Why wasn't it red?

[Monts]

For the penalty.

I know the double jeopardy rules are now in place, but I had thought it was a case that it only applied when a genuine attempt to play the ball had been made.

As handball is always deliberate, by the letter of the law, why wasn't it a red card?

[hibbysam]

For the penalty.

I know the double jeopardy rules are now in place, but I had thought it was a case that it only applied when a genuine attempt to play the ball had been made.

As handball is always deliberate, by the letter of the law, why wasn't it a red card?

Said exactly the same. Clear as day. Add to Sean (rightly) getting booked for his first foul, SDG for his second, but Main committing 6+ and getting two ‘no more’ warnings, and their right back getting away with the same as Mackie got booked for on Flo first half.

I understand Clancy trying to give as few as possible today ina a pretty easy game to referee but that requires consistency. Main just goes about barging into folk.

[H18 SFR]

Double jeopardy rule.

[MWHIBBIES]

Double jeopardy rule.

No, doesn't apply to hand ball.

[H18 SFR]

No, doesn't apply to hand ball.

It does. Google it.

[hibbysam]

It does. Google it.

It really doesn’t. Handball can only be given if it’s deliberate. Therefore he deliberately stopped a goalscoring opportunity with his hand. Double jeopardy only applies where the foul is ‘accidental’ ie trying to play the ball and mistiming.

[H18 SFR]

Players who commit a foul to deny a goalscoring opportunity will no longer automatically be sent off, football's rule-making body has confirmed. ... Those include holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball in order to deny a goalscoring opportunity.14 Apr 2016

[Crab apple]

I'm sure Clancy has already phoned Hecky this evening to explain things.

[hibbysam]

Players who commit a foul to deny a goalscoring opportunity will no longer automatically be sent off, football's rule-making body has confirmed. ... Those include holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball in order to deny a goalscoring opportunity.14 Apr 2016

I feel you’ve probably missed a fairly important part of the article with the ellipsis as it only applies where you’ve made a genuine attempt to win the ball, pulling or pushing for one doesn’t apply to that, serious foul play is a straight red regardless of position, as is violent conduct.

Unless your saying I can punch someone in the face in the box and because he gives a penalty I can’t be sent off 😂

[JXM73]

Hand was raised, wasn't a deliberate diving save... yellow was right call imho

[H18 SFR]

I'm not saying that.

[wookie70]

The rules states "Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs."

If the ref has thought that the ball was going wide or the player was maybe passing the ball then a pen could be awarded without the red card. Remembers Rocky's red at St Johnstone.

[H18 SFR]

The rules states "Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs."

If the ref has thought that the ball was going wide or the player was maybe passing the ball then a pen could be awarded without the red card.

It was indeed a cut back so yellow is correct.

[MWHIBBIES]

It does. Google it.

It doesn't. The ref must've deemed it not deliberate because stopping a goal deliberately with your hand is still a red card.

[hibbysam]

I'm not saying that.

You are though. You’ve put an article up to back up your point which includes serious foul play and violent conduct beside handball. I’m fairly certain therefore that the article you’ve put up is saying the complete opposite of your point of view.

[hibbysam]

It was indeed a cut back so yellow is correct.

It was a shot heading into the net 😂

[Hibbyradge]

It was indeed a cut back so yellow is correct.

I thought it was a shot at goal.

[hibbysam]

The rules states "Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs."

If the ref has thought that the ball was going wide or the player was maybe passing the ball then a pen could be awarded without the red card. Remembers Rocky's red at St Johnstone.

If the shot was going wide then it wouldn’t be a goal scoring opportunity, obviously, as it wasn’t going in. That shot was going into the net.

[H18 SFR]

It was a shot heading into the net 😂

Apologies, from the FFL, it looked like he'd hit the goal line and played it towards the 6 yard box line. I'm 5 rows from the front at the opposite end of the stadium. Error in judgement on my part.

[Scouse Hibee]

The ref must have decided the handball did not stop a certain goal so a yellow card is correct. Incorrectly in my opinion but that must be it.

[hibbysam]

The ref must have decided the handball did not stop a certain goal so a yellow card is correct.

Then it’s a massive error and luckily didn’t effect the game, Hecky can get a phonecall tonight from him lol. It would’ve required some save from the keeper to keep it out. It also doesn’t need to stop a ‘certain goal’, just a clear goalscoring opportunity, making the keeper make a good save is a clear opportunity for me.

[wookie70]

If the shot was going wide then it wouldn’t be a goal scoring opportunity, obviously, as it wasn’t going in. That shot was going into the net.

My memory is a bit hazy but I wasn't sure that was the case at the time. I thought yellow was correct.

[Hibbyradge]

He definitely should have been sent off because the ball was going in the net.

SENDING-OFF OFFENCES

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:
denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)

DENYING A GOAL OR AN OBVIOUS GOAL-SCORING OPPORTUNITY

Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.

[Scouse Hibee]

Then it’s a massive error and luckily didn’t effect the game, Hecky can get a phonecall tonight from him lol. It would’ve required some save from the keeper to keep it out. It also doesn’t need to stop a ‘certain goal’, just a clear goalscoring opportunity, making the keeper make a good save is a clear opportunity for me.

Yes I know, I just worded it certain goal cos it was 🥅 ⚽️

[hibbysam]

My memory is a bit hazy but I wasn't sure that was the case at the time. I thought yellow was correct.

I was directly behind it in the West and was raging at the time it wasn’t a red as I felt it was a goal bound shot, I’m hoping I’m not proved wrong with highlights..

[Hibbyradge]

Unless the referee thinks that the keeper might have been able to save it.

:dunno:

[hibbysam]

Unless the referee thinks that the keeper might have been able to save it.

:dunno:

For me it would need to be an ‘easy’ save for that to apply, ie a daisy cutter straight at him. If he had to make a proper ‘save’ then I’d count that as a clear goalscoring opportunity.

[Hibbyradge]

For me it would need to be an ‘easy’ save for that to apply, ie a daisy cutter straight at him. If he had to make a proper ‘save’ then I’d count that as a clear goalscoring opportunity.

I agree.

I'm just trying to guess what the referee is going to say about it to the match supervisor.

[Speedy]

Unless the referee thinks that the keeper might have been able to save it.

:dunno:

Still a clear goalscoring opportunity.

Only justifiable reason is that the shot wasn't on target.

[hibbysam]

I agree.

I'm just trying to guess what the referee is going to say about it to the match supervisor.

I guess his decisions will go under the radar like I said as it was a fairly clean game of football, just daft decisions like that and our bookings while letting them away with them on other days could cost us. Luckily today we were that good that they didn’t matter.

[Hibbyradge]

Still a clear goalscoring opportunity.

Only justifiable reason is that the shot wasn't on target.

True. I don't understand the decision at all.

[ian cruise]

I'm glad it wasn't. If we'd won today playing against ten me for 70 mins there would still be a nervousness about our support and more would question if Heckingbottom's Hibs were just flattering to deceive. A comfortable win against good opposition who had there full 11 out for 90 mins was what we needed to give our fan base the belief in the team that we needed. There seems to be a real cloud lifted off the majority of our support tonight.

[Keith_M]

The ball was heading for the net until the Motherwell player handled it. So, the only explanation possible is that the Ref decided it wasn't deliberate.

As an aside, it was a very well taken penalty.

[Monts]

The ball was heading for the net until the Motherwell player handled it. So, the only explanation possible is that the Ref decided it wasn't deliberate.

As an aside, it was a very well taken penalty.

Shouldn't have given a penalty then

[CMurdoch]

Said exactly the same. Clear as day. Add to Sean (rightly) getting booked for his first foul, SDG for his second, but Main committing 6+ and getting two ‘no more’ warnings, and their right back getting away with the same as Mackie got booked for on Flo first half.

I understand Clancy trying to give as few as possible today ina a pretty easy game to referee but that requires consistency. Main just goes about barging into folk.

Glad the ref left Main alone. Didn't want him being replaced.
He was completely ineffective and in the pockets of both Hibs central defenders until eventually subbed.

[hibbysam]

Glad the ref left Main alone. Didn't want him being replaced.
He was completely ineffective and in the pockets of both Hibs central defenders until eventually subbed.

Totally agree but the inconsistencies are poor.

[Richibee]

Shouldn't have given a penalty then

Can still be a penalty.
For example. Deliberate is a player punching the ball off the goal line - that’s a penalty and a red. Not deliberate is the ball hitting a players outstretched arm as he jumps to head it clear. - that’s just a penalty

[hibbysam]

Can still be a penalty.
For example. Deliberate is a player punching the ball off the goal line - that’s a penalty and a red. Not deliberate is the ball hitting a players outstretched arm as he jumps to head it clear. - that’s just a penalty

The law literally states a handball must be deliberate to be given. Position of the hand makes no difference to whether a penalty will be awarded or not.

On that point though, you may unintentionally clip a players heels as he runs across you through on goal, but as you’ve fouled him you get sent off, likewise, you’ve stopped a goalscoring opportunity due to being penalised for handball so it should be a red card.

[Keith_M]

The law literally states a handball must be deliberate to be given. Position of the hand makes no difference to whether a penalty will be awarded or not.

On that point though, you may unintentionally clip a players heels as he runs across you through on goal, but as you’ve fouled him you get sent off, likewise, you’ve stopped a goalscoring opportunity due to being penalised for handball so it should be a red card.


Re: The bit in bold. I think that rule's just been changed.

[hibbysam]

Re: The bit in bold. I think that rule's just been changed.

For next season it has yeah.

[Keith_M]

For next season it has yeah.


Ah, OK.


:aok:

.

[Hibbyradge]

Can still be a penalty.
For example. Deliberate is a player punching the ball off the goal line - that’s a penalty and a red. Not deliberate is the ball hitting a players outstretched arm as he jumps to head it clear. - that’s just a penalty

Sorry, that's not true.

If a handball is deemed accidental, it's not a foul.

[Booked4Being-Ugly]

From the highlights on YouTube, although they’re not too clear either, it looks like the Motherwell player raises his hand as a natural reaction to the ball about to smack him in the face, rather than to deliberately stop the shot.

[BlackSheep]

It was indeed a cut back so yellow is correct.

Not sure which game you were watching but it was a shot and the Motherwell player actually dives like a goalie to stole the ball, while he doesn’t extend his arm, he definitely uses it to prevent a goal, no way the keeper was able to see it so unlikely to save it himself.

Should’ve been a red no doubt about it.

I fully expect Heckingbottom to receive his phone call from Clancy by Monday evening 😂

[Hibbyradge]

From the highlights on YouTube, although they’re not too clear either, it looks like the Motherwell player raises his hand as a natural reaction to the ball about to smack him in the face, rather than to deliberately stop the shot.

So, by definition, he deliberately handled the ball.

That's a red card offence.

[PaulSmith]

So, by definition, he deliberately handled the ball.

That's a red card offence.

Its a shot on goal blocked by a hand in an unnatural position, yellow card.

For me there’s too many what ifs to make it a red card.

[we are hibs]

I thought if it stopped a possible goal then it was irrelevant if it's deliberate or not?

[wookie70]

Looked at the highlights and the shot was definitely on target. By the letter of the law that should be a red as it was a deliberate act, has to be to be given as handball, that stopped a goal. Harry Maguire got a red yesterday for clipping the heels of the attacker as he ran through on goal 30/35 yards from the posts. There was no intent as it was caused by the attacker running across his path. It was harsh but because it was outside the box he gets red as no double jeopardy.

I like the fact they have tried to change the rules on sending offs at pens. They need to keep finessing it though. I don't want to see someone sent off for the handball yesterday. He was getting his body in the way of the shot and his arms are part of that movement. Yes it hit his arm but it isn't the same as someone sticking an arm out goalie style. There was still a fair chance that the goalie will save the ball so a pen gives us the same chance of scoring and the defender is booked.

[calumhibee1]

Straight red all day.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I thought football was supposed to be a simple game?

[Hibbyradge]

Its a shot on goal blocked by a hand in an unnatural position, yellow card.

For me there’s too many what ifs to make it a red card.

There's no such rule.

I posted this earlier on this thread, but the laws of the game say the following;

SENDING-OFF OFFENCES

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:
denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)

DENYING A GOAL OR AN OBVIOUS GOAL-SCORING OPPORTUNITY

Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.

[PaulSmith]

There's no such rule.

I posted this earlier on this thread, but the laws of the game say the following;

SENDING-OFF OFFENCES

A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:
denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)

DENYING A GOAL OR AN OBVIOUS GOAL-SCORING OPPORTUNITY

Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.

As I said the player stopped a shot at goal, there are too many what if’s to say that it denied a goal and in my humble opinion you are looking at the wrong rule.

[hibbysam]

As I said the player stopped a shot at goal, there are too many what if’s to say that it denied a goal and in my humble opinion you are looking at the wrong rule.

There wasn’t many if’s, he was 3/4 yards out, ball was heading into the corner away from the goalie and he’s stopped it. Simple and straightforward.

[PaulSmith]

There wasn’t many if’s, he was 3/4 yards out, ball was heading into the corner away from the goalie and he’s stopped it. Simple and straightforward.

McNulty got the shot away from around 7-8 yards out. You cannot say 100% that the ball was going in.

[Hibbyradge]

McNulty got the shot away from around 7-8 yards out. You cannot say 100% that the ball was going in.

Wouldn't you agree that it was a goal scoring opportunity?

[Hibbyradge]

As I said the player stopped a shot at goal, there are too many what if’s to say that it denied a goal and in my humble opinion you are looking at the wrong rule.

Which other rule is there? :confused:

[hibbysam]

McNulty got the shot away from around 7-8 yards out. You cannot say 100% that the ball was going in.

I can 100% say it was on target and the keeper would’ve pulled off a worldie to save it, to me that’s a ‘clear goalscoring opportunity’... just like if you get cleaned out when through one on one, you aren’t guaranteed to score.

[PaulSmith]

Which other rule is there? :confused:

You keep quoting denying an obvious goal by handball, as I’ve said that’s open to debate whether the hand ball stopped a goal.

You’ve failed to comment on the interpretation of handball - suggesting wrongly that accidental handball cannot be penalised - and the fact that a shot at goal blocked by handball is a yellow card offence not red.

in this instance if you think that it clearly stopped a goal then fine, it’s a red card. I think that there’s to many what ifs and it’s a yellow card.

[PaulSmith]

I can 100% say it was on target and the keeper would’ve pulled off a worldie to save it, to me that’s a ‘clear goalscoring opportunity’... just like if you get cleaned out when through one on one, you aren’t guaranteed to score.

The law is denied a goal by handball.. not an opportunity. By the fact that you say that the GK could’ve saved it you’ve answered your own question that it’s a yellow card.


For the second part you are correct..well kind of unless there was a genuine attempt to play the ball... as you have denied a goal scoring opportunity and that’s a red card.

[hibbysam]

You keep quoting denying an obvious goal by handball, as I’ve said that’s open to debate whether the hand ball stopped a goal.

You’ve failed to comment on the interpretation of handball - suggesting wrongly that accidental handball cannot be penalised - and the fact that a shot at goal blocked by handball is a yellow card offence not red.

in this instance if you think that it clearly stopped a goal then fine, it’s a red card. I think that there’s to many what ifs and it’s a yellow card.

It doesn’t need to stop a goal. It needs to stop a ‘clear goalscoring opportunity’, it’s not difficult to comprehend. Accidental handball can’t be penalised as that’s not the rule, it has to be an intentional handball.

[hibbysam]

The law is denied a goal by handball.. not an opportunity. By the fact that you say that the GK could’ve saved it you’ve answered your own question that it’s a yellow card.

‘denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)’

You better tell IFAB that you know best then.

[PaulSmith]

‘denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)’

You better tell IFAB that you know best then.

McNulty has not lost the opportunity though as he.....

But you know best lol

[Hermit Crab]

Yellow card and a penalty, correct decision imo.

[PaulSmith]

Wouldn't you agree that it was a goal scoring opportunity?

Tell me what opportunity was lost?

[hibbysam]

McNulty has not lost the opportunity though as he.....

But you know best lol

McNulty has hit a shot heading on target with the keeper needing to pull off a worldie, nothing lost, it’s as clear a goalscoring opportunity as you’ll get, just admit your wrong and there aren’t 1) any other rules like you suggested and 2) that you can be sent off for handball denying a goalscoring opportunity. Simple really.

[PaulSmith]

McNulty has hit a shot heading on target with the keeper needing to pull off a worldie, nothing lost, it’s as clear a goalscoring opportunity as you’ll get, just admit your wrong and there aren’t 1) any other rules like you suggested and 2) that you can be sent off for handball denying a goalscoring opportunity. Simple really.

1) No opportunity has been lost, we are agreed on that?

2) Therefore the only part of this law which is relevant is “did it prevent a goal”

So you admit that the GK could’ve saved it with a worldie or hit may have hit the bar, went over the bar or hit the post..as I said it’s a shot at goal which has hit a hand/arm. Penalty and yellow card is the outcome.

[hibbysam]

1) No opportunity has been lost, we are agreed on that?

2) Therefore the only part of this law which is relevant is “did it prevent a goal”

So you admit that the GK could’ve saved it with a worldie or hit may have hit the bar, went over the bar or hit the post..as I said it’s a shot at goal which has hit a hand/arm. Penalty and yellow card is the outcome.

The opportunity isn’t lost, it’s still live, a lost opportunity is one that got away, this wasn’t illegally halted. So no, it couldn’t hit the post bar over the bar as it was going in the net.

The keeper could save a one on one, doesn’t mean it isn’t a red as there’s an opportunity it could go in the net. The keeper ‘could’ve’ saved it but there’s far More chance it would’ve been a goal.

[PaulSmith]

The opportunity isn’t lost, it’s still live, a lost opportunity is one that got away, this wasn’t illegally halted. So no, it couldn’t hit the post bar over the bar as it was going in the net.

The keeper could save a one on one, doesn’t mean it isn’t a red as there’s an opportunity it could go in the net. The keeper ‘could’ve’ saved it but there’s far More chance it would’ve been a goal.


Your miles off the mark here mate, I’ve tried my hardest to explain the difference between “opportunity” and “denying a goal by handball”.

If you think that the ball was clearly going into the net then that’s a matter of opinion and you could argue a red card. Anything else, in this example, is a yellow card.

[hibbysam]

Your miles off the mark here mate, I’ve tried my hardest to explain the difference between “opportunity” and “denying a goal by handball”.

If you think that the ball was clearly going into the net then that’s a matter of opinion and you could argue a red card. Anything else, in this example, is a yellow card.

No, if it was guaranteed to go in then it’s denying a goal.

It was on target, that there is no doubt.
So the only question is ‘will the goalkeeper definitely save that?’ The answer is no so it’s a clear opportunity for a goal. The keeper was miles away from it.

[PaulSmith]

No, if it was guaranteed to go in then it’s denying a goal.

It was on target, that there is no doubt.
So the only question is ‘will the goalkeeper definitely save that?’ The answer is no so it’s a clear opportunity for a goal. The keeper was miles away from it.


Your getting yourself in a bit of a muddle now and I don’t have any other words to add that I’ve not already said.

[hibbysam]

Your getting yourself in a bit of a muddle now and I don’t have any other words to add that I’ve not already said.

No we’re really not, you’ve realised your two arguments about the wrong rule and not being able to be sent off for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity with your hand has got yourself pickled so you started making stuff up about posts bars and going over the bar. I understand you don’t want to admit it so we’ll leave it there.

[weecounty hibby]

I don't think anyone can really argue that it could have been yellow or a red. Either decision would have had people debating the rights and wrongs of it. In the end penalty and a yellow seems fair enough, but could easily have been red. Hope that clears everything up

[HibbyAndy]

It's a red card and a penalty all day long

If it was at the other end you can bet that clown Clancy would have taken great delight in flashing a red card in Hanlons face !

[Hibbyradge]

Your getting yourself in a bit of a muddle now and I don’t have any other words to add that I’ve not already said.

The referee obviously took your view, but I think he was particularly lenient.

The defender deliberately handled the ball and it looks to me that it was going into the net. That's a red card offence.

You, and the ref, think that it might not have gone into the net, thereby justifying the yellow.

I disagree, but I understand your interpretation of the law and the incident.

[Danderhall Hibs]

It's a red card and a penalty all day long

If it was at the other end you can bet that clown Clancy would have taken great delight in flashing a red card in Hanlons face !

Did he send Porteous off last year (v Killie) or was it just a penalty?

No wonder the refs get “everything” wrong - the rules are written in a way that no one understands them and can be interpreted in whichever way suits you best.

[PaulSmith]

No we’re really not, you’ve realised your two arguments about the wrong rule and not being able to be sent off for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity with your hand has got yourself pickled so you started making stuff up about posts bars and going over the bar. I understand you don’t want to admit it so we’ll leave it there.

OK, let's talk specifically about this incident which I thought we were?


1) Hibs do NOT lose an opportunity to score a goal. The very fact that McNulty gets his shot away is clear evidence of this. End of the argument about denying a goal scoring opportunity unless you don't understand the meaning of an opportunity. For clarity the opportunity cannot continue once the referee has blown his whistle

2) Therefore the ONLY question is did this incident deny a goal....that's open to interpretation and opinion. I have given mine as you have done this also by saying that the GK could've saved it via a 'worldie'. Therefore the correct decision would be a yellow card for simply handball in the penalty area with the added requirement of a yellow card as it was a shot at goal.


You absolutely can be sent off for denying a goal scoring opportunity via handball, a defender stopping a through ball to a striker who would be one on one with the GK would be an example of that.


I really hope you aren't a referee!!

[hibbysam]

Did he send Porteous off last year (v Killie) or was it just a penalty?

No wonder the refs get “everything” wrong - the rules are written in a way that no one understands them and can be interpreted in whichever way suits you best.

That’s because it was quite clear that shot was going about 15 yards wide of goal.

[brianmc]

OK, let's talk specifically about this incident which I thought we were?


1) Hibs do NOT lose an opportunity to score a goal. The very fact that McNulty gets his shot away is clear evidence of this. End of the argument about denying a goal scoring opportunity unless you don't understand the meaning of an opportunity. For clarity the opportunity cannot continue once the referee has blown his whistle

2) Therefore the ONLY question is did this incident deny a goal....that's open to interpretation and opinion. I have given mine as you have done this also by saying that the GK could've saved it via a 'worldie'. Therefore the correct decision would be a yellow card for simply handball in the penalty area with the added requirement of a yellow card as it was a shot at goal.


You absolutely can be sent off for denying a goal scoring opportunity via handball, a defender stopping a through ball to a striker who would be one on one with the GK would be an example of that.


I really hope you aren't a referee!!

That's mental!
Using your logic: a defender standing on the 6 yard line who makes a diving save and turns the striker's shot round the post only deserves a yellow card because the striker 'already got his shot away' and the goalie is stood behind him and MIGHT make a save???

I really hope that you're NOT a referee!

[PaulSmith]

That's mental!
Using your logic: a defender standing on the 6 yard line who makes a diving save and turns the striker's shot round the post only deserves a yellow card because the striker 'already got his shot away' and the goalie is stood behind him and MIGHT make a save???

I really hope that you're NOT a referee!


Someone else who cant tell the difference between example 1 and 2 :confused:

Surely example 2) would come into play in that situation and it would be a red card as it would be more clear to the referee that it was almost certain that the player diving to save a shot denied a goal...

[hibbysam]

That's mental!
Using your logic: a defender standing on the 6 yard line who makes a diving save and turns the striker's shot round the post only deserves a yellow card because the striker 'already got his shot away' and the goalie is stood behind him and MIGHT make a save???

I really hope that you're NOT a referee!

Takeaway the ‘diving save’ and change to ‘lifted arm
Towards the ball’ and that’s exactly the scenario from yesterday.

[Hibbyradge]

Takeaway the ‘diving save’ and change to ‘lifted arm
Towards the ball’ and that’s exactly the scenario from yesterday.

Except, the keeper was diving in an attempt to save it from crossing the line.

[Danderhall Hibs]

That’s because it was quite clear that shot was going about 15 yards wide of goal.

And it was deliberate?

[hibbysam]

And it was deliberate?

The referee deemed it deliberate hence the penalty. It wasn’t a red, or yellow for that matter due to where the ball was going.

[hibbysam]

Except, the keeper was diving in an attempt to save it from crossing the line.

That doesn’t mean he is going to save it, however. If thats the case then any handball going towards a goal, as long as a keeper dives in the direction of the ball will save his defender from a red card.

[PaulSmith]

The referee deemed it deliberate hence the penalty. It wasn’t a red, or yellow for that matter due to where the ball was going.


It was a shot on goal and Ryan got a yellow card.


Did you see the Man Utd game last week.....

[PaulSmith]

That doesn’t mean he is going to save it, however. If thats the case then any handball going towards a goal, as long as a keeper dives in the direction of the ball will save his defender from a red card.


There's clearly a level of interpration required..how far is the defender from goal, the speed of the ball, how likely is the GK to save it and if you take away the defender was it clearly going to be a goal.

All factors which you've conveniently ignored.

[Hibbyradge]

That doesn’t mean he is going to save it, however. If thats the case then any handball going towards a goal, as long as a keeper dives in the direction of the ball will save his defender from a red card.

A handball on the line with the keeper stranded is an obvious red card.

If it's a shot on target and there are defenders, or a keeper, behind the defender when he handles it, then it's most likely a yellow.

Of course there are grey areas, and I thought the Motherwell player could easily have been sent off, but if you're looking for the referee's justification for his decision, which I was, then that's it.

Not much point discussing this any further, tbh.

[hibbysam]

There's clearly a level of interpration required..how far is the defender from goal, the speed of the ball, how likely is the GK to save it and if you take away the defender was it clearly going to be a goal.

All factors which you've conveniently ignored.

Ok I’ll answer them, again for you.
Defender was inside 6 yard box so approx 4 yards out.
Pace of the ball was decently struck.
Keeper hadn’t started to dive yet, therefore would have been unbelievable had he stopped it.

[hibbysam]

It was a shot on goal and Ryan got a yellow card.


Did you see the Man Utd game last week.....

It was a shot miles off target. Yes I seen the Man Utd one, another which was well off target and a much greater distance from goal for both shot and ‘save’ hence why he wasn’t sent off. Not sure what point your making with either...

[Hibbyradge]

Ok I’ll answer them, again for you.
Defender was inside 6 yard box so approx 4 yards out.
Pace of the ball was decently struck.
Keeper hadn’t started to dive yet, therefore would have been unbelievable had he stopped it.

Have you seen it again, yet? I've watched it a few times, and again just now.

The keeper dives as soon as Sparky shoots. Whether he was getting it or not is another matter, but he might have.

[PaulSmith]

Ok I’ll answer them, again for you.
Defender was inside 6 yard box so approx 4 yards out.
Pace of the ball was decently struck.
Keeper hadn’t started to dive yet, therefore would have been unbelievable had he stopped it.

So I’m glad you’re now not arguing about the different laws and seem to accept how I’ve described them.

A matter of opinion absolutely fine, just exactly as Hibbyradge has said .

[hibbysam]

Have you seen it again, yet? I've watched it a few times, and again just now.

The keeper dives as soon as Sparky shoots. Whether he was getting it or not is another matter, but he might have.

Multiple times. This photo being after the ball hits the arm and is away from the arm and the keeper still hasn’t dived. Starting to think you’ve probably not seen it again.

[Hibbyradge]

Multiple times. This photo being after the ball hits the arm and is away from the arm and the keeper still hasn’t dived. Starting to think you’ve probably not seen it again.

I've seen it several times on Hibs TV

[hibbysam]

I've seen it several times on Hibs TV

The photo clearly shows the keeper hadn’t dived until after it hit the arm.

[Hibbyradge]

You can freeze frame to prove just about anything. I've posted one showing the keeper starting to dive, a split second after McNulty shot. The referee doesn't have that luxury.

I don't know what you're arguing about now.

https://i.postimg.cc/c1hZJSsy/Screenshot-20190317-183650-Chrome.jpg

[hibbysam]

You can freeze frame to prove just about anything. I've posted one showing the keeper starting to dive, a split second after McNulty shot. The referee doesn't have that luxury.

I don't know what you're arguing about now.

https://i.postimg.cc/c1hZJSsy/Screenshot-20190317-183650-Chrome.jpg

That split second is after the ball has travelled to the arm (3/4 yards) and left the arm to go away from goal, and he’s only just started to move. It’s clear he was getting nowhere near it.

You can’t say the keeper dived as soon as McNulty hit it as that’s simply not true.

[Hibbyradge]

The photo clearly shows the keeper hadn’t dived until after it hit the arm.

It doesn't clearly show anything, but since when did keepers have to dive before a player shoots to make a save?

As I've said from the start, the player could have been sent off. However, the referee didn't think that the offence merited a red card according to the laws of the game.

Not much else to say really.

[Hibbyradge]

That split second is after the ball has travelled to the arm (3/4 yards) and left the arm to go away from goal, and he’s only just started to move. It’s clear he was getting nowhere near it.

You can’t say the keeper dived as soon as McNulty hit it as that’s simply not true.

Cool. Well done. :aok:

[Monts]

OK, let's talk specifically about this incident which I thought we were?


1) Hibs do NOT lose an opportunity to score a goal. The very fact that McNulty gets his shot away is clear evidence of this. End of the argument about denying a goal scoring opportunity unless you don't understand the meaning of an opportunity. For clarity the opportunity cannot continue once the referee has blown his whistle

2) Therefore the ONLY question is did this incident deny a goal....that's open to interpretation and opinion. I have given mine as you have done this also by saying that the GK could've saved it via a 'worldie'. Therefore the correct decision would be a yellow card for simply handball in the penalty area with the added requirement of a yellow card as it was a shot at goal.


You absolutely can be sent off for denying a goal scoring opportunity via handball, a defender stopping a through ball to a striker who would be one on one with the GK would be an example of that.


I really hope you aren't a referee!!

I was the one that started the thread, and your explanation has answered it for me. I had never considered the significance of the term 'opportunity'. It makes sense now. Subjective, but makes sense.

[The Green Goblin]

Not sure which game you were watching but it was a shot and the Motherwell player actually dives like a goalie to stole the ball, while he doesn’t extend his arm, he definitely uses it to prevent a goal, no way the keeper was able to see it so unlikely to save it himself.

Should’ve been a red no doubt about it.

I fully expect Heckingbottom to receive his phone call from Clancy by Monday evening 😂

It was right in front of me and this is how I saw it too.

[Speedy]

I was the one that started the thread, and your explanation has answered it for me. I had never considered the significance of the term 'opportunity'. It makes sense now. Subjective, but makes sense.

I don't really agree with the explanation. If you deliberately pull someone back when they're clear through in the box it would still be a pen and red - that wouldn't be the case if you accept the explanation.

I think it's more likely the ref has interpreted it as not deliberately denying a goalscoring opportunity but has left his body in a place that is deemed a 'deliberate' handball, i.e. a middle ground that isn't really in the rules.

[Spike Mandela]

How was Goldson not a red in the Rangers game? Unfathomable.

[Monts]

I don't really agree with the explanation. If you deliberately pull someone back when they're clear through in the box it would still be a pen and red - that wouldn't be the case if you accept the explanation.

I think it's more likely the ref has interpreted it as not deliberately denying a goalscoring opportunity but has left his body in a place that is deemed a 'deliberate' handball, i.e. a middle ground that isn't really in the rules.

If they were pulled back when clear through on goal they would've lost the opportunity, so it would be covered by explanation.

[Speedy]

If they were pulled back when clear through on goal they would've lost the opportunity, so it would be covered by explanation.

I thought the point was that there was a penalty so the opportunity is still there.

Either way, a handball in the box which denies a clear goalscoring opportunity should be a red:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/05/19/phil-jones-not-sent-last-man-foul-eden-hazard/amp/

[superfurryhibby]

How was Goldson not a red in the Rangers game? Unfathomable.

Just watched the highlights and aye, clear red. No attempt to play the ball, realised the guy had him f9r pace and just takes him out as he’s bearing down on the box.

Almost more annoying, McGregor launch the ball right at the Killie lad and then go radge at the ref. My most disliked player, along with Naismith.

[Monts]

I thought the point was that there was a penalty so the opportunity is still there.

Either way, a handball in the box which denies a clear goalscoring opportunity should be a red:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/05/19/phil-jones-not-sent-last-man-foul-eden-hazard/amp/

I think the point was that once the attacker takes a shot, they no longer have an opportunity to shoot.

So once it leaves their boot its either a certain goal (red card if stopped illegally) or a possible goal (yellow card if stopped illegally).

[Eyrie]

How was Goldson not a red in the Rangers game? Unfathomable.

The answer is in the question, and also explains Morelos coming back out for the second half.

[JimBHibees]

Just watched the highlights and aye, clear red. No attempt to play the ball, realised the guy had him f9r pace and just takes him out as he’s bearing down on the box.

Almost more annoying, McGregor launch the ball right at the Killie lad and then go radge at the ref. My most disliked player, along with Naismith.

Couldnt agree more you had to laugh what he was doing for the Killie goal there. Looked almost deliberate.