Premier League Gameweek 7

Yeah, that one you could maybe argue was intentional (I don't think it was and would have given the goal). There's no way Koscielny's today was on purpose.
No but it changed the flight of the ball and never should have stood..
 
OK, I'm going to say that Kos is windmilling his arms about all over the place trying to gain an advantage even if it's just trying to stay on his feet. Also, he's offside.
 
It has to be intentional to be given as handball. It does not matter that it changed the flight of the ball.

From the FAs rules...
"Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm."
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...fouls-and-misconduct.aspx#HTHqqxZjiIZEFZIS.99


The following must be considered:
  • the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
  • the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
  • the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement
  • touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement
  • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement
Position and movement... Both could be argued.
Plus as even Ox said after the game he couldnt tell if it was his goal or Kos so if Ox touched it it was offside.

Read more at http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...fouls-and-misconduct.aspx#sBezWSbK23UXEJfG.99
 
The following must be considered:
  • the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
  • the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
  • the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement
  • touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement
  • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) is an infringement
Position and movement... Both could be argued.
Plus as even Ox said after the game he couldnt tell if it was his goal or Kos so if Ox touched it it was offside.

Read more at http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...fouls-and-misconduct.aspx#sBezWSbK23UXEJfG.99

There's no way he meant to handle it. He was about 5 inches out and the ball was going in. If anything, his akward body shape was a result of him trying to not handle it!

As for Ox, that lying shit didn't even touch the ball, he's just trying to get the goal credited to himself!
 
7 games into the season. City was looking good at the start of last season. Us under LVG was top of the league for a week... And both fought for 4 place in the end.

After an international break the momentum can be turned easily in this early stage of the season.

Whatever helps you sleep.
 
It has to be intentional to be given as handball. It does not matter that it changed the flight of the ball.

From the FAs rules...
"Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm."
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...fouls-and-misconduct.aspx#HTHqqxZjiIZEFZIS.99

In our match, Graham Poll said something very weird to me. He said, 'We refs deal with consequences, not intentions' This was in relation to the Herrera challenge on Alan. If this is true then there would be a lot of penalties given for handball.
 
What does it matter? It resulted directly in a goal.
The rule for handball stipulates that there must be intent for the handball.

Personally, I think there should be an addendum about gaining a clear advantage (stopping a clear goal scoring opportunity or scoring a goal), but there is not. So no handball.
 
It has to be intentional to be given as handball. It does not matter that it changed the flight of the ball.

From the FAs rules...
"Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm."
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...fouls-and-misconduct.aspx#HTHqqxZjiIZEFZIS.99

It's "deliberate" hand ball, not "intentional". They're not the same thing (in football hand ball vernacular at least).

In the same way as a hand in an unnatural position preventing a shot on target is a penalty, there is absolutely no way a shot off target being deflected in by someone's outstretched hand is a legal goal.

I think it was given because nobody really knew what happened or who it hit. Terrible defending by Burnley. Either of the 2 Arsenal players should have buried it legally.
 
It's "deliberate" hand ball, not "intentional". They're not the same thing (in football hand ball vernacular at least).

In the same way as a hand in an unnatural position preventing a shot on target is a penalty, there is absolutely no way a shot off target being deflected in by someone's outstretched hand is a legal goal.

I think it was given because nobody really knew what happened or who it hit. Terrible defending by Burnley. Either of the 2 Arsenal players should have buried it legally.

Precisely, it's the law of common sense, the referee has the power to interpret, it should clearly have been disallowed but you take your luck when you can.
 
It's "deliberate" hand ball, not "intentional". They're not the same thing (in football hand ball vernacular at least).

In the same way as a hand in an unnatural position preventing a shot on target is a penalty, there is absolutely no way a shot off target being deflected in by someone's outstretched hand is a legal goal.

I think it was given because nobody really knew what happened or who it hit. Terrible defending by Burnley. Either of the 2 Arsenal players should have buried it legally.

I agree that shot may have hit the crossbar or gone over the top had koscielny's forearm not deflected down and into the net. I watched the replay on slo mo on my DVR. One angle shows the ref in a clear position maybe 4 or 5 yards away with a direct sight line. The hand ball whether intentional or not is so obvious it defies logic to that he wouldn't disallow it or talk to the linesman at least to be sure. You can also tell by Koscielny's guilty body language that he KNOWS that he batted it in with his arm. He even feigns some injury after he scores. (perhaps a sore forearm!!??) Burnley got utterly jobbed by the officials at the end of that game.
 
I agree that shot may have hit the crossbar or gone over the top had koscielny's forearm not deflected down and into the net. I watched the replay on slo mo on my DVR. One angle shows the ref in a clear position maybe 4 or 5 yards away with a direct sight line. The hand ball whether intentional or not is so obvious it defies logic to that he wouldn't disallow it or talk to the linesman at least to be sure. You can also tell by Koscielny's guilty body language that he KNOWS that he batted it in with his arm. He even feigns some injury after he scores. (perhaps a sore forearm!!??) Burnley got utterly jobbed by the officials at the end of that game.

I agree and if the ref saw the handball clearly and decided not to give it then it was an absolutely disgraceful decision.

Burnley could have helped themselves by not giving Sanchez so much time to pick out a cross.