Manchester United v Crystal Palace- 3pm 30/09/23 - Official Match Thread

Made to think that it’s a rule that’s probably been debated since the invention of the game, or whenever the actual handball rule came in to force, and yet it’s still argued because no one quite knows what the rules are

Why not just remove any type of ambiguity and say that if the ball touches a hand it’s a penalty, absolutely no other scenario?

Same with offside, make it clear daylight between the last defender and the attacking player and no other reason (heads shoulders, knees or toes)

It’s bizarre that they can’t implement something everyone can understand

Originally Posted by believe

Why not just remove any type of ambiguity and say that if the ball touches a hand it’s a penalty, absolutely no other scenario?

so a defender is ko'd on the floor on the edge of the box and you can just roll the ball into his arm for a pen? I'm in

Originally Posted by est.1878

so a defender is ko'd on the floor on the edge of the box and you can just roll the ball into his arm for a pen? I'm in

Ffs leave it as it is.

Play a record.

Originally Posted by est.1878

Play a record.

It was a pen, the ball travelled 40 yards. He made the decision to take his eyes off the ball, he wasn't in control of his body, his arms we're out and blocked the ball landing to an opposition player who had a clear shot at goal.

Would be thinking the exact same thing if it was the other way round.

Originally Posted by Patty_b

It was a pen, the ball travelled 40 yards. He made the decision to take his eyes off the ball, he wasn't in control of his body, his arms we're out and blocked the ball landing to an opposition player who had a clear shot at goal.

Would be thinking the exact same thing if it was the other way round.

I am sure you would.

the distance the ball travelled is irrelevant. he turned his back on it because he assumed it would reach the attacking player and wanted to be ready facing him. his arms were in a perfectly natural position and not raised or outstretched. there is no £#%&!ing way that should given as handball. ever.

Originally Posted by jem

I am sure you would.

the distance the ball travelled is irrelevant. he turned his back on it because he assumed it would reach the attacking player and wanted to be ready facing him. his arms were in a perfectly natural position and not raised or outstretched. there is no £#%&!ing way that should given as handball. ever.

No point reading the rest of your reply if you actually believe that.

Originally Posted by Patty_b

No point reading the rest of your reply if you actually believe that.

I agree that there would appear to be no point in you reading it.

once the defender decides he is not going be able to intercept the pass and turns his back to face the player he thinks will get the ball, he loses track of the flight of the ball. it doesn't matter if it is a 10-yard pass or a 60-yard pass.

lads, it's wednesday.

Originally Posted by est.1878

lads, it's wednesday.