| “Maguire handball was correct decision” 12:02 - Sep 9 with 4011 views | Chris_ITFC |
Official verdict. Time to move on, but what a SHOCK.
“Maguire's arms are within his bodyline meaning that the contact with his right arm was accidental and not a punishable handball offence given that Maguire was not the goal scorer. The shot was clearly off target and then deflected in via the defender for a clear own goal. The panel supported the referee's call to award the goal, 4:1, with one panellist considering the handball to be deliberate.”
https://resources.premierleagu |  |
| |  |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:13 - Sep 9 with 980 views | Chris_ITFC |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 12:19 - Sep 9 by soupytwist |
So if you move your arms directly forwards to touch the ball with your hand, as long as the arms are not outside the boundaries of your body, it's permissible?
The open palm action as demonstrated here by Black Lace would be fine then?
 |
10/10 for the point. 11/10 for the use of graphic. | |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:36 - Sep 9 with 926 views | VanSaParody |
It's irrelevant whether Maguire's shot was off target, then hit a defender & went in for an own goal
4 out of 5 on this panel are WRONG that the handball was ACCIDENTAL just because his hands were within the shape of his body
He instinctively (or not) moved his hands towards the ball, perhaps to stop it hitting him in the face, as it was bouncing upwards
If he doesn't use his hands, & tries to control the ball with either his tummy, chest or even his face, the ball would likely have continued it's upward trajectory, so he may not have had time to get it under enough control to get a shot away
Just because I'm an Ipswich fan & this decision went against Ipswich, is NOT why the above is the opinion I've formed.
It's because it's right
& I'd say this even if this type of decision went for us v them up the road!
THAT law needs to be changed NOW |  | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:37 - Sep 9 with 926 views | SamWhiteUK |
I think the issue with this ruling is the use of the word "accidental" and therefore the implication of there being a "deliberate" option.
How many handballs are actually deliberate? Maradona vs England, Suarez vs Ghana, DJ vs Cardiff...
But if a defender launches themselves in the way of a shot and a penalty is given because it strikes his hand away from his body - even if he's jumped in with his feet - it doesn't mean he's deliberately handballed it. It would be given correctly as a penalty but it's still accidental.
I think the wording should be changed to "avoidable" vs "unavoidable" rather than accidental vs deliberate. Maguires was definitely avoidable and therefore the goal shouldn't have stood. |  | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:40 - Sep 9 with 912 views | Chris_ITFC |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:37 - Sep 9 by SamWhiteUK |
I think the issue with this ruling is the use of the word "accidental" and therefore the implication of there being a "deliberate" option.
How many handballs are actually deliberate? Maradona vs England, Suarez vs Ghana, DJ vs Cardiff...
But if a defender launches themselves in the way of a shot and a penalty is given because it strikes his hand away from his body - even if he's jumped in with his feet - it doesn't mean he's deliberately handballed it. It would be given correctly as a penalty but it's still accidental.
I think the wording should be changed to "avoidable" vs "unavoidable" rather than accidental vs deliberate. Maguires was definitely avoidable and therefore the goal shouldn't have stood. |
Very true. So many ‘accidental’ handballs are given, clearly, so why is that used as a reason not to give this? | |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:47 - Sep 9 with 901 views | surreyblue |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:37 - Sep 9 by SamWhiteUK |
I think the issue with this ruling is the use of the word "accidental" and therefore the implication of there being a "deliberate" option.
How many handballs are actually deliberate? Maradona vs England, Suarez vs Ghana, DJ vs Cardiff...
But if a defender launches themselves in the way of a shot and a penalty is given because it strikes his hand away from his body - even if he's jumped in with his feet - it doesn't mean he's deliberately handballed it. It would be given correctly as a penalty but it's still accidental.
I think the wording should be changed to "avoidable" vs "unavoidable" rather than accidental vs deliberate. Maguires was definitely avoidable and therefore the goal shouldn't have stood. |
The wording of the accidental handball law has a lot of heavy lifting done by "natural position" and "in the silhouette of the body". The first one makes sense, but not sure about the second one.
I like your avoidable vs unavoidable terminology. |  | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:01 - Sep 9 with 870 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 13:15 - Sep 9 by surreyblue |
The more I look at this, the more I think the problem sits with the accidental handball rule.
The existence of an accidental handball rule is important as it prevents ridiculous decisions where the ball is blasted at a players hand from a yard away in a position next to their body and a penalty is awarded.
I can also understand the "accidental handball directly scoring a goal" rule to a certain extent - if you are not going to penalise accidental handballs, there need to be an exception when one leads directly to a goal. There is a legitimate question as to whether that goes enough phased of play back.
However, the accidental handball rule reads too broad for me, as it allows a situation where the player moves their hands towards the ball in a manner that could be deemed natural, as long as it is within their silhouette. It feels like "accidental" and "deliberate" don't cover all options - there is also an "instinctive" event where the movement of your hands may be natural and not making yourself any bigger, but it results in contact between hand and ball. For me that should be an offence, but the current rules seemingly don't.
It wouldn't surprise me if that definition of accidental is tightened up at some point in the future. Sods law is that we will lose out because of that change shortly after it is made.
(While I'm at it, I also think the offside rule that means the offside is nullified if a defender makes contact after taking a deliberate action is stupid. Often the contact is made because the player is in an offside position in the first place. We have a perfectly good assessment of a deliberate pass with the backpass rule - why not apply the same hurdle with the offside rule?) |
Think it sits with a few different, well intentioned rules, which make sense in isolation but become farcical when combined
Accidental handball - logical in some instances as you state, but now overly defined and confusing
Not direct to a goal - sensible exception as you say, and also makes sense in VAR terms as no one wants goals pulled back because there was a borderline handball 40 seconds before at the other end of the pitch (well no one wants VAR at all, but still…)
VAR clear and obvious - again something we all want if having to accept VAR being a thing, but falls over here as whilst the handball is obvious an obvious error hasn’t been made with the above rules
End result being a confusing mess where somehow the ‘right’ decision has been reached, despite every neutral football fan in the world watching thinking it is handball and should be disallowed
Also completely agree it would have been a different outcome at the other end!! |  |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:04 - Sep 9 with 861 views | ITFCson |
1 of the 5 panel did not agree with the decision. Would have been interested had ref blown for a foul in play, as it would then not have been clear and obvious. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:15 - Sep 9 with 823 views | Deano69 |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 12:19 - Sep 9 by soupytwist |
So if you move your arms directly forwards to touch the ball with your hand, as long as the arms are not outside the boundaries of your body, it's permissible?
The open palm action as demonstrated here by Black Lace would be fine then?
|
Unless you are Neco Williams scoring against Tottenham, then it is handball and disallowed... |  |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:35 - Sep 9 with 797 views | itfc_bucks |
Christ, I was happier when I just thought it was a mistake! | |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:44 - Sep 9 with 786 views | farkenhell |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 13:40 - Sep 9 by Guthrum |
No, because that would have been blatantly handling the ball, therefore deliberate and a free kick to Ipswich (plus probably a yellow card). The issue is that the handball was deemed in the moment - and subsequently confirmed by VAR and this panel - to be accidental.
What caused the problem for us was the ball rebounding off Greaves' heel and into the goal. Had that not happened, the goal would not have stood, even if Maguire's shot were on target (which it wasn't).
It's not this new rule, but the authorities' interpretation of deliberate handball which should be up for question. |
But according to the interpretation of the rules that the OP has quoted, it must be accidental handball if the arms are within the bodyline. In other words, it's only deliberate handball if the arms are outside of the bodyline.
That is a skewed interpretation of the rules in my opinion, but it is the reasoning that the idiotic panel has given. That reasoning leads naturally to the absurd example that I gave.
If Maguire catches the ball, of course it's deliberate handball. In the same manner, it was deliberate handball by his bringing his arm (in fact, both arms) towards the ball when his arm struck the ball in the game against us. | | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 17:10 - Sep 9 with 718 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:35 - Sep 9 by itfc_bucks |
Christ, I was happier when I just thought it was a mistake! |
Haha this
Had VAR not been a thing it’d still be a goal and I’d still have been annoyed, but at least accept it was just sh*te refereeing. Instead, knowing VAR actually looked at it and seemingly got it right per the convoluted rules in place just makes me think the whole thing is ridiculous | |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 17:27 - Sep 9 with 700 views | Garv |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:12 - Sep 9 by Chris_ITFC |
I agree. I think the fact a goal / own goal was then scored almost confuses the whole thing.
Forget the goal - it’s just a blatant handball. |
Correct. I'm surprised how many people missed the point at the time. We all complained about the wrong thing. |  |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 12:07 - Sep 10 with 487 views | OldFart71 |
All part of the agenda today. Put into play rules that suit the establishment and the way forward they wish to go.
Very dangerous times I am afraid. | | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 12:44 - Sep 10 with 461 views | Cafe_Newman |
Does the rule state that the player's hands have to remain within their own body shadow, or Harry Maguire's body shadow? |  |
| FREE PALASTINE FROM ZIONIST BOMBS. FREE LEBANON FROM ZIONIST BOMBS. FREE IRAN FROM ZIONIST BOMBS. |
| |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 13:03 - Sep 10 with 436 views | berkstractorboy |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:36 - Sep 9 by VanSaParody |
It's irrelevant whether Maguire's shot was off target, then hit a defender & went in for an own goal
4 out of 5 on this panel are WRONG that the handball was ACCIDENTAL just because his hands were within the shape of his body
He instinctively (or not) moved his hands towards the ball, perhaps to stop it hitting him in the face, as it was bouncing upwards
If he doesn't use his hands, & tries to control the ball with either his tummy, chest or even his face, the ball would likely have continued it's upward trajectory, so he may not have had time to get it under enough control to get a shot away
Just because I'm an Ipswich fan & this decision went against Ipswich, is NOT why the above is the opinion I've formed.
It's because it's right
& I'd say this even if this type of decision went for us v them up the road!
THAT law needs to be changed NOW |
If he doesn't put his hands up to block the ball it likely goes over him and Akpom can counter, after all it looks like might have been what the Ipswich player was attempting to do.
There is no way that ball is going to end up in Maguire's control unless he uses his hands to bring that ball down. | | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 14:58 - Sep 10 with 376 views | surreyblue |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 13:03 - Sep 10 by berkstractorboy |
If he doesn't put his hands up to block the ball it likely goes over him and Akpom can counter, after all it looks like might have been what the Ipswich player was attempting to do.
There is no way that ball is going to end up in Maguire's control unless he uses his hands to bring that ball down. |
And if it does hit Maguire's chest, it flies out for a goal kick. If it hits him in the face he gets floored.
He clearly gains control of the ball using his hands | | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 15:24 - Sep 10 with 362 views | wischip |
In the return fixture at Portman Road, if Handball Harry is playing, can we just aim every single shot into the box straight at Handball Harry's 'Snipers Dream' of a head-face and see what decisions the ref finds in his ever-expanding book of football rules. C'mon, it'll be funny, just leather it straight at him 10 times. [Post edited 10 Sep 15:25]
|  | | |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 18:51 - Sep 10 with 306 views | eirannach_gorm |
| “Maguire handball was correct decision” on 12:20 - Sep 9 by barcelonablue2 |
I hope all other sports in the UK also change to accept the correct decision of our ever great-grand correct PGMOL and move on.
Next time a cricket player moves his ball towards the ball but does not catch it, the correct announcement will be an accident occurred. Cricket needs to MOVE ON.
Next time a basketball player move his hands towards the ball to block a dunk, the correct announcement will be an accident occurred. Basketball needs to MOVE ON.
Next time a rugby player move his hands towards the ball to intercept a pass, the correct announcement will be an accident occurred. Rugby needs to MOVE ON.
Farcical body. Sorry if the caps are a tad much am imagining a Morecambe and Wise shop scene. |
Ironically, deliberate knock on in rugby is a yellow card ( sending off ) offence.
The bottom line with this rule is that you should not gain advantage by an offence which this clearly was. The position of the hands gave an advantage. This is why things like being in an unnatural position should not be considered, only did it give the handler an advantage whatever position the arm/hand was. Other consideration would be in a situation where the ball is blasted off someone's arm not allowing avoidance. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
