URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 61214--------------------------------------------------
       S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: Adam
       Date: March 11, 2023, 5:29 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Never seen anything like this before, goalkeeper handles the
       ball outside the penalty area, having mistaken a rugby 22m line
       marking on the pitch as the edge of the box.
       I know the sticklers for the rules won't like it but fair play
       to Sam for only giving a yellow in an understandable situation.
       Also this is where the line needs to be drawn on multi purpose
       pitches. People need to put the game first over money and
       profit.  😅🤣😂.
  HTML https://streamin.me/v/d655bc79
       #Post#: 61216--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: Arbitre anglais
       Date: March 11, 2023, 5:48 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Common sense but also the correct decision anyway. Wouldn’t be
       DOGSO as attacker was never getting on to the ball anyway. YC
       totally correct.
       #Post#: 61220--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: Rosstheref
       Date: March 12, 2023, 1:33 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       This is one that football fans don't seen to understand,
       thinking that a GK handling outside the area is an automatic red
       card.
       This is not a DOGSO. Attacker is nowhere near the ball.
       #Post#: 61222--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: nemesis
       Date: March 12, 2023, 5:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Arbitre anglais link ---
       >
       > Common sense but also the correct decision anyway. Wouldn’t be
       DOGSO as attacker was never getting on to the ball anyway. YC
       totally correct.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       If it wasn't DOGSO (and I agree it wasn't) what is the "totally
       correct" yellow card for ?  Hardly preventing a promising
       attack.
       #Post#: 61229--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: RCG
       Date: March 12, 2023, 6:46 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Indeed, more about perception than accuracy
       Maybe "idiocy" or "losing ones bearings" fall under unsporting
       behaviour
       #Post#: 61240--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: nemesis
       Date: March 12, 2023, 11:24 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: RCG link ---
       >
       > Indeed, more about perception than accuracy
       >
       > Maybe "idiocy" or "losing ones bearings" fall under unsporting
       behaviour
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       No. Nor does being confused by extraneous line on pitch.
       #Post#: 61316--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: Ref Watcher
       Date: March 13, 2023, 10:33 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: nemesis link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Arbitre anglais
       link=topic=4667.msg61216#msg61216 date=1678578534]
       > Common sense but also the correct decision anyway. Wouldn’t be
       DOGSO as attacker was never getting on to the ball anyway. YC
       totally correct.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       If it wasn't DOGSO (and I agree it wasn't) what is the "totally
       correct" yellow card for ?  Hardly preventing a promising
       attack.
       [/quote]
       This is either a red card or no card.  I also agree that it
       wasn't DOGSO.  A yellow card is not supportable in Law (although
       trying selling that to the attacking team at the time!).
       #Post#: 61382--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: RCG
       Date: March 13, 2023, 5:31 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       My point exactly, doesnt make it right
       #Post#: 61414--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: Seagull
       Date: March 14, 2023, 10:12 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Chris Foy's take on the incident below. He feels a caution is
       correct but doesn't categorise it. (Source: Sky Sports website).
       "As has been spoken about over the weekend, there is a potential
       red card offence for a denial of a goal scoring opportunity
       (DOGSO), however I don't believe this warrants a dismissal. When
       the goalkeeper catches the ball, the nearest player is a
       defender. The positioning of the attacking player is key to the
       decision, as well as the likelihood of the attacker gaining
       control of the ball at the moment of the handball offence. The
       attacking player was not denied an obvious goal scoring
       opportunity, and I think the correct call on balance is a yellow
       card."
       #Post#: 61416--------------------------------------------------
       Re: S ALLISON: NEWPORT V BRADFORD (HANDBALL INCIDENT)
   DIR By: Ref Watcher
       Date: March 14, 2023, 10:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Seagull link ---
       >
       > Chris Foy's take on the incident below. He feels a caution is
       correct but doesn't categorise it. (Source: Sky Sports website).
       >
       > "As has been spoken about over the weekend, there is a
       potential red card offence for a denial of a goal scoring
       opportunity (DOGSO), however I don't believe this warrants a
       dismissal. When the goalkeeper catches the ball, the nearest
       player is a defender. The positioning of the attacking player is
       key to the decision, as well as the likelihood of the attacker
       gaining control of the ball at the moment of the handball
       offence. The attacking player was not denied an obvious goal
       scoring opportunity, and I think the correct call on balance is
       a yellow card."
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Chapter and verse on why it's not a red card but nothing on why
       he thinks it should be a yellow.
       For clarity, there are three occasions when handball is a yellow
       card offence.  They are:
       Stopping a promising attack
       Attempting to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is
       successful)
       Unsuccessfully attempting to prevent a goal
       None of these apply in this case (although I appreciate that
       some long-suffering Newport County fans might consider this to
       be a promising attack  :)).
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 2
   DIR Next Page