Fulham claimed Gianluca Scamacca’s goal for West Ham should have been ruled out for handball – but the goal was given after a VAR review
This weekend, too, the VAR provided a topic of conversation with some controversial decisions about handball rules.
The Match of the Day 2 team described some of them as “amazing,” with seemingly similar incidents leading to different outcomes.
But did the officials understand the calls correctly?
Here’s what happened in each incident, below – and you can vote on whether you think the umpires made the right decision.
What is the handball rule?
Let’s start with the rules. When deciding on a handball decision, referees have three important considerations:
- Whether it was a ‘deliberate action’ by the player – ie whether he moved his arm towards the ball;
- When the hand or arm is in a “natural position”, that is, away from the body;
- The player’s closeness to the ball and the speed with which he hits his arm/hand.
In the event of an accidental handball in the goal structure:
- If a player accidentally touches the ball and a team-mate scores a goal, the goal is awarded;
- However, if a player accidentally plays with the ball himself and scores a goal, the goal does not count.
` Sport football reporter Simon Stone said: “The reality is that most of these calls involve some level of subjectivity at some point and that can lead to disagreements where there is no clear right or wrong answer.”
“However, there are also rules from the gaming authority IFAB that have to be observed.”
Gabriel and Dan Burn
Liverpool were not awarded a penalty for the left-side incident, while Brentford received one for the right-side incident
Newcastle’s Dan Burn concedes a penalty when he arm-blocks Aaron Hickey’s header from close range. Arsenal defender Gabriel is involved in a similar incident 24 hours later when he blocks Diogo Jota’s cross but is not awarded a penalty after a VAR check.
MOTD2 host Mark Chapman: The PGMOL say that handball is about “proximity and speed”.
Danny Murphy: “That’s what makes the fans angry. How can you give one and Liverpool don’t? And that’s a fair argument. We’re all about consistency. How can these be two different decisions?”
Simon Stein: “Newcastle’s Dan Burn conceded a penalty because his arm was well above his head, making his body bigger. In contrast, Arsenal defender Gabriel had not removed his arm from his body when the ball hit him, from there it will it’s a subjective view for referees on the field Michael Oliver.”
Marcus Rasford
Marcus Rashford’s goal would have made Manchester United 3-1, although they were still clinging to the 2-1 win
Marcus Rashford’s goal against Everton is disallowed after a VAR check as the ball struck the Manchester United striker’s arm as it blocked James Tarkowski’s release under construction.
MOTD 2 commentator Guy Mowbray: “There was nothing Marcus Rashford could do about that, it’s completely random. But if the player who scores scores a goal after the ball has touched any part of his arm, he’s not going to stop.”
Gianluca Scamacca
Gianluca Scamacca’s goal gave West Ham a 2-1 lead after a VAR check
Gianluca Scamacca’s goal for West Ham against Fulham is under review by VAR for a possible handball by the Hammers forward but the goal is awarded.
Chapman: “There were some pretty amazing decisions in that game. We were told the reason was that there was no conclusive evidence the ball had touched Scamacca’s hand.
Dion Dublin: “If you look at the replay, you can see that the rotation of the ball has changed. We only talk about the smallest touches. He knows it touched his hand and thinks, ‘I got away with one’.”
Simon Stein: “With Scamacca’s goal, VAR Michael Salisbury should have been 100% sure the Italian managed to rule out the goal. It can only be assumed that the incident did not reach the threshold.”
Mikhail Antonio
Replays clearly show Michail Antonio handling the ball leading up to his goal that made West Ham 3-1
Later in the same game, West Ham’s Michail Antonio blocks a clearance with his hand before scoring past Bernd Leno on the second try.
Chapman: “We were told the goal will be given because he [Antonio] still had work to do – it will be a second phase if he meets Leno and Fulham have a chance to clear.”
Dublin: “It’s a goal, isn’t it? You scored a goal. You benefited directly from handball?”
Simon Stein: “So VAR decided the ball hits Marcus Rashford’s arm at Goodison Park, then runs through to score. In fact, this handball leads directly to a goal, which is not allowed, so it was ruled out. VAR.
“By contrast, while Antonio handles the ball against Fulham, this was not ruled out by the referee as intentional. Antonio then has a shot that’s blocked Fulham doesn’t have a chance to clear, then Antonio rounds the goalkeeper The view is that the handball didn’t lead directly to a goal as the game went through more moments – including the Fulham -Defense that had a chance to clear the situation – before the ball lands in the net.”
Did the officials get the penalty decisions right?
Despite the unrecognized goal, Manchester United still won the game 2-1
Murphy: “It’s unintentional, tiny touches of the hand. Perhaps one could argue that Antonios is more than that, but the other two are. I don’t think we want to rule out goals for that.
“But if we abide by the letter of the law, they shouldn’t all be allowed.”
Dublin: “It is the same [offence]. They’re basically all the same, the same kind of handball.”
Comments are closed.