West of Scotland

[jaggyness]

Surely the team with fewer than 7 would forfiet the game though? So for talking sake, if you are getting beat you can just purposely get a few bodies sent off to get a replay??

Upto the organising body. If it was due to genuine injuries then would think they'd replay the match

[List_of_Jericho]

14 minutes ago, jaggyness said:

37 minutes ago, MattEmulsion said:

Surely the team with fewer than 7 would forfiet the game though? So for talking sake, if you are getting beat you can just purposely get a few bodies sent off to get a replay??

Upto the organising body. If it was due to genuine injuries then would think they'd replay the match

Surely a bit of common sense has to prevail given the score at the time?

[Nipples]

15 hours ago, 8 Bit said:

Cross played across box. Player goes to clear it. Slices it and it hits his hand and the ball continues pretty much where the cross was going. The player had his arm out at 45  degrees so it was obvious it hit his arm.  Although accidental I guess it comes under the "The ball touches a player’s hand/arm which has made their body unnaturally bigger". No one complained about the awarding of the penalty. I thought it was a little harsh. 

Later in the half a Saints player crosses and hits the Inverclyde players arm. No penalty. I'd say from where I was standing that the players arm was nearer his body. Ref must have interpreted it as "The ball touches a player’s hand/arm which is close to their body and has not made their body unnaturally bigger".  Accidental again but it stopped the ball going to another Saints player.

Who'd want to be a ref. 

If it's from a block and it deflects up, it's a penalty (subject to the other conditions - ie unnaturally bigger). If, and it sounds like this is the case here, they have attempted to actively play the ball and it then hits the arm, it shouldn't be a penalty. 

 

Relevant part of the rule is:

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)

Not always easy for a ref to quickly judge and get it correct with new rules, but that sounds like it shouldn't have been a penalty. 

[Gunner]

2 hours ago, Nipples said:

If it's from a block and it deflects up, it's a penalty (subject to the other conditions - ie unnaturally bigger). If, and it sounds like this is the case here, they have attempted to actively play the ball and it then hits the arm, it shouldn't be a penalty. 

 

Relevant part of the rule is:

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)

Not always easy for a ref to quickly judge and get it correct with new rules, but that sounds like it shouldn't have been a penalty. 

You cant pick and chose parts of the law to back your point up. Above the part you quoted it says: 

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

- 

The part you quote only applies if one of the above offences hasn't happened. In this case, the arm being so far off the body has made it unnaturally bigger (i.e a bigger target to miss) - therefore correctly awarded as a foul - even though it's came off the players own head or body (including foot). 

-

 

[Gunner]

Spoiler

Handling the ball

It is an offence if a player:

• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball

• gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:

• scores in the opponents’ goal

• creates a goal-scoring opportunity

• scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper

(I.e It's ALWAYS hand ball if you've done it deliberately. It's ALWAYS hand ball If it hits your arm and gain possession and either score or create a goal scoring opportunity.)

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

(I.e It's ALMOST ALWAYS going to be a foul if your hand/arm has made your body bigger. It's ALMOST ALWAYS going to be a foul if it hits your hand/arm when they are above your shoulders (unless you're the one who deliberately kicked it))

Except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm:

• directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)

• directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close

• if the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger

• when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body.

(I.e As long as nothing has occurred in the first two parts has happened, then it's NOT NORMALLY a foul)

 

Here's the handball law in full and my interpretations. Simply, there are some things that always are a foul, some things that usually are a foul and some things that normally aren't a foul providing one of the other 2 circumstances hasn't happened. 

In the game being discussed. The ball hitting the arm from the foot of the player, wouldn't normally be a foul - unless for the fact that the hand/arm has made the body unnaturally bigger which is almost always a foul. 

-

Worth pointing out, that position of referee has a massive factor on these decisions. Often there's no bad position, a referee will try to be in an area of the pitch to not only see whats going on there and then but also with some anticipation of where play will go next. Sometimes these incidents occur on the far side of the player from where a referee is positioned - it makes it near on impossible to know if the hand/arm was making the body bigger or not... and even thought the refs position is probably good for the play that's going on at that second - it's just bad luck. 

[Chappy]

6 hours ago, MattEmulsion said:

Surely the team with fewer than 7 would forfiet the game though? So for talking sake, if you are getting beat you can just purposely get a few bodies sent off to get a replay??

Sounds like there old team Larkhall thistle

[Amateur Footie Fan]

Upto the organising body. If it was due to genuine injuries then would think they'd replay the match

Wouldnt think so. Getting pumped and then all of a sudden 4 players get injuries. If that was made to be replayed imagine what ideas that would give other teams. Motherwell out the Cup would be my guess

[Nipples]

On 26/09/2019 at 16:35, Gunner said:

You cant pick and chose parts of the law to back your point up. Above the part you quoted it says: 

It is usually an offence if a player:

• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:

• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger

The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close.

- 

The part you quote only applies if one of the above offences hasn't happened. In this case, the arm being so far off the body has made it unnaturally bigger (i.e a bigger target to miss) - therefore correctly awarded as a foul - even though it's came off the players own head or body (including foot). 

-

 

The situation described is almost identical to the examples used in the training about the new handball guidance. Theres a good video, I think from the Women's World Cup that shows it well. I'll see if I can dig it out for you.

The part of the law you have quoted relates to it coming off another player, not the one whose hand it hits. The law is designed to be considered in the whole, not part by part. The 2nd bit doesn't overrule the 3rd bits any more than the lower bit overrules them.

If it had been, or had been from a block/deflection rather than trying to /play/ the ball, then it would be a foul. That was the key distinction we were given for this.

There might have been a clarification that I've missed, but this interpretation is what is being taught. I'll double check on Tuesday when I'm doing my exam.

 

Edited September 27, 2019 by Nipples

[Gunner]

11 hours ago, Nipples said:

The situation described is almost identical to the examples used in the training about the new handball guidance. Theres a good video, I think from the Women's World Cup that shows it well. I'll see if I can dig it out for you.

The part of the law you have quoted relates to it coming off another player, not the one whose hand it hits. The law is designed to be considered in the whole, not part by part. The 2nd bit doesn't overrule the 3rd bits any more than the lower bit overrules them.

If it had been, or had been from a block/deflection rather than trying to /play/ the ball, then it would be a foul. That was the key distinction we were given for this.

There might have been a clarification that I've missed, but this interpretation is what is being taught. I'll double check on Tuesday when I'm doing my exam.

 

The top part Over rules the second part and the second over rules the third and so on. I.e: if something happens that’s always a foul, it’s always a foul - nothing in part 2 or 3 will stop or change that. It’s a foul because the players arm is making the body unnaturally bigger - doesn’t matter that it came off his foot. 

Good luck on on your exam, the games needing more refs. It’s something I’m really enjoying having played for long enough. 

[pleslie99]

Dougie, I was st the last refs meeting at hampden where they covered the handball rule in detail. One of the examples was if a player plays the ball onto their own hand/arm, regardless of its position, it is not a foul. They showed numerous clips to clarify this. Many of the handball changes caused confusion in the room.

[Nipples]

3 hours ago, Gunner said:

The top part Over rules the second part and the second over rules the third and so on. I.e: if something happens that’s always a foul, it’s always a foul - nothing in part 2 or 3 will stop or change that. It’s a foul because the players arm is making the body unnaturally bigger - doesn’t matter that it came off his foot. 

Good luck on on your exam, the games needing more refs. It’s something I’m really enjoying having played for long enough. 

I agree that the top part over rules anything below, but not that the 2nd over rules the 3rd. It's definitely not a foul if a defender plays the ball onto his own hand under these rules.

Hopefully be fine for the exam, did fine on the mock. Looking forward to getting back onto the pitch, even if I think I'll be gutted not to be playing...

There's been about 50 or so folk going through this course, mostly under 20 or so years old. Hopefully keep them all and not have them scared off by arseholes.

Edited September 28, 2019 by Nipples

[Gunner]

5 hours ago, Nipples said:

 It's definitely not a foul if a defender plays the ball onto his own hand under these rules.

It is if his hand is unnatural or above the shoulders. 

[Sempy13]

This is a personal profile. All views are my own, not that of the Club.

 

Few people needing to get their facts straight. All the best [emoji1360]

 

 

I played in it. To be honest, you didnt miss much. Motherwell Thistle showed up with bare 11, one went off injured after 30 mins, we were 1-0 up and well on top. 3-0 at ht. They got a man sent off at 4-0 early in the 2nd half and they looked for any excuse to get the game abandoned, picking up other "injuries" not as exciting as it would seem from the outside. Wee bit embarrassing actually

 

[8 Bit]

A couple of big results in the West of Scotland cup today:

Broomhouse 3 Bannockburn 3

Broomhouse win on penalties

AS Airdrie 2 Harestanes 2

AS Airdrie win on penalties

 

[Jobby_Martin]

Erskine 0-1 Mauchline Utd

[GAVT67]

Moorlands AFC 0 v 1 Wishaw High School FPs

[king Henrik7]

Castlemilk Dynamo 8 v 1 Hillington

[josecc]

Anyone know what time the draw is for the next round of the west today?

[eyeswideopen15]

Just now I'm sure. At a meeting

[MarkMcGill]

Any idea on a time for this?