Yea that's why the "all contact with a hand/arm should be an offence" idea that some have is completely unworkable.
In this WC, we see defenders in the box challenging the opponent with their hands behind their back. See David Luiz multiple occasions during BRA x MEX yesterday. Keep your arm extended, and at some point someone will kick a ball at it.
You don't see them with their arms tucked in when running to the side! I agree it's a tough call - even defensible, but I think the PK was wrong.
I didn't get to watch as I was on a plane, so I admit this might be unfair. However, the stats on FIFA.com caught my eye. 43 fouls and only 2 yellow cards. It also sounds like the penalty was, at minimum, dubious. And RvP unexpectedly stayed on the field. I know this is the WC of keeping the cards in the pocket so far (has anyone done a card count comparison to the past 4 WCs to this point? It must be amazing.). But 43 fouls with 2 cautions sounds like taking it a bridge too far. Was there any flow to this match? Any management? Or was it just constant whistling? You can be accurate on all 43 foul calls--doesn't mean you refereed a good game. Again, stipulating that a critique might be unfair here. So genuinely asking for anyone that's seen.
That's why those are among the most difficult calls of all... because you're trying to second guess someone's intentions. The thing is, unless he's reasonably certain the decision is correct, shouldn't the ref NOT make the call? To my mind there was NO WAY that ref could be certain the defender intentionally blocked that cross for the reason you give, (his arms weren't 'unnatural'), so, on that basis, it was the wrong call.
The law stipulates that the movement be "deliberate", not "intentional". Pretty close concepts, but there is a slight difference. Deliberate is a movement that puts the arms in an unnatural position, even if the intent to hit the ball is not there. It is generally acknowledged by referees that a player "making himself bigger" by putting his arms out is deliberately doing so.
... which is precisely why referees should only make decisions about interpretations after they've discussed the matter with someone who's actually played the game because that is nonsense. In many situations it's impossible to maintain balance with your arms stuck to your side so your arms will ALWAYS be somewhere else... it's only a matter of where they are. To be clear, I'm not saying that the guy, (or other players), DON'T 'make themselves bigger' by sticking their arms out as he did... I'm saying that a player 'making himself bigger' and a player 'maintaining proper balance' can look EXACTLY the same. On that basis that sort of decision shouldn't be given because it's almost impossible to tell what someone's thinking.
While I think you would have many people who would, in certain match situations, agree with you, your overall point is lost when you present your argument in this manner. Of course, no referee at this level has any experience to make just interpretations on their own, they need to ask someone. Right. And no referee has ever played the game. We get plenty of feedback from people currently playing the game every time a hand touches the ball. Interestingly enough, the consensus seems to be split 50/50 depending on which team you play on. This true, to a certain extent, and I assure you it goes into the thought process a referee makes. All of the facts are taken into consideration and it's not deliberate handling simply because the hands are out from your side. We have plenty of examples when the ball hits a player's hand and it's not handling. It's just one of the pieces of the puzzle we look at. Well, sorta. Yes, the two can look very similar. But these players are also very skilled at leaving their hand/arm in said position in order to take away space. Not saying this is what occurred here but I want to let you into the calculus. If you can't tell, handling is a tough one -- even in refereeing ranks.
Well, to be fair, that was my first comment in my first post Actually, I did know that ref's discuss these things with pro's and ex-pro's. It just seems to me that the balance has swung too heavily in the one direction, (at least, as evidenced by some of the calls being made over the past few years), towards an assumption that an are in anything other than behind your back, (like David Luiz... a fella whose playing style I know well for obvious reasons), or stuck to your side. To my thinking, when we have players going our of their way to place their arms in a totally unnatural position, it's become a bit daft, tbh.
I see it as one of those cases where an arm starts in a natural position but is then unnaturally left to hang out there just in case. I agree it should be called. It's a sneaky, dishonest and far too common practice IMO.
First, let me say that in my mind, this call could have gone either way. On the replay, it looked like he moved his arm back a tiny amount in a way that was suspicious in slow motion. Maybe he deliberately made himself bigger, and maybe he didn't. Second, NM, soccer is a zero sum game. Calling a penalty has the EXACT SAME impact as not calling it (cards aside.)
Fair enough and good point! Just curious -- why do you think things have swung in that direction? Usually, such momentum swings don't occur naturally but rather through a focused effort by FIFA or local authorities. I would suggest that -- at least in the USA -- there was a big focus on "making yourself bigger." So referees didn't just decide to go target that, instead it was a key point during training.
Well, I'm not suggesting it's something that's just been dreamt up for a laugh I just think it's following a theme that FIFA, in particular, is pushing... an 'agenda', (to use the phrase du jour), to create more 'chances' and 'excitement' It all comes back to this idea that the game needs 'updating'... that's why we've had Sepp's idea of shorter shorts for the women. Actually, I'm on board with that one I dunno... it just seems to be inclining people to make false choices when there's no need. The thing is, from my perspective, this issue has been discussed since... well... forever. I used to talk about it, at length, with an old workmate of mine who played over 400 games as a pro back in the 40's and 50's as a centre half, including against fellas like Stan Matthews and Tom Finney. Defenders 'made themselves bigger' back then too and the thing is, we don't actually know any more about it now than we did then and yet, as Martin O'Neill said on the BBC over here a little while ago, that call probably wouldn't have been made even 10 or 15 years ago. Well, not and not have everyone saying it was 'ball to hand' and was wrong. Like I say... what's changed???
My personal rule of thumb was "Could contact have been reasonably avoided while vigorously competing for the ball?" It covers both commission and omission.
Hey...a whole bunch of posts on this match and no one mentions the very rare "double advantage bingo"? (I made that up!) But our referee in the build up to the first two bang bang goals of the match rightly played advantage on each play. Major credit to him. And major credit to Evertonian forever Tim Cahill for the goal of the tournament.