omg maybe not. handled on the first ball upoh no said:
that one counts.. what a ball in too
***UEFA Euro 2024 Thread***
82,237 Views |
1780 Replies |
Last: 5 mo ago by jeffk
hahahah handball in the build up!
this will be a BS overturn if called back.
he handled itAustinScubaAg said:
this will be a BS overturn if called back.
Thats way harsh, but yes handled it
That's harsh. He wasn't the goal scorer and it certainly wasn't immediate.
it's the right call. the handball helped him control it.
right after getting shoved in the back. That is super harsh.oh no said:he handled itAustinScubaAg said:
this will be a BS overturn if called back.
where in the laws does it say it's okay to reach your arm out and handle the ball if you were jockeying with another player on your back first?AustinScubaAg said:right after getting shoved in the back. That is super harsh.oh no said:he handled itAustinScubaAg said:
this will be a BS overturn if called back.
it's harsh for Belgium to have a second one disallowed on close calls, but it's the correct call.
Slovakia and Romania could have a commanding hold on Group E over Belgium and Ukraine
France up next at 2pm. Hoping for another upset!
What an upset. Good on you Slovakia. Belgians massive oooph.
Belgium. Known for Waffles, mayo on fries and underperforming in soccer. Well and Eddie Merckx.
It is harsh because his arm extends after he was pulled back by the defender then the defender knocks his arm and forward and the ball barely brushes his hand. there was virtual no change to the flight of the ball. In the context of the play the contact was incidental.
I don't care which team one. I feel that was a harsh call in the context of the play and in the context to the law which says it must be viewed a intentional to over turn a goal on VAR.
I don't care which team one. I feel that was a harsh call in the context of the play and in the context to the law which says it must be viewed a intentional to over turn a goal on VAR.
the second one disallowed for hand ball was correct, but hard for any ref to see live. the first one disallowed for offsides was very close. ...could argue neither goal would have been disallowed just a few years ago due to technology. ..the graphic showing vibration/frequency waves of the hand hitting the ball on the bounce - that's crazy
— Bognár Domokos (@domabognar) June 17, 2024
I disagree on the second one. That was incidental not intentional handball which is not an over turn on VAR per the Laws.oh no said:
the second one disallowed for hand ball was correct, but hard for any ref to see live. the first one disallowed for offsides was very close. ...could argue neither goal would have been disallowed just a few years ago due to technology. ..the graphic showing vibration/frequency waves of the hand hitting the ball on the bounce - that's crazy
This is also the crap that makes handballs and VAR such a PIA. You never know how it will be interpreted on the day.
TWO GOALS DISALLOWED 😨
— betway (@betwayusa) June 17, 2024
Belgium (-200) have had TWO goals called back due to an offside and a handball 🫠
pic.twitter.com/6BqsDjBhdi
A goal is scored by the arm/hand of an attacking player; or if the ball touches an attacking player's hand/arm in the immediate goal-scoring build-up play. A handball can be called if the arm/hand gives the player an unfair advantage. Even if the attacker's arms were close to the body in a "natural position."
Does not have to be intentional.
Does not have to be intentional.
But was it intentional. I do not believe it was but the official must have to have overturned. Remember the law changed to say only an intentional handball can overturn a goal on VAR.wangus12 said:
Thats way harsh, but yes handled it
Where did you get this?Furlock Bones said:
A goal is scored by the arm/hand of an attacking player; or if the ball touches an attacking player's hand/arm in the immediate goal-scoring build-up play. A handball can be called if the arm/hand gives the player an unfair advantage. Even if the attacker's arms were close to the body in a "natural position."
Does not have to be intentional.
Yes the flight of the ball changed but it was not enough in my opinion to give him any advantage. Jut my personal opinion but in the context of the play it made no difference.Furlock Bones said:
A goal is scored by the arm/hand of an attacking player; or if the ball touches an attacking player's hand/arm in the immediate goal-scoring build-up play. A handball can be called if the arm/hand gives the player an unfair advantage. Even if the attacker's arms were close to the body in a "natural position."
Does not have to be intentional.
also, we have to remember that UEFA, Premier League, IFAB etc all have slightly different interpretations of handball. It's akin to what is a "catch" in football. It's the only rule in soccer that has been rewritten and reinterpreted so often that almost no knows what the rule is from game to game.AustinScubaAg said:Yes the flight of the ball changed but it was not enough in my opinion to give him any advantage. Jut my personal opinion but in the context of the play it made no difference.Furlock Bones said:
A goal is scored by the arm/hand of an attacking player; or if the ball touches an attacking player's hand/arm in the immediate goal-scoring build-up play. A handball can be called if the arm/hand gives the player an unfair advantage. Even if the attacker's arms were close to the body in a "natural position."
Does not have to be intentional.
From the IFAB release explain the change "Accidental handball that leads to a team-mate scoring a goal or having a goal-scoring opportunity will no longer be considered an offence."
what makes it tough is the ball in (from De Buyne?) was beautiful, the cross from Bakayoko(?) was perfect, the finish by Lukaku was outstanding. VAR makes it appear the handle gave Bakayoko an advantage and helped him maintained control of that ball-in. Ref had to disallow it, IMO.
Again helped does not matter at least to IFAB maybe UEFA gave different guidance I am not aware of. IFAB required it it be intentionaloh no said:
what makes it tough is the ball in (from De Buyne?) was beautiful, the cross from Bakayoko(?) was perfect, the finish by Lukaku was outstanding. VAR makes it appear the handle gave Bakayoko an advantage and helped him maintained control of that ball-in. Ref had to disallow it, IMO.
"Accidental handball that leads to a team-mate scoring a goal or having a goal-scoring opportunity will no longer be considered an offence."
By the way I was not listening to any audio so if the there was audio of the communication between the match official and VAR explaining the reasoning I was not able to here it. This is solely my interpretation based on the laws and the video.AustinScubaAg said:Again helped does not matter at least to IFAB maybe UEFA gave different guidance I am not aware of. IFAB required it it be intentionaloh no said:
what makes it tough is the ball in (from De Buyne?) was beautiful, the cross from Bakayoko(?) was perfect, the finish by Lukaku was outstanding. VAR makes it appear the handle gave Bakayoko an advantage and helped him maintained control of that ball-in. Ref had to disallow it, IMO.
"Accidental handball that leads to a team-mate scoring a goal or having a goal-scoring opportunity will no longer be considered an offence."
Var protocol.
Handball
Not sure where y'all are getting your information, but this is directly from the LoTG.
No goal.
Quote:
a. Goal/no goal
attacking team offence in the build-up to or scoring of the goal (handball, foul, offside etc
Handball
Quote:
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:scores in the opponents' goal:
- 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
- directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
- immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental
Not sure where y'all are getting your information, but this is directly from the LoTG.
No goal.
AustinScubaAg said:By the way I was not listening to any audio so if the there was audio of the communication between the match official and VAR explaining the reasoning I was not able to here it. This is solely my interpretation based on the laws and the video.AustinScubaAg said:Again helped does not matter at least to IFAB maybe UEFA gave different guidance I am not aware of. IFAB required it it be intentionaloh no said:
what makes it tough is the ball in (from De Buyne?) was beautiful, the cross from Bakayoko(?) was perfect, the finish by Lukaku was outstanding. VAR makes it appear the handle gave Bakayoko an advantage and helped him maintained control of that ball-in. Ref had to disallow it, IMO.
"Accidental handball that leads to a team-mate scoring a goal or having a goal-scoring opportunity will no longer be considered an offence."
I freaking wish. They can do it in cricket and rugby. They need to do this in soccer. Dunseth was saying this morning they should just feed the interaction between the ref and VAR into the broadcast and he as a commentator just shuts up while it is happening.
oh well. poooor Belgians. That's how they do it in Beligum.
It's called a Belgian Dip.
Time Austria and France!
It's called a Belgian Dip.
Time Austria and France!
Furlock Bones said:AustinScubaAg said:By the way I was not listening to any audio so if the there was audio of the communication between the match official and VAR explaining the reasoning I was not able to here it. This is solely my interpretation based on the laws and the video.AustinScubaAg said:Again helped does not matter at least to IFAB maybe UEFA gave different guidance I am not aware of. IFAB required it it be intentionaloh no said:
what makes it tough is the ball in (from De Buyne?) was beautiful, the cross from Bakayoko(?) was perfect, the finish by Lukaku was outstanding. VAR makes it appear the handle gave Bakayoko an advantage and helped him maintained control of that ball-in. Ref had to disallow it, IMO.
"Accidental handball that leads to a team-mate scoring a goal or having a goal-scoring opportunity will no longer be considered an offence."
I freaking wish. They can do it in cricket and rugby. They need to do this in soccer. Dunseth was saying this morning they should just feed the interaction between the ref and VAR into the broadcast and he as a commentator just shuts up while it is happening.
That conversation isn't necessarily in English. If the crew is from the same country it would be in their native language.
And while they are all conversant in English, as we saw with the WWC, trying to get a non native speaker to explain something technical in English to a a TV audience can be comical.
well I think the potential for comedy is a poor excuse to argue against being transparentQuote:
trying to get a non native speaker to explain something technical in English to a a TV audience can be comical
#46 beats #22, #48 beats #3… and now #25 takes on #2oh no said:
France up next at 2pm. Hoping for another upset!
Would make an excellent sweep of upsets if Austria can pull it off.
oh no said:well I think the potential for comedy is a poor excuse to argue against being transparentQuote:
trying to get a non native speaker to explain something technical in English to a a TV audience can be comical
What good does it do to broadcast a discussion in what may have been Turkish? And even supposing it's English, what good does that do for the broadcast of the match in say Albania?
I'm just saying that it's more complicated than it sounds. I would be all for transparency if you could pull it off but if all you got was broken English I'm not sure what value it adds.
I've listened to the published PRO feeds when they go over mistakes or when they use it to reinforce good decisions. There is less value than you would imagine.
My quote was from the IFAB clarifications.Rudyjax said:
Var protocol.Quote:
a. Goal/no goal
attacking team offence in the build-up to or scoring of the goal (handball, foul, offside etc
HandballQuote:
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:scores in the opponents' goal:
- 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
- directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
- immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental
Not sure where y'all are getting your information, but this is directly from the LoTG.
No goal.
Featured Stories
See All
21:35
15h ago
4.2k
Buzz Williams' Ags are proving why experience, continuity still matter
by Luke Evangelist
13:15
17h ago
2.8k