Seen the highlights same as I watched the game. It was inside the box and it was handball. Your player **** it and it cost you.
You win some, you lose some. Unless it's an out and out travesty it's a source of debate for about 5 minutes then we move on. It was a bit harsh, but not incorrect.
Now try looking at it with an open mind instead of just space between your ears ....from the behind the goal camera and how he lands with his right foot outside the box . And keep in mind where officials vantage points are when the incident happened , last on the subject ........Good luck to you guys and your new manager catching the rest on your quest to a league title , Liverpool are the greatest top level team in my eyes ....ever .....and not winning a title since the Premier League started is beyond harsh ...cheers
Astro isn't. He's claiming it wasn't handball because Suarezs hands were in natural position. Read back. My only point is that it was a similar type incident to the weekend where foul was not called. Some refs give it and some don't. I'm not even saying penalty SHOULDN'T have been given- merely it is a grey area in the rules and not as clear cut as many make out. Very open to interpretation.
No it's not a handball because he had no time to react and his hands being in a natural position mean you can't us them as evidence of a premeditated attempt to jump in front of the ball making himself big Yesterday the player had all the time to react
Jeez, this is like listening to that latest internet crank who swears blind that the woman hanging onto the ledge in the Paris attacks is definitely on a harness, yes siree, you can definitely see a harness..... except that you ****ing well can't. I recorded MotD 2 last night and have now watched it several times x 50. It's a harsh, but correct decision. I wouldn't want one like that against us, but can think of one or two that were (Agger a few seasons back, Carra at Spurs once, spring to mind). But on thing for certain - his arm is at least 2 metres in the box when the ball strikes it. And I really dunno what not winning the Prem has to do with the physics of it all, but there you go.
Swansea are having problems at the moment, they should try Taylor in goal that penalty incident shows he has the ability.
You misunderstood me. Since when have we got off someone's back when they are on the ropes? We usually grind them down as much as possible
no worries... I know I'm in minority opinion here but don't feel like anyone on my back. For what it's worth, if anyone is interested, this is what the rules actually say: Handling the ball Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: • 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 infringement • touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement So, as I said, all open to interpretation. The rule pretty much states it's up to ref to determine if deliberate or not based on a number of factors.
Also. The defender being a chicken turning his back is not a factor. I searched rules and not one reference to "chicken" appears. It appears being a chicken is indeed legal. please log in to view this image
Handball has to be deliberate, quite how a player can turn his back on the ball and yet be deemed to have handled deliberately is a new one on me like.
So closing your eyes should be considered a get out of jail free card for waving your arms about as the ball comes into the box #10blindgoalkeepers
So any player can spread his arms as wide as he wants as long as he turns his back or shuts his eyes? surely the deliberate act was raising his arm which prevented the ball going into the box....or did the linesman make him do that
