Fox - It wasn't a Penalty - Official

[Whitey Grandad]

That would be a penalty and a yellow.

 

Red cards are only given for a deliberate handball that denies a goal or a obvious scoring opportunity.

 

? If its a penalty it can't be a yellow in that circumstance.

[110_Persaint]

Doubt this will change anyone's thoughts on this muppet. Still should be nowhere near a premier league team.

[sotonist]

That would be a penalty and a yellow.

 

Red cards are only given for a deliberate handball that denies a goal or a obvious scoring opportunity.

No he was definitely sent off.

[Saint Martini]

No he was definitely sent off.

 

Sending-off offencesA player, substitute or substituted player is sent off if he commits any of the following seven offences:

• serious foul play

• violentconduct

• spitting at an opponent or any other person

• denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity

by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within

his own penalty area)

• denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving

towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a

penalty kick

• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures

• receiving a second caution in the same match

A player, substitute or substituted player who has been sent off must leave the vicinity of the field of play and the technical area.

 

Now explain to me why it would be a red card if it wasn't deliberate.

[Lazlo78]

Who's Graham Poll anyway? We know better than he does. We're Southampton fans and we wanted it to be a penalty, because we don't like Danny Fox.

 

Sounds like that to me.

 

[david in sweden]

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

 

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

 

 

interesting point ..YES, but what's an " un-natural position " when you're pumping your arms, running full pelt side by side with a player and he kicks the ball against your hand /arm ?

[scotty]

w-wait cracking unfunny trolls on main board is ok surely??? It's only posting serious punions that it is bad reputations! Spudders? Ruling please!

 

Its definitely an infraction, bear. Your arm was in an unnatural position.

[sotonist]

Now explain to me why it would be a red card if it wasn't deliberate.

Because referees.

 

Because Mike Dean in particular.

 

Also because Tottenham not winning against Southampton at WHL.

 

http://www.southampton-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/saints_to_appeal_svensson_dismissal_60713/index.shtml

 

Maybe you could explain to me why it would be a booking and a penalty if not deliberate?

 

Looking at the rest of the laws supplied by the same source, I find a penalty kick is awarded when any of the 10 fouls for which a direct free kick would be awarded is committed within the penalty area. Deliberately handling the ball is one of the 10 fouls for which a direct free kick can be awarded.

 

No deliberate hand ball, no foul, no card, no penalty. Am I missing something?

[Ohio Saint]

New handball interpretations = Defensive lineups that look like River Dance.

[Saint Martini]

Because referees.

 

Because Mike Dean in particular.

 

Also because Tottenham not winning against Southampton at WHL.

 

http://www.southampton-mad.co.uk/news/tmnw/saints_to_appeal_svensson_dismissal_60713/index.shtml

 

Maybe you could explain to me why it would be a booking and a penalty if not deliberate?

 

Looking at the rest of the laws supplied by the same source, I find a penalty kick is awarded when any of the 10 fouls for which a direct free kick would be awarded is committed within the penalty area. Deliberately handling the ball is one of the 10 fouls for which a direct free kick can be awarded.

 

No deliberate hand ball, no foul, no card, no penalty. Am I missing something?

 

I'm not arguing referees don't make mistakes. Absolutely not. But according to the laws of the game that should not be a penalty.

 

And you are entirely correct, a non-deliberate handball is never a foul and shouldn't be a freekick or penalty.

 

My suggestion is that it is too difficult for a referee to make a determination on intent (unless it is very obvious, i.e. Suarez vs. Ghana). I'm of the opinion that any handball should be punished with a freekick/penalty but only in case of deliberate handball should a card be given (in most cases yelllow, red in case its too stop an obvious goal chance).

 

If we apply that to the Michael Svensson incident he would not have gotten a card (non-intentional) but would have gotten a penalty against him, which is fair in my opinion.

[sotonist]

I'm not arguing referees don't make mistakes. Absolutely not. But according to the laws of the game that should not be a penalty.

 

And you are entirely correct, a non-deliberate handball is never a foul and shouldn't be a freekick or penalty.

 

My suggestion is that it is too difficult for a referee to make a determination on intent (unless it is very obvious, i.e. Suarez vs. Ghana). I'm of the opinion that any handball should be punished with a freekick/penalty but only in case of deliberate handball should a card be given (in most cases yelllow, red in case its too stop an obvious goal chance).

 

If we apply that to the Michael Svensson incident he would not have gotten a card (non-intentional) but would have gotten a penalty against him, which is fair in my opinion.

Yeah it's a gap in the laws. Unless a referee sends Svensson off, the goal opportunity is denied. As I was saying a penalty would be justifiable by common sense. Ball deflected by a part of the player that couldn't legally strike the ball.

 

In Fox's case the deflection only denied a cross into the box. Penalty? Not for me.

[The9]

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.

 

It is VERY easy for the linesman to look across the line when the kick is taken, register that Cisse will be offside if he plays the ball next, and then put his flag up when he does so. Very, very easy, for someone who is basically only there to do that and check if the ball is still on the pitch or not.

 

As for Shearer's "you couldn't disallow that", it's another reason to get rid of the Old School of ill-informed pundits on MotD spouting cliches and irrelevances.

[The9]

Yeah it's a gap in the laws. Unless a referee sends Svensson off, the goal opportunity is denied. As I was saying a penalty would be justifiable by common sense. Ball deflected by a part of the player that couldn't legally strike the ball.

 

There's no gap in the laws, if it hit Svensson and he didn't move towards it or try and block it, you play on and it's not handball. If he's moved to block it then it's deliberate and it's a goalscoring opportunity and a red card.

 

Whether "accruing an advantage by accidental handball" should be a punishable offence by the laws of the game is an entirely different discussion. By the current laws, accidental handball is not a foul.

[DT]

I think it was a harsh penalty but Fox is still absolute pants.

[Whitey Grandad]

It is VERY easy for the linesman to look across the line when the kick is taken, register that Cisse will be offside if he plays the ball next, and then put his flag up when he does so. Very, very easy, for someone who is basically only there to do that and check if the ball is still on the pitch or not.

 

As for Shearer's "you couldn't disallow that", it's another reason to get rid of the Old School of ill-informed pundits on MotD spouting cliches and irrelevances.

 

These linesmen ( I cannot get used to calling them assistant referees) are very well trained and specialise in their job so I would be pretty certain that he saw that Cissé was in an offside position when the ball was kicked. The trouble is that FIFA have meddled so much with the interpretation of the law that once the other two player had gone for the ball and Cissé had run back onside enough time may have passed that he may have been considered 'inactive' in the 'first phase'. No, I don't like it either. You're quite right about the second part.