Well done to Rizzoli and his crew. He's had a good tournament and, probably, had the most big calls to make of any team in this tournament and I think he's gotten them all right. For me, a shame that he didn't get the Final. Don't get me wrong, Clattenburg is well deserved, but there is a good chance he will be at the next Euros and he'll probably be the favorite for the World Cup Final in Russia. I think this is Rizzoli's last tournament and would have been a good way for him to go out. He's continued the fine tradition of top Italian officials like Collina and Rosetti.
Except that even the IFAB says nothing about the commonly used standard of "arm/hand being in an unnatural position" being cause to whistle an infringement. (Direct from the IFAB website)...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 In the case of both Boateng and Schweinstieger, the movement was from ball to hand, and the ball only hit the defenders hand/arm because it changed direction at the last moment thanks to hitting the head of the attacking player. I suggest everyone read the following two articles about how everyone, including many referees and the media, get the handball rule incorrectly. http://indaily.com.au/sport/soccer/2015/06/10/soccers-most-wrongly-applied-law/ http://totalfuteblog.com/2014/05/26/understanding-the-hand-ball-rule/ Nowhere in either the Laws of the Game, or the IFAB's interpretation of the Laws, does it state that having the hands/arms outside the frame of the body equals "deliberate intent", or that having the hands/arms in such position is grounds to whistle an infringement.
If you are so certain I am wrong, please back up your assertion with some actual evidence, preferably using the Laws of the Game and/or information from the IFAB website regarding Rule 12....
Gladly. • the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Here IFAB tells us "Hey this means this is not an infringement." If it was NEVER POSSIBLE FOR BALL TO HAND TO BE A FOUL, why not just say that here: • the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) could read the movement of the hand towards the ball (it is not a foul if the ball moves towards the hand). But they don't! And do you know why? Because it can still be a foul. Here is a quote from the Laws of the Game: "Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm." Schweinsteiger made a deliberate act and made contact with the ball with his arm. Foul. You, as a non referee, screaming that every referee in the world doesn't know what handling is, but YOU somehow do, is laughable.
And here are a few more links for all of you refs who think you know the Laws better than me should read... http://www.readingrefs.org.uk/should-unnaturally-positioned-hands-be-penalised/ This unnatural position of the arm talk is odd. The arm would only be in an unnatural position if it were not attached to the shoulder, no?— Gary Lineker (@GaryLineker) March 8, 2015
Except you have no evidence that his act was deliberate...you cannot jump in the air without your arms also going up in the air and/or into unnatural positions. He jumped in the air deliberately. He did not position his hand/arm specifically with the purpose of blocking the path of the ball deliberately. And given that the ball was headed into his hand from inches away, giving him no reaction time, he could not have possibly deliberately intended to handle the ball. Anyway...we've both made our points...we'll just have to respectfully disagree.
Sure I do. From a practical standpoint? There is no reason for his arm to be there based on where he is coming in to challenge from. From a Laws standpoint? "The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final." - Law 5. I won't respond anymore because there is no point. I should have listened to the akindc about not responding to the troll. Akindc, if we ever cross paths, I owe you dinner. Nah. This is 10000% disrespectfully disagreeing. You are just... here, I'll let Dr Cox sum it up. You don't know anything about the Laws of the Game. Mods, I'll take my punishment for continuing this nonsense.
That's a reverse hand of God move. The German was beaten to the ball and for some reason used his hand as an additional line of defense. As I contend quite often on handling calls that result in penalties, you, as a defender, have to defend differently in the area. Boateng raising his hands is one crazy example, and Schweinsteiger launching himself arm first is a second crazy example of awful defending. It's a penalty. And with 3 referees in the vicinity, not that hard to see. He put his arm up to block the header, and whether he's a foot away or 10 feet away, his arm is up to block the ball.
Keep convincing yourself that it is not handling and while you're at it keep telling yourself that the Earth is flat and the sky is purple.
Can't believe Rizzoli didn't get the final. I wish I had the refereeing ability that is in just his pinky finger.
Gee. Now you've convinced me. All of the expereinced referees on here are wrong. All of the FIFA refs are wrong. All of the MLS refs are wrong. All of the PL refs are wrong. And IFAB and FIFA are utterly powerless to explain to them that they are doing it wrong. You, however, are not a misguided one trick pony, but the guiding light lifting us from the darkness of ignorance into the light of wisdom so that we can do things your way. You have greater insight into what FIFA and IFAB think than the referees that they train. Thank you for educating us ignorant masses who have foolishly been relying upon our training. Uhh, thank you Big Soccer for the ignore feature.
So to veer this back to discussion of Rizzoli, does anyone have a replay of that German penalty shout? From my memory, I was more concerned with the incident that happened before the penalty area than the one in the penalty area. Any other thoughts? Thezzaruz brought it up at the front of the thread but then I kind of got us off track because I really liked the socks haha.
I believe Piggy used his arm to get himself in front of the defender and mis-timed it. It was not an unnatural position. Thus, the ball landed on his hand. Soft PK. Was it the right call? Yes, but did we need the ref to call it and change the match when it didn't really prevent a goal scoring opportunity? 50/50. Not arguing on the call, just saying if it had gone the other way, no one would have claimed that France just got robbed.
You are at least consistent. This is a penalty. Boateng's was a penalty. And I am a Germany supporter.
The had a look at it in the half time studio. It was one of those "clips the back heel" type of things, more due to a stumble than an actual attempt for a trip and very similar to the situation a few minutes later that got France a FK. The one thing that the replays showed clearly that I missed live was that the actual contact/foul happened outside of the PA by 1 or 2 feet. The contact inside the PA was just a bit of everyone falling into each other but no foul IMO.
I don't actually disagree with all of the links you posted, but I think you are interpreting them wrong. Schweini does not commit a PK because he went hand to ball, or merely because the ball touched the hand - and nobody is arguing to the contrary. Rather, they are arguing that when a professional at that level goes up for a header with his hands up and out shielding the other player's head, that's objectively done to make it difficult for the other player to head the ball without hitting your hand. You can't then claim it wasn't deliberate when that event actually happens. If it's a U10 game and they're jumping up like Superman because they're afraid of contact, the situation is different (although one still might call a penalty for a variety of reasons, including using your hands to protect your head from hitting the ball is still deliberate and as a teachable moment, so to speak). But at the top level, you *have* to make this call. Or, if Schweini's arm was out grabbing the attacker's shirt, so as to pull that down, and the ball gets headed down and hits Schweini's arm, that's not deliberate (although it does draw quite a bit of attention to the other foul in this hypothetical). It's not enough to say ball to hand, no foul. You have to ask the next question, which is "why is the player's hand in that location in the first instance."
Once again, this is wishy-washy bullshit and is designed to be unclear so the referees get off the hook whatever they do. You can shape this into form under whatever circumstances occur and the referee will always be right. Did Schweinsteiger deliberately handle the ball? No way. Did he see the ball coming? No way. Was the distance between his hand and the ball (coming from the French player's head) big enough for Schweinsteiger to expect the ball bouncing off his hand? No way? Did the hand go towards the ball? No way. The hand was up there already before the ball even bounced off the French player's head. So, can you give the penalty here? Well, apparently you can. And all experts say it was "stupid by Schweinsteiger" and a necessary penalty. Why? I think this rule is absolute crap and only serves the officials to get off the hook. If this was a penalty, then the foul on Kroos was too. But anyway, expected result. I only thought the French would dominate the match, not vice versa. Handling the ball Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: • 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.) counts as an infringement • hitting the ball with a thrown object (boot, shinguard, etc.) counts as an infringement Disciplinary sanctions There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player: • deliberately and blatantly handles the ball to prevent an opponent gaining possession • attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball A player is sent off, however, if he prevents a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball. This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored. Soft PK that didn't need to be given.
I agree the Law needs more clarity to eliminate some of this debating. But this was such an obvious handball I don't see the Law ever changing enough where this wouldn't result in a penalty. Otherwise every time a defender loses his man he can just make himself bigger so that the ball has less chance to get past him. We've seen several goals and scoring chances generated in this tournament which never could have happened if defenders were just allowed to raise their arms like Boetang and Bastian did. And since their arms were raised before the ball was flicked on to them, technically its ball-to-hand, not hand-to-ball. But its still a form of cheating (gaining an advantage) and should be punished as such.
Is he blind? Amazing feat to play at the level he has all these years being blind. Assuming he is not blind, how was he able to jump towards the ball to begin with if he can't see a ball?