Jump to content

Fox - It wasn't a Penalty - Official

dubai_phil

By dubai_phil,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2284201/GRAHAM-POLL--The-Official-Line-The-new-handball-rule-explained-Newcastle-got-lucky-Fox-penalty.html

 

Graham Poll explains the new Handball Interpretation and

 

Regarding handball they now ask the referee to consider the proximity of the potential offender to the person last playing the ball, the speed of the ball and importantly whether the offender's arms are in a natural or unnatural position.

 

So the question of intent is now, did the offender deliberately place his arms in an unnatural position to increase the chances of the ball hitting him?

If the answer to that is yes then it is correct to penalise that player even though it used to be argued that was ball to hand.

 

So, with three controversial handball decisions this weekend:

 

  • Craig Gardner (Sunderland)- penalty correctly given - his arm was in an unnatural position against West Brom
  • Gareth McAuley (West Brom)- correct decision not to award penalty - his arm was in a natural position
  • Danny Fox (Southampton) - penalty incorrectly given - his challenge was clumsy but his arm was not in an 'unnatural' positio

 

 

Interesting point made for future reference - Hand to Ball arguments are now irrelevant (so you can go into MLG mode when it happens again!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deano6

Deano6

Posted
Posted

Interesting Dubsie, thanks for that. I think a lot of refs would have given it tho, and I heard few complaining here (even tho it was Fox).

 

So we lost 4-1 to:

 

- an offside goal

- a pen that shouldn't have been

- a freak own goal

 

I guess luck evens itself out after all (pen v Villa, og vs Man City)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Interesting Dubsie, thanks for that. I think a lot of refs would have given it tho, and I heard few complaining here (even tho it was Fox).

 

So we lost 4-1 to:

 

- an offside goal

- a pen that shouldn't have been

- a freak own goal

 

I guess luck evens itself out after all (pen v Villa, og vs Man City)

 

4-2 actually but everything else was correct ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted (edited)

Good article cheers- reinforces the idea that it was a harsh decision. Just coz they're often given doesn't make it any more valid. Never bought into singling out refs but there should be a ref watch thread for upcoming fixtures on this place.

Edited by shurlock
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Barry Sanchez

Barry Sanchez

Posted
Posted

I just can imagine the eulogy.

 

If Daniel were here today he would not want you to be unhappy, he will want you to be angry and confused, can anyone remember that cross field pass against Reading? So leave here today confused, angry and and have an image of him being ghosted and losing his man in the box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andre

Andre

Posted
Posted

These laws need to be made consistent and uniform, there shouldn't be room for such interpretation. I personally think it was a penalty, based on the fact that his block with his hand interfered with the play and benefited his side unfairly, so I think that should be the rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
monosaint

monosaint

Posted
Posted

The more I look at it the less it looks like a Penalty. Garry Neville also said last nigh on MNF that he thought that it was definitely not a penalty. The CISSE goal was also offside. When the guy hit the long ball he was way offside and nobody else touched it before he struck the ball. All 4 Newcastle goals had an element of luck to them. Still, maybe that's all our bad luck over in one game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Barry Sanchez

Barry Sanchez

Posted
Posted (edited)

Whether it was offside or not Shaw jumped to early and who was covering Cisse? Or who was Shaw covering as they were out of position? The goal stood but if the defending was correct there would not of been a goal to talk about.

It was handball and a penalty as the referee gave it, harsh but it was.

The own goal was ***ing shocking and Fox's spacial awareness is 0, Aston Villa anyone?

 

Lets stop with this girly whining of its not fair and state the facts, we lost, we deserved to and Fox is total ****.

Edited by Barry Sanchez
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tajjuk

tajjuk

Posted
Posted
Interesting Dubsie, thanks for that. I think a lot of refs would have given it tho, and I heard few complaining here (even tho it was Fox).

 

So we lost 4-1 to:

 

- an offside goal

- a pen that shouldn't have been

- a freak own goal

 

I guess luck evens itself out after all (pen v Villa, og vs Man City)

 

I think it's fair to say we were a little unlucky in that game, we probably deserved a draw and we could have have easily won and I don't think Newcastle could have had too many complaints.

 

Agree with Barry though we need to get Fox and Hooiveld out of the team asap, both have cost us points and like Davis and Gazza we need to forget about them. Get Fonte back in next week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pingwing

pingwing

Posted
Posted

Clearly need a video ref to call this stuff, it's getting embarrassing how a multi billion pound league shown to over 100 countries in the world can tolerate crap officiating week in week out to a point where the league table is almost unrepresentative of a teams ability and instead represents who the refs like more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2284201/GRAHAM-POLL--The-Official-Line-The-new-handball-rule-explained-Newcastle-got-lucky-Fox-penalty.html

 

Graham Poll explains the new Handball Interpretation and

 

 

 

Interesting point made for future reference - Hand to Ball arguments are now irrelevant (so you can go into MLG mode when it happens again!)

 

Not sure how you read that and work out that "hand to ball arguments are irrelevant", the whole basis of the judgement is whether the player has deliberately tried to block the ball, if they haven't (and their hand is it a "natural" position) then it's the very definition of "ball to hand".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
trousers

trousers

Posted
Posted
Raise your right leg high, when running at pace, and see how high your left arm naturally goes.

 

I've just tried this in the condiments aisle at Sainsbury's and can confirm that my arm went up as high as Fox's. And I only clobbered one old dear in the process.

 

No penalty. #fact

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Olallana

Olallana

Posted
Posted
Whether it was offside or not Shaw jumped to early and who was covering Cisse? Or who was Shaw covering as they were out of position? The goal stood but if the defending was correct there would not of been a goal to talk about.

It was handball and a penalty as the referee gave it, harsh but it was.

The own goal was ***ing shocking and Fox's spacial awareness is 0, Aston Villa anyone?

 

Lets stop with this girly whining of its not fair and state the facts, we lost, we deserved to and Fox is total ****.

 

 

So what you are saying is that the linesman is forgiven for his BIG error due to that our players weren´t doing their job (defending) properly.

But our players can´t be forgiven and blaim the linesman for not doing his job properly...

 

If you have an opinion about things it should work both ways, should it not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
Clearly need a video ref to call this stuff, it's getting embarrassing how a multi billion pound league shown to over 100 countries in the world can tolerate crap officiating week in week out to a point where the league table is almost unrepresentative of a teams ability and instead represents who the refs like more.

 

Why would a video ref be any different? In cases like this it's a matter of opinion. Don't call for another ref just because you don't like this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
The more I look at it the less it looks like a Penalty. Garry Neville also said last nigh on MNF that he thought that it was definitely not a penalty. The CISSE goal was also offside. When the guy hit the long ball he was way offside and nobody else touched it before he struck the ball. All 4 Newcastle goals had an element of luck to them. Still, maybe that's all our bad luck over in one game.

Cissé was offside when the ball was kicked, which is not an offence by itself, but a lot happens between him being offside and ending up kicking the ball. It's not an easy decision to call since at the time of the kick he's in another area of the pitch and then two players have tried to head the ball and missed. It's the sort of situation where the linesman normally flags some time after the kick and everybody wonders 'what the f....' and then the linesman makes that gesture with his free arm swinging from side to side to show that the player had come back from an offside position. Could have gone either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Window Cleaner

Window Cleaner

Posted
Posted (edited)
All 4 Newcastle goals had an element of luck to them. Still, maybe that's all our bad luck over in one game.

 

 

Certainly not, in modern football bad reffing is as certain as death and taxes. Just because you get 3 iffy decisions against you one week it doesn't mean you'll be spared them the next. The game has become too fast and too intricate for the referee and assistants. When a ref costs 40 million £ and gets 200K£ a week for his talents it will be better.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Olallana

Olallana

Posted
Posted
Cissé was offside when the ball was kicked, which is not an offence by itself, but a lot happens between him being offside and ending up kicking the ball. It's not an easy decision to call since at the time of the kick he's in another area of the pitch and then two players have tried to head the ball and missed. It's the sort of situation where the linesman normally flags some time after the kick and everybody wonders 'what the f....' and then the linesman makes that gesture with his free arm swinging from side to side to show that the player had come back from an offside position. Could have gone either way.

 

Exactly that, but I dont agree it could have gone either way. That´s about as easy it can be to make an offside call for a linesman and that´s also their favourite gesture these days to explain a lot of offside calls.

If you cant trust a linesman to spot THAT call, then football has a big problem...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint Martini

Saint Martini

Posted
Posted
It wasn't a pen but "handballs" similar to Fox's are given more often than not. There's only one solution, tie all outfield player's hands behind their backs.

 

There's one solution, give a penalty/freekick for every time the ball touches a hand. No exceptions, I don't get why you wouldn't give a penalty in for instance Fox' case. He stops the ball from going towards the goal, he thus has an advantage from the ball touching a part of his body it shouldn't. What argument could you have for not giving a penalty? Would the same apply if you block the ball on the line? Just imagine the Ghana - Uruguay match in the 2010 WC. Suarez stops the ball with his hand but imagine his hand is in a natural position. How can you explain that it isn't a penalty? Rather unfair on the other team isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sotonist

sotonist

Posted
Posted
There's one solution, give a penalty/freekick for every time the ball touches a hand. No exceptions, I don't get why you wouldn't give a penalty in for instance Fox' case. He stops the ball from going towards the goal, he thus has an advantage from the ball touching a part of his body it shouldn't. What argument could you have for not giving a penalty? Would the same apply if you block the ball on the line? Just imagine the Ghana - Uruguay match in the 2010 WC. Suarez stops the ball with his hand but imagine his hand is in a natural position. How can you explain that it isn't a penalty? Rather unfair on the other team isn't it?

Michael Svensson stanging on the goal line, the ball fired at the goal, hits his hand hanging naturally by his side, penalty, red card. Genius.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
Raise your right leg high, when running at pace, and see how high your left arm naturally goes.

 

Agree to an extent but Fox was running to block a cross, he was aware that having his arms stuck out could result in the ball hitting them. It was harsh but I think it had to be given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Miltonroader07

Miltonroader07

Posted
Posted
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2284201/GRAHAM-POLL--The-Official-Line-The-new-handball-rule-explained-Newcastle-got-lucky-Fox-penalty.html

 

Graham Poll explains the new Handball Interpretation and

 

 

 

 

Interesting point made for future reference - Hand to Ball arguments are now irrelevant (so you can go into MLG mode when it happens again!)

 

Yeah that is a good post BUT Fox is still crap !!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
scotty

scotty

Posted
Posted
Why would a video ref be any different? In cases like this it's a matter of opinion. Don't call for another ref just because you don't like this one.

 

The point of this thread is that another ref (or at least, a former one) has already said it wasn't a pen.

 

Doubt many refs would not have given it on the day, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
The point of this thread is that another ref (or at least, a former one) has already said it wasn't a pen.

 

Doubt many refs would not have given it on the day, though.

 

A lot of this is a matter of opinion so what an ex-ref thinks does not really matter. Graham Poll is employed to give an insight into the thinking behind the decisions but at the end of the day it's the man in the middle who has to decide. We can't appeal to a higher authority if we don't like his decision nor put it to a vote. The guidelines for these sorts of incidents change all the time but as you say, I think most refs would have given it, or to put it another way, you'd need balls of steel not to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
  • Author
Posted
A lot of this is a matter of opinion so what an ex-ref thinks does not really matter. Graham Poll is employed to give an insight into the thinking behind the decisions but at the end of the day it's the man in the middle who has to decide. We can't appeal to a higher authority if we don't like his decision nor put it to a vote. The guidelines for these sorts of incidents change all the time but as you say, I think most refs would have given it, or to put it another way, you'd need balls of steel not to.

 

A primary reason for posting the OP in the FIRST case was that myself and I am sure many others on here did not know about the change in Interpretation this season.

 

As for Danny Fox, there is ONE point that not a single poster has made - there was a major clash of heads with a toon player (Taylor I believe) for which he appeared to receive treatment on the sideline.

 

Perhaps that knocked what little footballing sense he had out of him, who knows, but some of the vitriol against him is out of order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...