Ref Watch Referees and things .....

[Somerset Ex-TTB]

I was behind the shot in the East Greens and it was going towards the goal. However with the angle it would of been difficult to tell if it was going in. (Remember Freddy against Huddersfield? a couple of year ago)

The point of the matter is that even if it wasn't on target, it could of hit the woodwork and bounced anywhere, a defender could of cleared it straight to a Southend player, who would of had the job of putting it in an empty net from 30 odd yards, or it could of gone out for a goal kick, or been cleared to safety, or bobbled around and gone anywhere.

The point of this is that whichever way you look at it, the handball prevented a clear cut goal scoring opportunity whether the shot was on target or not.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

I have just seen the highlights of the game on Virgin media...I didn't realse how far out of the penalty area the keeper was. It wasn't just a stick your hand out type of thing, it was a full on dive to stop the ball going past him...

Red card for me everytime. If it was in the permiership, it would have been a Red!!

 

[fbm]

Personally I would like to thank Mick for his initial post. I'm not a referee and never have been... I did half a game once and it was the hardest thing I'd ever had to do. Obvious decisions that as a player or spectator I would have seen were missed... good job it was a friendly!

Anyway, I'm not a ref crucifier generally and realise just how hard a job they have with one pair of eyes, a few seconds to make a decision and often a baying crowd and pressure from the players trying to influence them one way or another.

I am also very grateful to Mick for clarification of the rules concerning deliberate handball and it would appear that the assessor has NOT ripped Ward to shreds - on another thread on here somewhere I'm sure I read that the assessor backed him up afterwards. No doubt I will be corrected but I am sure that once upon a time deliberate handball WAS a red card offence and it was changed to avoid the double punishment of a player handling in the box, getting sent off and giving away a penalty which mostly would be converted.

And again, this is where us fans really get it wrong as well. There is little purpose in us comparing Ward's decision not to send Phillips off last Saturday with what happened a few years ago because the rules and the way the officials are told to interpret them change from season to season. What was a yellow last year will be a red this year or possibly not even an offence next year! It always amazes me as to just how many fans still think the old offside rule applies.

I thought on Saturday that his decision to allow the keeper to stay was one of if not THE worst decision I have ever witnessed. Further, it seems that the players and 99% of the fans (including the Rovers ones) thought so as well as everyone - even Phillips himself I imagine - expected him to walk. You could almost see the relief as he scurried back to his goal in case Ward changed his mind.

So, it would seem that if he has seen red, no-one would have complained. Isn't it therefore time the league looked at the rules then?

For me, if a keeper deliberately handles outside the area, then he is cheating. This is where I do disagree with Mick's interpretaion of the verb "cheat". The actual Oxford English Dictionary definition is as follows -

Cheat - verb 1; act dishonestly or unfairly in order to gain an advantage. 2; deprive of something by deceitful or unfair means.

The 2nd definition is the most appropriate here, especially the unfair means bit.

So, whilst deliberate handball remains a yellow card offence, surely a different rule should be applied for the keeper? For instance, he is the only player allowed to handle it at all, so deliberate handball inside the area for the keeper is not an offence. So, the actual offence should be "deliberate handball outside the area by the golkeeper". This is akin to the "professional foul" once frequently commited by the last defender to stop the striker having a clear run on goal. Was there ever an offence that made the attacking sides fans blood boil so much? To have that goalscoring chance denied by an act of cheating? Because that is what it was. Cheating. Bringing down a player who in all likelihood would have scored a goal if they hadn't, i.e. depriving the attacking team of a chance by unfair means (see definition 2).

For me, Phillips took an almighty chance at the weekend by coming out of his area at all. But having come out, he then stayed out for probably 10-15 seconds, tried to play the ball again, and, when Freedman got past him and shot goalwards, dived full length to make the save of the match.

Now, who knows whether the ball would have gone in? But without the keeper in the goal, there is always an improved chance of a goal because the one person who can stop it with his hands just ain't there. Was there any Southend player in the box? Can't remember and haven't seen the highlights. But the keeper cheated to deprive us of a goalscoring opportunity as he obviously thought that if the ball got past him then there may well have been a goal scored and it would have been his fault as he hadn't been where he should be, i.e. guarding his net.

That, in my view, SHOULD be a straight red card offence, and perhaps the league ought to be lobbied in order to make that so. It seems an appropriate punishment for the crime. The yellow card does not.

 

[Exiled Shrimper]

2002-3 ... we had 6 players booked that day. Am sure everyone on here was up in arms about the injustice of it. :)

As I remember that instance, it was ridiculously wet and Flahavan actually claimed the ball a couple of yards inside the penalty area and slid outside with forward momentum. Completely different to a goalkeeper who has already burst out of his area, pushed an attacker out of the way to try and get to a ball, leaping to his right to make a save from a goalbound shot, although I guess it proves that every instance, even with regards to the same offence, is different.

For the record, I fully expected Flahavan to go, despite the conditions, because there was the prospect of a goal coming about had he released the ball. Of course, I was delighted when he wasn't, although the Torquay supporters wouldn't've seen it the same way. I also saw Mark Bunn topple out of his area for Northampton Town Reserves a few years back a Sixfields, merely losing his balance, and be shown a straight red when there was no Southend player anywhere near him, which was an equally ridicuous decision to Saturday, IMHO.

 

[Lord Football]

I wasn't there (thanks to the lurgy) so I didn't see it, but an important point...

You get sent off for denying a obvious goalscoring opportunity, not deliberate handball. Deliberate handball is yellow.

If in the view of the referee the ball was not going in, then it wasn't "obvious" and as such a yellow card would be correct.

I was pulled up on assessment at Canvey for walking a keeper for handling outside when it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity.

 

[JoshC]

Anyone remember Barnet keeper Ross Flitney getting sent off at old trafford after losing his barings catching a long clearance. If that was a red card then this should have been...

 

[fbm]

Anyone remember Barnet keeper Ross Flitney getting sent off at old trafford after losing his barings catching a long clearance. If that was a red card then this should have been...

Yes but see a quote from my earlier post in this thread -

There is little purpose in us comparing Ward's decision not to send Phillips off last Saturday with what happened a few years ago because the rules and the way the officials are told to interpret them change from season to season. What was a yellow last year will be a red this year or possibly not even an offence next year!

It may well be that when a few seasons back when Barnet played Man Utd the refs were encouraged to send a keeper off for handball outside the area,

 

[Exiled Shrimper]

...You get sent off for denying a obvious goalscoring opportunity, not deliberate handball. Deliberate handball is yellow.

If in the view of the referee the ball was not going in, then it wasn't "obvious" and as such a yellow card would be correct.

I was pulled up on assessment at Canvey for walking a keeper for handling outside when it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity.

The terminology here, as I said in another thread, is ambiguous. The word "obvious" suggests that the ball should be going in, but that is followed by "goalscoring opportunity". I defy anyone to tell me that Saturday's incident was not a "goalscoring opportunity" as the ball was flying goalwards, and the goalkeeper thought it was "obvious" enough to fling himself full-length to make the save.

The positive thing for me is that we went on and won the game, despite the players clearly feeling that an injustice had occurred here and then again when Clarke's 'goal' was ruled out directly afterwards. We could so easily have fallen apart and allowed Rovers back into the game.

Regardless of a slight difference of opinion, I'm extremely grateful to Mick and the other referees that have posted since the match to try and clear things up - it's certainly shown the decision more from the referee's position, and I can almost see where he was coming from in reaching it!

 

[Mick]

Anyone remember Barnet keeper Ross Flitney getting sent off at old trafford after losing his barings catching a long clearance. If that was a red card then this should have been...

Josh, I mentioned that earlier in the thread. If you are going to join in the discussion, and you are most welcome, it is helpful to read what has gone before.

An historic and discredited-on-appeal red card is not a good precedent to judge anything by.

 

[Mick]

In that instance a yellow card would have been correct if there was no goal threat, but in terms of Saturday how Phillips got away with it beggars belief!!!


http://www.football.virginmedia.com...ideoIndex/0,,12555,00.html?mvnAssetId=3492441

No, we're still having trouble with this. Catching a ball outside of the area with no goal threat whatsoever should be a free-kick NOT a yellow card. See the very first message of this thread ... yes I know it's a long way back!

 

[Mick]

I wasn't there (thanks to the lurgy) so I didn't see it, but an important point...

You get sent off for denying a obvious goalscoring opportunity, not deliberate handball. Deliberate handball is yellow.
If in the view of the referee the ball was not going in, then it wasn't "obvious" and as such a yellow card would be correct.

I was pulled up on assessment at Canvey for walking a keeper for handling outside when it wasn't a goalscoring opportunity.

aaaargh ... deliberate handball is not yellow it's a freekick

What on earth did you do that for ?

 

[Lord Football]

aaaargh ... deliberate handball is not yellow it's a freekick

What on earth did you do that for ?

Yes it is.

It comes under the caution header "unsporting behaviour", and for FA Panel codes it is HB (you'll see it on those nice yellow forms). **


** not being registered for 2 years, the above is bollocks if they've changed, but I don't think they have!



As for the Canvey keeper. Nine minutes into the first game of the season, which was also an assessment. I panicked a bit, thought that was what the assessor would want to see and hey presto. Game ended up going to extra time.

 

[Mick]

Yes it is.

It comes under the caution header "unsporting behaviour", and for FA Panel codes it is HB (you'll see it on those nice yellow forms). **


** not being registered for 2 years, the above is bollocks if they've changed, but I don't think they have!

It's hardly surprising that half the crowd are unsure of these issues when qualified referees get it wrong. I repeat for the final time (sighs of relief all round) :

Handball must be deliberate and the sanction for it is a direct free-kick (or a penalty). There is no mandatory card for handball.

If in, the opinion of the referee, the handball constituted unsporting behaviour then a yellow card will be shown. If, in the opinion of the referee, an obvious goalscoring opportunity is denied by the handball, a red card will be shown. This applies equally to a goalkeeper or outfield player.

Handball therefore can be unsporting but is not necessarily so.

By the way, no Refwatch for tonight yet as I don't think it will be on. Keith Hill is the appointed referee although he hasn't refereed for a month due to injury.

 

[McNasty]

By the way, no Refwatch for tonight yet as I don't think it will be on. Keith Hill is the appointed referee although he hasn't refereed for a month due to injury.

Let's hope if the match is on Mr Hill is off.

 

[Andyhsufc]

Let's hope if the match is on Mr Hill is off.

Keith Hill has got to be possibly one of the worst refs in the FL

 

[Matt the Shrimp]

All well & good SG, but isn't the real issue the inconsistency again. I've been going to footy for nigh on 40 years & I don't personally remember seeing a keeper not sent off before for handball outside his area, sometimes in the most innocuous of fashions, in a game I've been at. It may have happened but my memory isn't that good, whoever you are.

Two words:

Harald Schumacher.

* * *

It happens, Hooly. Whether you choose to remember it or not is a different matter.

Matt

 

[Pubey]

It's hardly surprising that half the crowd are unsure of these issues when qualified referees get it wrong. I repeat for the final time (sighs of relief all round) :

Handball must be deliberate and the sanction for it is a direct free-kick (or a penalty). There is no mandatory card for handball.

If in, the opinion of the referee, the handball constituted unsporting behaviour then a yellow card will be shown. If, in the opinion of the referee, an obvious goalscoring opportunity is denied by the handball, a red card will be shown. This applies equally to a goalkeeper or outfield player.

Handball therefore can be unsporting but is not necessarily so.

By the way, no Refwatch for tonight yet as I don't think it will be on. Keith Hill is the appointed referee although he hasn't refereed for a month due to injury.

So if a player completely 100% accidently handballs it and diverts the ball wide of the goal when it was going in (say the defender was facing the other way and couldn't possibly have done it on purpose), it wouldn't even be a foul/penalty etc.

Personally, I like the rule in hockey which determines it a foul if a handball (foot) means the play gains an advantage from it (irrespective of if it is on purpose or not). the difficulty would probably be the failure of many refs in this country being able to properly play 'advantage'.

 

[C'mon you Shrimpers]

Two words:

Harald Schumacher.

* * *

It happens, Hooly. Whether you choose to remember it or not is a different matter.

Matt

I don't think Schumacher gets his hand on the ball but may be wrong. However for our younger viewers this is what Matt's talking about (I think) Ouch.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=3byTNRoxujo

 

[BILLERICAY BLUE]

Two words:

Harald Schumacher.

* * *

It happens, Hooly. Whether you choose to remember it or not is a different matter.

Matt

Schumacher wasn't sent off for handling outside the area, he wasn't sent off for nearly killing (literally) Patrick Battiston. Very unlike you Matt, not to have the correct facts. I put it down to the sleepless nights you must be having at the moment :)

 

[Gremlin]

Matt's point is that Schumacher WASN'T sent off.