all but by the letter of the new law it should probably have been a penalty. But it was a very close thing as to whether his hand was actually above his shoulder when the ball hit it so it wasn't a clear error.
If they can give an offside that is millimetres, then I think this was handball. Ideally it should not be, but his hands do move towards the ball (if he'd left them by his side, no contact with the ball). As the ball is hit, he does move them up, so it is objectively hand to ball. Intent is a weird measure. How often does a defender intend to handle the ball (other than acting as a keeper in last resort - a la Suarez in the World Cup)
Separate intent from effect. So the player did not intend for the ball to hit his hand, but the effect was that his team got an advantage (the ball deflected safely to the GK) . So IMHO my VAR decision is : 1. Penalty, because of the end effect. 2. No card, because there was no player intent or dangerous play.
Re-watching the incident VAR style, and applying the same logic ... 1. On target shot ?? No. 2. Intentional use of hand ?? No. 3. Opposition advantage gained ?? No. On #3, my reasoning is that hit him on the "arm" as it did or not, the ball was not going to a Poool player either way.
I can certainly agree with that. But the whole law seems mad. You get the ball blasted at you from two yards away while you are in the process of crossing your arms in front of your body and because you've flinched a bit and the ball touches your hand the opponents get a 90% chance of scoring a goal.
Given that the competition was played in south America in the 1980's ,it would have been given and Shilton would have been red carded for obstruction
I read after that he said he was overwhelmed when Kane scored to make it 2-1 ... love that sort of passion
