DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 100705--------------------------------------------------
Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: Ref25
Date: January 25, 2026, 11:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Im struggling to understand the penalty awarded to Chelsea and
I’m not sure whether the officials have misunderstood the Laws
of the Game.
Darren England’s announcement was:
“After review, the ball hits Crystal Palace 23. It is an
accidental handball, not deliberate. Therefore it is a penalty
kick, however, because it is accidental, this is only a yellow
card.“
The relevant part of Law 12 states:
Handling the ball
…
It is an offence if a player:
• deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for
example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their
body unnaturally bigger. 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. By having
their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of
their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
I don’t see how there is a handball offence here. The Crystal
Palace defender’s arm is as tight to his body as it possibly can
be. It’s not in an unnatural position. If the officials believe
there is an offence of making himself unnaturally bigger then I
think they are wrong.
For sanctions, Law 12 states:
A player is cautioned and shown a yellow card if:
• denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring
opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick for a
non-deliberate handball offence.
There still has to be a handball offence for there to be a
penalty awarded. I don’t believe this part of the law means that
if the ball hits a defenders arm when it’s going in the goal, no
matter what the circumstances, it’s a penalty. I read it as
being if the referee thinks the player has made their body
unnaturally bigger and it’s DOGSO, then it’s a yellow card.
This is either another poor handball judgement or a incorrect
application of the Laws of the Game.
#Post#: 100706--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: TA_Ref
Date: January 25, 2026, 11:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref25 link ---
>
>
> There still has to be a handball offence for there to be a
penalty awarded. I don’t believe this part of the law means that
if the ball hits a defenders arm when it’s going in the goal, no
matter what the circumstances, it’s a penalty. I read it as
being if the referee thinks the player has made their body
unnaturally bigger and it’s DOGSO, then it’s a yellow card.
>
>
--- End Quote ---
I agree with this paragraph entirely. I think Donohue in VAR was
too fixated with the direction the ball was travelling.
Admittedly, the ball is going into the goal, there is no
question about that. But there’s no deliberate movement of the
arm to block the shot and there’s no way his body is unnaturally
bigger. So I’m struggling to see an offence myself too.
I don’t think the explanation particularly helps fans understand
either. It was quite a messy reasoning given by Darren England.
I’d like to hear this one on Howard Webb’s show.
#Post#: 100726--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: ajb95
Date: January 25, 2026, 4:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
IMO England is one of the worst refs on the PL list and how he
got to FIFA level too is beyond me. Correct to send off Wharton
but never fully in control of the game and lacks authority.
Doesn’t get a grip with games loses control and resorts to
cards. It’s never a penalty but if it is surely it’s a red card?
#Post#: 100728--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: ARF
Date: January 25, 2026, 4:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> It’s never a penalty but if it is surely it’s a red card?
>
--- End Quote ---
As it's been given for a non-deliberate handball offence, and
would otherwise be DOGSO, it's a caution. But I agree that it's
not a handling offence in the first place.
#Post#: 100729--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: Tonydent
Date: January 25, 2026, 4:34 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: ajb95 link ---
>
> IMO England is one of the worst refs on the PL list and how he
got to FIFA level too is beyond me. Correct to send off Wharton
but never fully in control of the game and lacks authority.
Doesn’t get a grip with games loses control and resorts to
cards. It’s never a penalty but if it is surely it’s a red card?
>
--- End Quote ---
Agree about England, but not about it being a red card
#Post#: 100732--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: UmpireIan49
Date: January 25, 2026, 5:26 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
With regards to the penalty incident - I’m quite baffled as to
how a penalty was awarded.
First of all, if we’re taking other incidents this weekend
regarding handball than this is patently incorrect.
It’s not a deliberate handball at all. The arm has made no
movement towards the ball, in fact the arm is forced backwards
by the shot.
Then Matt Donohue and Darren England disappeared down a rabbit
hole with the final explanation. “An accidental handball so it’s
only a yellow card”. Yes it was an accidental handball so no
penalty should have been given.
Once the OFR was recommended the bemusement started. They say
many a decision is spoilt by a poor explanation and I think the
two gentlemen will have some explaining to do as I was totally
confused by the OFR and the subsequent explanation.
Darren England doesn’t convince me as a referee as his style
seems a little stilted and wooden. Not a great deal of empathy
for the game and consequently his control suffers a bit.
The sending off was correct but the award of the penalty and the
explanation was totally out of step with the other correct
handball interpretations this weekend. Very strange.
#Post#: 100748--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: Marvin Grapevine
Date: January 26, 2026, 3:59 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Ref Watch is stating that it's the correct decision because it's
stopped a goal.
Gallagher saying that the laws were changed a season or so ago.
#Post#: 100750--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: Claretman
Date: January 26, 2026, 4:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Marvin Grapevine link ---
>
> Ref Watch is stating that it's the correct decision because
it's stopped a goal.
>
> Gallagher saying that the laws were changed a season or so
ago.
>
--- End Quote ---
DERMOT SAYS: "The law was changed in August 2024. It was felt
that if a player stops the ball accidentally with his hand from
going in the goal, it isn't about handball, it's about stoping a
goal. That's the difference, it's a dfferent part of the law.
"When you look at this incident from behind the goal, it is
quite clear it is going in the goal. There is no doubt
whatsoever it's going to be a goal. The goalkeeper is out."
#Post#: 100752--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: ARF
Date: January 26, 2026, 4:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I get that misreadings/misunderstandings of the LotG happen, but
Dermot really needs to be doing his homework and fact-checking
himself before he goes on air stating false information. And
it's especially concerning that two SG1 referees (one being FIFA
list) have both failed to correctly understand/apply the Laws
here.
The ONLY situations where accidentally touching the ball with
the hand/arm is automatically an offence is when a player scores
directly from it, or scores immediately after the touch. The
fact the ball was otherwise going in the goal is completely
irrelevant. No-one who understands the game and the LotG would
reasonably deem the player's arm to be making him unnaturally
bigger here, and no-one for a moment thinks that it's a
deliberate handball. There is no offence here.
#Post#: 100754--------------------------------------------------
Re: Crystal Palace v Chelsea - D England (VAR M Donohue)
DIR By: ChippenhamCherry
Date: January 26, 2026, 5:44 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Claretman link ---
>
> [quote author=Marvin Grapevine
link=topic=7656.msg100748#msg100748 date=1769421596]
> Ref Watch is stating that it's the correct decision because
it's stopped a goal.
>
> Gallagher saying that the laws were changed a season or so
ago.
>
--- End Quote ---
DERMOT SAYS: "The law was changed in August 2024. It was felt
that if a player stops the ball accidentally with his hand from
going in the goal, it isn't about handball, it's about stoping a
goal. That's the difference, it's a different part of the law.
"When you look at this incident from behind the goal, it is
quite clear it is going in the goal. There is no doubt
whatsoever it's going to be a goal. The goalkeeper is out."
[/quote]
That's absolutely appalling from Gallagher. He's completely
misunderstood the law change and mislead any fan that watches.
It's a different part of the law, but it's not supposed to be
read in isolation or supercede the definition of handball.
The law change was about defining what sanction to apply to a
DOGSO handball offence. You're still supposed to determine
whether it's a handball offence using the existing law.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 3
DIR Next Page