We'll see plenty of them this season that won't be given. Toss of the coin which you're on the unfortunate end this time
Greenlizard0 Premier League Football Thread ** spoilers ** [15th - 18th August 2025]
- Thread starter explicit4u
- Start date
We'll see plenty of them this season that won't be given. Toss of the coin which you're on the unfortunate end this time
But he didn't block it with his chest, he blocked it with his arm. Everybody is now getting hung up on whether his arm is in a natural position because we see so many ball to hand/arm situations and are ignoring the fact that he moves into the path of the ball. The ball hasn't just hit his arm, he's moved his arm into the path of the ball.
Yeah, the game doesn't run in slow mo. He would have no idea if the ball was going to his arm or not.
It's a 50/50 one for me, we'll see plenty that won't be given
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 5,909
- Location
- Location, Location!
Not a penalty at all.
Possibly but they'd be wrong decisions. As I say everybody is now getting caught up with whether his arm is in a natural position and ignoring the fact that he moves his arm into the path of the ball. Had he not moved into the path of the ball then it wouldn't be handball but that was a deliberate action from a shot traveling from a distance. He has no excuses for handling the ball.
Handball offence:
• Deliberate movement of
arm away from body
• Clear additional arm
movement
• Arm position makes body
bigger and is unjustifiable
There was a clear arm movement, when he moves his entire body. He's moved his arm into the path of the ball, that is an indisputable fact as he moves and the ball hits his arm.
Lol, it's never a pen.. his arm couldn't be any closer to his body towards his back.
He's moving his whole body towards the ball, not his arm
Ok, like I keep saying and Dale Johnson (a qualified official who spends his life explaining refereeing decisions) says, stop focusing on whether his arm is close to his body. The fact that he moves into the path of the ball is why the pen was given.
Whether he's trying to chest the ball (I'm not sure he is) or not is irrelevant, he's moved into the path of the ball and handled it. Imagine it like making a slide tackle, the intention is to win the ball but if you don't and trip the attacker then it's a foul. You've made a deliberate action and resulted in handling the ball/fouling the opponent.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 58,789
- Location
- Surrey
It seems wrong to me. I get if someone moves their arm towards the ball but leaning your body with your arms by your side? Hell his arm is half behind his back. That just seems silly to make that a handball.
According to Law 12, which covers handball, an infringement occurs when a player "touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger".
The law, which is detailed on the Football Association's website, external, goes on to explain that "a player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player's body movement for that specific situation".
But this is where it becomes murky.
Before last season, the handball law was actually relaxed slightly. Players were told by the Premier League they do not have to move with their arms rigidly by their sides or behind their backs.
The position of their arm or hand will be judged purely in relation to the movement of their body.
"We get a sense that we give too many handballs for actions that are quite normal and justifiable," refereeing boss Howard Webb said at the time
The law, which is detailed on the Football Association's website, external, goes on to explain that "a player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player's body movement for that specific situation".
But this is where it becomes murky.
Before last season, the handball law was actually relaxed slightly. Players were told by the Premier League they do not have to move with their arms rigidly by their sides or behind their backs.
The position of their arm or hand will be judged purely in relation to the movement of their body.
"We get a sense that we give too many handballs for actions that are quite normal and justifiable," refereeing boss Howard Webb said at the time
Thats never been the case before. There have been plenty that haven't been given in recent years for that and they always say "his arm wasn't in an unnatural position" and "hes tried to play the ball". If you make any attempt to play the ball and it hits your arm then by this logic, its a penalty and I would bet a fair chunk of money thats not going to magically become the new norm because its stupid.
There will no doubt have been instances where they've not been given however if you check Dale Johnson's twitter, he's listed numerous instances of players handling in the way Tarkowski did yesterday and points out the few that weren't given have been recorded as mistakes.
People really need to stop getting hung up about natural or unnatural position of the arm. This is a thing for instances of ball to hand, where the defender has no ability to get out the way of the ball. In those instances if your arm is in a natural position then handball won't be given. Yesterday or similar instances aren't a case of ball to hand but the player moving into the path of the ball. Even if you believe Tarkowski wasn't intending to handle the ball (I'm not convinced he wasn't), he's still made a deliberate action by moving into the ball and gained an unfair advantage by the ball hitting his arm. As I said above, it's no different from a slide tackle - a defender might not be intending to trip his opponent but if you make that deliberate action and don't win the ball cleanly, it's still a foul.