With the recent controversy over whether Danny Simpson's block on the line against Liverpool constituted a penalty and a red card, it got me thinking. With so many people unsure on whether this, along with other instances throughout the recent seasons, was a handball, what actually constitutes a handball during the game? We all know what constitutes a blatant handball, the arm blocking an advantage to the other team whilst being in an unnatural position. Along with this, if this was caused in the penalty area, it results in a penalty without a sending off. However, after reading the rules on this, it becomes an incredibly unreliable grey area that varies from ref to ref. Focusing on the incident mentioned at the beginning, the rules state that if a handball in the Goalkeeper's area is committed, then the player doesn't receive a caution but a penalty kick is awarded. Along with this, the next rule says that if the ball is intentionally blocked by a hand, then the player will be sent off for unsporting behavior during play. However, the rules do not state what constitutes a deliberate handball, so depending on the ref's view of the incident, it could go either way, even if the offender didn't intentionally commit the foul. To go with all of this, the rule on handballs go on to talk about the punishment for a handball, but ignore where on the body it stops becoming a handball and becomes a legitimate block. So, in many cases, no one (Even the person refereeing the game) is actually sure whether the player is actually committing the foul, or making a goal line clearance. Danny Simpson's incident was a clear arm going for the ball, which in the rules would be an intentional handball if it was anywhere on the lower part of his arm as it was in an unnatural position, but the fact it hits the upper section of his arm leaves everyone divided on what the outcome should have been. I'm not defending Simpson here. I'm just raising the point that whilst many pundits will go on to say how it was 'a blatant penalty and sending off', it's not actually as black and white as they may think.
It's an interesting point. One that will divide everyone's opinion. But let's remember that in real time it's very difficult for a referee to make a decision on something like this unless he is ABSOLUTELY certain of the fact that it was an intentional hand ball. Thus it there's doubt..... It cannot be given. Thus all these sky sports slow motion replays that show it was a handball mean bollocks because it's the refs decision. The fact remains that although it was an intentional hand ball the ref at the time was not certain and thus.... Cannot give the decision. That's simples.
It's all very easy to give decisions with the help of slow motion replays but the ref has to act on the spur of the moment, and doesn't have the luxury of slo mo replays. The pundits sitting on their arses in the studio are making arses of themselves contradicting the refs decisions, I just wonder how they'd make out making split second decisions, it takes some of them half an hour to make their mind up what to say in the first place and even then they talk tripe. I'll refrain from using Lawro's name.
Not be funny but he's trying to you his chest/shoulder to clear the ball, wasn't Balotelli not praised for scoring a goal with his shoulder earlier in the season. He did take a silly risk though.
