faddythedaddy Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 Even more frustrating thing is it was going miles over Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underboyleheating Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 If the ball hit Lasley's arm, there is no 'technically' about it. It's not a pen. It has to be deliberate. The referee must have judged it as being deliberate hand ball, however, only Lasley can say if it was, or not. Has he spoken about it? Edit: I found this quote in an article about the hand ball rule from 2013... 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. And on this blog, Flaws of the Game. http://flawsofthegame.blogspot.co.uk/p/deliberate-handball.html ...there are actually three types of handball: 1) an unavoidable accident 2) an arm moved from the player’s side, risking being struck by the ball 3) a deliberate striking of the ball with the arm The appropriate courses of action by the referee are respectively: 1) no action 2) a free-kick or penalty 3) a free-kick or penalty AND a caution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 2 and 3 both seem like deliberate to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweed Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 Just watched TV highlights on BBC. Two observations: * No evidence of a handball by Skippy at his second goal. Camera angle isn't perfect but nothing obvious. * Technically a penalty but a very soft one. Given that the ball hit Las's arm at point blank range there was nothing he could do about it. Probably the same as Stephen McManus's red card penalty against Aberdeen. The conclusion though is now that every ball in the box that hits a defender on the hand or arm, that isn't by his side is a penalty. We had a similar claim last Wednesday when Marvin's attempted cross struck an outstretched defender's arm in the box - no penalty. From now on our players should be instructed to claim vehemently, and in numbers, every time a ball strikes an opponent's arm or hand in the box. As there is no camera in the East Stand I doubt anyone who wasn't in it will ever see the handball as it was when he was on the deck and his body will conceal it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underboyleheating Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 Watching the penalty incident on Sportscene in HD, Lasley’s hand is certainly in an unnatural position when he deflects the ball, a definite penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweed Posted January 3, 2016 Report Share Posted January 3, 2016 Watching Sportscene has been a harrowing experience tonight. I've agreed with Pat Nevin on several occasions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 Watching the penalty incident on Sportscene in HD, Lasley’s hand is certainly in an unnatural position when he deflects the ball, a definite penalty. Going by the above guidance the referee clearly decided that it was a case of hand to ball, ie Lasley's premeditated intention was to handle the ball. He does not appear to have taken into account the very short distance between the attacker's boot and Lasley, nor the power with which the ball was struck. As regards the clause "an arm moved from the player’s side, risking being struck by the ball", I would say that its almost impossible to move or jump without moving your arm from your side. The only way for a player to avoid that scenario is to move carefully with your arms at your side or simply avoid trying to block a shot - both clearly absurd. Going back to last Wednesday and Marvin Johnson's cross, and applying the above interpretation then it was a clear penalty and a yellow card. The referee gave neither. The difference in opinion between us on this forum is perhaps understandable but what isn't understandable and very worrying indeed is the difference in interpretation between individual grade 1 referees. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underboyleheating Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 Going by the above guidance the referee clearly decided that it was a case of hand to ball, ie Lasley's premeditated intention was to handle the ball. I assumed he applied the ‘rule?’ of unnatural arm position, in which you risk being struck by the ball due to the position of your arm/hand. This ‘rule?’ appears to be used by some refs but not all. It would also appear that he thought Lasley was far enough away (roughly 10/12ft) from the attacking player to avoid being struck by the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kmcalpin Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 I assumed he applied the ‘rule?’ of unnatural arm position, in which you risk being struck by the ball due to the position of your arm/hand. This ‘rule?’ appears to be used by some refs but not all. It would also appear that he thought Lasley was far enough away (roughly 10/12ft) from the attacking player to avoid being struck by the ball. I'm not sure that your assumption is correct. Given that Las was booked it would seem that the referee took the view that it was deliberate handball. Going by the above photo I'd say that Las is about 8-10 feet away from the ball, which doesn't give him a lot of time to react. Were his arms up to protect his face? Interestingly of the 15 outfield players in the photo, excluding Conor Ripley and the striker hitting the ball, about 10 could be deemed to have their arms in an unnatural position. What would have happened if the shot had cannoned off Las's leg and hit a Hamilton player on the arm or another of our defenders on the arm? Our officials need to use more common sense here in their interpretation. Generally speaking a penalty should only be awarded if its a case of hand/arm to ball or a player adopts a stance with his arms spreadeagled quite deliberately to block a shot - which would be clearly unnatural. We will see many more incidents like the above this season where no penalty will be awarded. If more referees take such a strict interpretation then what is to prevent a manager from instructing a player who is on the edge of, or in, a packed penalty area and with little or no prospect of getting off a clear shot on goal, from deliberately aiming at a defender's arm which wasn't by his side? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 I assumed he applied the rule? of unnatural arm position, in which you risk being struck by the ball due to the position of your arm/hand. This rule? appears to be used by some refs but not all. It would also appear that he thought Lasley was far enough away (roughly 10/12ft) from the attacking player to avoid being struck by the ball. Unatural arm position ? i am still not convinced having watched thw highlights a few times. It looks like his arm was barely away from his body whats unatural about that. i can see the argument if it was at a 45 degree or more angle but it was not, it was ball to hand, no way for the player to avoid it, no intent, never stopped a goal. So for me never a pen, simple fact is the ref fecked up and cost us the win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 Not only has the ref fucked up and cost us points in this game, he's also hindered our chances of picking up points in the next game due to Lasleys suspension!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
numpty Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 Unatural arm position ? i am still not convinced having watched thw highlights a few times. It looks like his arm was barely away from his body whats unatural about that.His arm is at full stretch above his head. Deliberate or not, that's a pretty unnatural position when you're running around on a football pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superward Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 Said it earlier in the thread but I would be looking for a a penalty down the other end. So annoying as it is...I have made peace with the decision. However, I do think both Crawford and Lasley should have walked for second bookable offences before this even came about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
something else Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 HIs arm is at full stretch above his head. Deliberate or not, that's not where your hand should normally be when you're running around on a football pitch. I take it you've never played the game at any level? When you fly into a tackle or move to block a ball, or even jumping for a header, your arms and hands move to positions which aren't 'natural'. You cannot run around a pitch with your hands and arms down by your side. The force in which the ball was struck also made it impossible for lasley to do anything about it or even attempt a block with his hand. It was never a penalty imo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacol Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 I take it you've never played the game at any level? When you fly into a tackle or move to block a ball, or even jumping for a header, your arms and hands move to positions which aren't 'natural'. You cannot run around a pitch with your hands and arms down by your side. The force in which the ball was struck also made it impossible for lasley to do anything about it or even attempt a block with his hand. It was never a penalty imo. I was just about to say the same thing, it would have been impossible for Lasley to turn and attempt to close down the Accies player without his arm being in that or a very similar position, therefore that is a natural position. It is also similar to the penalty conceded against Inverness when McManus was adjudged to have handled while being nudged and not facing the ball his arm then couldn't really have been anywhere else. To me it highlights that so many of the referees have not played football at a sufficient level to basically understand the game. It is possible to learn the rules from seminars and rule books but have no real understanding of playing football. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 The "unnatural" position of arms, should really be to prevent situations like a defender standing with arms outstretched in front of a free kick. Anything else is too subjective, and should revert to the "deliberate" rule. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigWeegieDosser Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 A series of unfortunate events culminating in a rash instinctive attempt at a block. -Robinson came on and had an absolute 'mate -Cadden came on and we couldn't retain possession sufficiently to run the clock down - their final surge was met by various powderpuff challenges Lessons learned, two points dropped, we move on , buoyed by the fact that we didn't cave in when we went a goal down and confident that we're doing much more right than wrong these days. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Wispy Flossy Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 The "unnatural" position of arms, should really be to prevent situations like a defender standing with arms outstretched in front of a free kick. Anything else is too subjective, and should revert to the "deliberate" rule.It was a stonewall penalty. We have reasons to question the refs performance for the first 90 and a bit minutes but I can't see why he could award anything other than a penalty. We only have ourselves to blame for not winning the game 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
middleeastdave Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 How many games does Keith miss out on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweed Posted January 4, 2016 Report Share Posted January 4, 2016 Just one for two yellows unless the two yellows also took him over the threshold. And it'll be the Hearts game, not the Cove one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pretzel Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 My good friend (its not shitey arse btw) currently plys his trade with the Accies these days, was chatting to him earlier about the game and he was saying they were absolutely pishing themselves at the decisions they were getting away with hence why imrie and co ripped the crap in the 2nd half more so. Still beeling from the penalty decision, looking back at the game at NDP earlier in the season a similar scenario happened around the 90th min where an Accies player handled echoing what happened at the weekends game and we got heehaw. The standard of referees in this country really is pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geedub Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Lasley probably should have been sent off before it even happened. On a yellow and he made a couple rash challenges plus gave away a free kick for pulling back an Accies player trying to break away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faddythedaddy Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 Correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Dosser Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 If there are some on here who feel aggrieved about the "penalty", they should take a look at the one Real Madrid got last week. The opposing defender slid in low to block the Real cross, with his arm on the grass in front of his leg. The ball was smashed off his arm and the referee immediately gave a penalty. Of course, Barça and Real get all the decisions in La Ligua. Familiar, anyone? I had some respect for Accies under Alex Neil but their time-wasting and deep-sea diving on Saturday really cheesed me off. Of course, you could argue that they simply took advantage of a weak and ineffectual referee (as Pretzel suggested) but over three minutes when their goalie had a terminal dislocated eyelash really took the biscuit. And then only one minute was added for all that nonsense. McGhee has made quite a difference already but if he'd brought on Clarkson or Faddy instead of Robinson we would have retained possession much better and I don't think we'd be on here moaning. Lessons learned, I hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted January 5, 2016 Report Share Posted January 5, 2016 TBF, in the last few games before Accies, we had done quite well at closing out a game. We just blew it on this occasion, but as you say - hopefully lessons learned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.