Aim the ball at a player's arm

>ball hit his chest and bounces off his arm
>hurr durr intentional handball

Literally has nothing to do with my post or the post I replied to you nigger brained fatass.

Holy shit you're a fucking retard

also, points was not enough

Dumbass should have either kept his arm down and not raise it at all or kept it up, he gets fucked because he moved it.

>extend your arm like a retard
>"THIS IS NOT A PENALTY, WHY???"

Pathetic sport desu. 60 minutes later and this 6 foot long kick at some nigs arm is somehow the most exciting part.

>Try to organize defense
>KEEP UR ARM DOWN!!!!
Semen slurping sport might not be for me tbqh

Yeah I'm sure his arm wasn't up to block the ball in the first place.

AHAHAHAHAHAH THE COPE IS SO GOOD

Attached: 318271da980706f7a18a811c3456a77d.png (633x758, 16K)

>anybody on the LFC team a scouser

fucking moron

Name a sport that is not semen slurping.

Salah is fucking shit. So fucking shit. shittily shit. Omg how can he be so shit. How has mane not jusg smashed that shitter's head in. Fuck salah is so shit lads.

It's a fucking disgrace

Salah is based. Mashallah

jesus christ what a pathetic sport. now i remember why i dont watch this shit. boring and stupid as fuck

The cope is real

Attached: 0EA87275-AC87-4C98-8F94-C9DE2D4CE018.png (365x369, 135K)

Maybe don’t run around with your arm at a 95 degree angle?
Tottenham sucks lmao

>zero premier league titles
>uefa will strip this final from the record
ZERO
FUCKING
TITLES
AGAIN

Not the first team to get UEFApooled and won't be the last. Embarrassing for the sport

The cope is literally unreal

Attached: 1152CF3D-40E5-4154-ADD5-CEAD95DC7304.png (400x500, 169K)

JUST

Stay mad you ABL cunt.

>wins 1-0 instead of 2-0
wow it's fucking nothing

>arm pointing outwards like a fucking hitler salute
>get a penalty
era

most of the time these guys can't even hit a barn door from within 10m, and you think they could hit an arm in similar situations?

test

All the seething Jews making these threads. Looks like Liverpool is going to be the next city to receive the religion of peace treatment.

It will be worse next year when every single touch is a penalty. As of right now it needs to look "deliberate" but soon it will be even if you didn't mean to it's a penalty, to avoid all confusion.

Should have worn this. Having to use your arms to keep your balance like a normal human should not be an excuse.

Attached: bondage - arms behind back.jpg (679x538, 30K)

seriously though wtf is he supposed to do the ball deflects off his chest

how is this a penalty

connection error wtf

It aint NBA, he aint a keeper, he needs to keep his fucking arm down.

Hand ball rules are so fucking retarded holy shit how can you give another team such an edge like this after what is clearly unintentional and hit his shoulder, what a fucking joke

>if you hoof a ball from 2 meter at most at my arm like that I wouldnt be able to pull it away either.
Why does that matter? The arm should not be there in the first place, doesn't matter how much time you have to move it out of the way.
If he doesn't extend his arm out as the opponent's going to cross, he doesn't have to move it out of the way, even if it comes right at it.

So just like France "won" their World Cup.

Blame FIFA rule-application gerrymandering

It's supposed to be "handball" as in the ball hits your hand. What a load of bollocks, hit his upper arm.

and of course the ref buys it
are there any remotely intelligent people in football?

handball now means armpitball

the state of divegrass

pathetic

same referee didn't give this penalty against Liverpool with the ball not going in last year

Attached: 1540827213394.png (675x362, 117K)

>*t-poses at the goal line*
>*ball hits arm*
>not a handball, came right at me, had no time to react

This rule needs to fucking change, the entire pace of the game was fucked because of the penalty from this call

Not a handball in a million years. That's his chest and he he hit with his armpit at best.
VARefball at it again

*with the ball going in

cry moar faggot

laugh it up livercucks, wait till spuds win on away goals the next final leg

Can't explain how good this feels!!! Worlds best team, worlds best manager, worlds best striker, worlds best defender, WORLDS BEST FANS!!!

...

where to kop?

I constantly point out how bad it is that they try to get shit from the refs instead of playing the game, and all people say is
>"that's just the way the game is"
or
>"it's tactical"

still doesn't stop me from being disappointed with it. you wouldn't see Ronaldinho do shit like this; someone that had real fire for the sport

His arm is clearly out for the purpose of pointing while he's communicating with his teammates.

The rule is called deliberate handling for a reason, and that clearly wasn't deliberate handling.

Attached: meizaconsider.jpg (758x758, 334K)

There was a discussion about this rule already a few weeks ago in Germany since a few penalties were given for handballs like that in the Bundesliga. An expert already predicted that players would learn to aim for the arm of the opponent to get a penalty. What a shitty rule.

Lads, it's Tottenham.

>tf
>tp
get the fuck out burger
that isn't a handball, not in a million years

no, its fucking liverpool

AHAHAHAHAH SEETHING GYPSY

Putting your arm in an unatural poaition is deliberate dumbass.

Read the post you're replying to again. If you don't understand it, keep reading it until you do.

indirect freekick for unintentional hand would be ok

they used instant replay and declared it a handball

it doesn't matter what the player's INTENTIONS are.

his arm was out in an unnatural position while inside the box. its a penalty.

based
cringe

HODDLE SEETHING
ABLS SEETHING

Attached: @ABLs.jpg (616x596, 170K)

Handling the ball
Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand or arm. The following must be considered:
- movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
- distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
- the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. Inside their penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any related sanction but can be guilty of handling offences that incur an indirect free kick.
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
resources.fifa.com/image/upload/laws-of-the-game-2018-19.pdf?cloudid=khhloe2xoigyna8juxw3

dude, it you get your body surface bigger, that's a pen, intentionality or not.

it was a penalty, the only disgusting thing is mané deliberatly shooting at his arm

Hoddle is fucking LIVID. Hope BT Sport have an ambulance standing by for him.

>Putting your arm in an unatural poaition is deliberate
It clearly isn't in every case, according to how the actual rule is written.
>his arm was out in an unnatural position while inside the box
I don't know where people get the idea "unnatural position = penalty, always." The rule clearly fucking says the exact opposite: that the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence.
It's OK that you think it was a penalty; the way the rule is written clearly gives leeway for subjective interpretation. I can't say you're objectively wrong, but I subjectively think it wasn't a penalty because his arm was clearly in that position for the purpose of communicating with his teammates. That's not deliberate handling to me.

ok but spurs still couldnt score and it finished 2-0

keep coping

Worst final in recent history desu

>dude, it you get your body surface bigger, that's a pen, intentionality or not.
You would fail the reading comprehension section of the SAT very badly. What part of "the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence" do you not understand?

Attached: 1539950744592.jpg (438x447, 95K)

>he literally just said "the game's gone"
i have never seen seethe like this

ITT: people confuse "this is how it's usually called" with "this is how the rule is written." There is zero basis in the text of the laws of the game for the "unnatural position = penalty" meme.

Nigga it hit chest first
fucking refball

Chest to arm is never a penalty
fuck refball and fuck var

first time watching this play
how the fuck was that awarded a penalty? it clearly hits the nigger's chest

t. Random US spurs fan.

>not necessarily
>always

See the difference?

UEFA interpret the law differently from the Prem at the moment.
That said, there has been no shortage of briefings and information issued about this.
If he didn't know its because he wasn't listening the dozen times he was told.

Here we have a saying that goes: "El futbol es para vivos", which means football is for the streetwise. If you go flinging your arm inside the penalty area like a retard, then expect the opponent to attempt to gain a penalty.

Tell me how I'm wrong. Provide a logic-based rationale for that being a penalty, and explain how your logic is compatible with I wasn't rooting for either team in this game.

so what you retards are saying is that all defenders should run around in the box like an airplane and if the ball hits their arm its ok cos they were just pointing somewhereFUCKING SEETHING KIKES

Who would that ball even be for? He was literally aiming for the arm, the sly little senegali.

Problem is to decide what is intentional and what isn't.

Handballs in the area don't have a solution

are you fucking blind?

This reply is a nonsensical strawman, since is arguing that an arm in a certain position is ALWAYS a handling violation, and is correctly pointing out that the rule very specifically says it is NOT always a handling violation.

UEFA don't accept the distinction.
But as I say above, this in't a secret or anything.

This is one of the worst penalty decisions I've seen, partly because of how little the 'experts' and commentators questioned it! All this guff about 'unnatural shapes' is stupid. They've been saying 'Oh, it's clearly not intentional, but still a penalty'. NONSENSE.

That's not what he said, retard.

Then you're correct.

you simply cannot stick your hand up in the air like that in the penalty area
you should know better than to do something so retarded

This how UEFA are applying the law.

>Head of Uefa referees Robert Rossetti gave an insight into the law's implementation in January. He told the Times that any player using his arms to make his body bigger in order to block the ball would be penalised in this season's Champions League.

"The big challenge is the position of the arm," he said. "When the arm is totally out of the body above the shoulder it should be penalised. If the defender is making the body bigger in order to block the ball it is not fair.

>"It is different if the defender is challenging or playing the ball and it rebounds. But if he is looking to block a cross or a shot on goal and the player is trying to spread his body then it is a handball."

shut the fuck up you boomer

Attached: clingingmars.png (533x779, 84K)

>Later in second half Son receives ball in box
>Hits his chest
>Another handball
MFW

Absolutely baffling, as this interpretation directly contradicts the laws of the game as they are written:
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence

that's because you ignore the distance argument, sissoko simply had no reason to not tuck his arms in, he was not in movement and didn't use his ahnd to keep his balance.

Gonna cry? Piss your pants maybe?
Maybe shit and cum?
What about Origi's goal? Was it cheating too?

I'm sad for Son, Lucas Moura and Kane.
But for you? You are worthy of being ridicularized, butthurt loser.

Attached: 1558360330094.jpg (499x499, 26K)

Not even his arm, it looks like it bounced from the pecs, pit and then arms.

context exists

You had to import niggers from all over africa to win a world cup outside home.

>that's because you ignore the distance argument
He was a few feet away from him. The distance argument strengthens the argument for no penalty.
>sissoko simply had no reason to not tuck his arms in
He was communicating via pointing. His arm was where it was for a purpose other than blocking a shot/pass.

As soon as I saw the replay, and that it was being VARed, I was waiting for the inevitable 'No pen'. Then...OH.

Attached: 1534557561376.png (370x527, 236K)

Based
But this is still racism outside Yea Forums, stupid newfag.

Attached: 1559083416552.jpg (840x544, 89K)

You're completely fucking failing at reading comprehension yet again. Hilarious.
>any player using his arms to make his body bigger in order to block the ball would be penalised in this season's Champions League.
This is literally saying that a hand/arm in a certain position IS a handling violation, EVERY TIME. This DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS the following statement from the laws of the game:
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
It is factually a direct contradiction. I am right and you are wrong, Muhammad, literally, factually and objectively.

ABLs on suicide watch

>He was communicating via pointing.
he had no reason to lift his arm in this situation. be aware that I don't rate you as a person, go ahead if you want to pass for a fool, you're great at it.

Okay, so Liverpool won 1-0
>Ywn see Tottenham win an important title
>Ywn be anything but a jewish hugbox team
>Ywn see Son or Kane lift a relevant trophy wearing a Spurs's jersey

Attached: 1555512316540.gif (554x400, 238K)

Psst, Billy Big Balls, the law has been revised, you are quoting something out of date.

>in order to block the ball
Clearly NOT what was happening.

>does a fucking full on hitler salute for 10 fucking seconds
>ball hits his arm
>sp thinks thats fine
my sides put your fucking arm down you idiot, this is the most textbook penalty i've ever seen

The refs can't literally read the players' minds and know what their actual intentions are. The only thing they can judge is whether the player is deliberately making himself bigger and not just being affected by something else e.g jumping for a header and bumping with an opponent.
There's no reason why Sissoko's arm would be at a right angle other than a deliberate movement of the arm. A referee simply can not and should not have to accurately judge whether a player is candidly pointing to command his teammates when a winger is at the edge of the box ready to play it in or just disguising a block attempt.

Actually, it doesn't contradict the statement.
>This is literally saying that a hand/arm in a certain position IS a handling violation, EVERY TIME.
Yes. EVERY TIME, IN A CERTAIN POSITION. Which means not all position is a handling violation.
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
Which also means "Usually (usually, not always), the position of hands means that there is an offence, except for a special case"
Some of the case is if the ball hits the defender's arm when the defender is using the arm to protect his crotch/face on reflex. Though a decent defender will spin his body to both block the ball and protect his crotch.

Oi, you got a loicense for that pointing, m8?
Pathetic. Pointing clearly =/= "looking to block a cross or a shot on goal"
To argue that any time a player's arm is in a certain position and a non-deflected shot/pass hits it = a handling violation is completely contrary to the spirit of
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
because the whole point of that excerpt is, as you ironically pointed out, Context, like the arm being there before the shot/pass attempt was even taken for the purpose of fucking pointing and communicating.

You wouldn't even see Ronaldo, Messi or Ibrahimovic do shit like this
Literally a disgrace

so defenders just start randomly pointing and if the ball hits their arm its cool cos they were just pointing LOL

It is usually an offence if a player:
• touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
• the hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
• the hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player
deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
The above offences apply even if the ball touches a player’s hand/arm
directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is
close.

That's literally taken directly from the 2018/2019 laws of the game. Please provide a more up to date source if it exists.

>Psst, the law is stupid now
>Which means it's OK
>Somehow

>full on hitler salute
I lol'd

Do you think a defender t-posing on the line shouldn't be a handball EVERY TIME?

unironically can i just run around pretending to be a plane and if it hits my arms that fine because its unintentional as thats just how i run

It's not fine, but it's also not a penalty. That's really not hard to understand.

>honest ref i was just POINTING TO THE BALL

That might be a good tactic. All defenders will point their arm but it's OK , they're just pointing lol. This will be dubbed the "cross" tactic because it makes your body looks like a cross AND used to block a cross.

This is just making excuses for appalling officiating.

>point to god just as a cross is coming in to give you some last minute strength
>ball hits your hands
well its not fine, but we'll have to allow it

IF he was a couple yards off the line, AND the attacker hit the ball AWAY from the line, probably not a pen.

That's why grey area room for interpretation exists in the rule. In this individual instance, if you're arguing that the point was some sort of ruse that's a pretty fucking flimsy, difficult to buy argument. If it had been ruled no penalty and players started the pointing shit more often and the refs saw a pattern, then the grey area room for interpretation allows them to make the argument that the pointing is a ruse.
I cannot say that your argument is objectively wrong, because that's a legitimate stance: that the ref thinks the chance that the point was a ruse is sufficiently high to justify a penalty. I don't subjectively agree with that stance, but I can't say it's objectively wrong, either.

6 times la

But it's not Sissoko saying this, it's EVERYONE, because it was OBVIOUS. Plus the ball originally doesn't even hit his arm.

That isn't technically the rule yet, only for the 19/20 season, but that is the current interpretation since the current rule is incredibly vague and actually more of a guideline than a stone cold rule.

>honest ref he was just POINTING SO ITS OK LOL

>Plus the ball originally doesn't even hit his arm
then what, some scouser edited reality to make it hit his arm twice?

>>ball hits your hands
You mean 'Hits body then bounces onto hands', which considerably weakens your rebuttal.

how does a deflection change that your hands were in an unnatural position, the deflection is completely irrelevant

Again you're making it sound like players were saying this, and like it was some kind of con, AND ignoring it didn't even hit his arm first. And you're having to do this because of how clearly it's not a penalty.

The penalty felt like when you activate handball in FIFA games.
This was shameful.

But this exact referee did the same thing with Kimpembe during PSG-United...

So Sissoko INTENDED the deflection off his body onto his arm???

It clearly originally hits his body.

At the last WC in Nigeria vs Argentina the ball hit an argie’s arm after rebounding off his chest and there was no pen

heres an idea, how about you dont run around in the penalty box like a fucking aeroplane so you dont risk giving away stupid penalties

where the ball bounces off a fucking beach ball or fucking theresa may pops out of the ground asking you to support the next brexit bill, dont stand around in the penalty box with your arms outstretched

whataboutism

After winning the world cup in the exact same manner you of all people should be slinking into the shadows right about now,

intent is not necessary because unnatural position

thats not how the rule works, its classed as intentional if your arm is in an unnatural position - that is the intent, holding your arm unnaturally,
you dont actually have to move toward the ball for it to be 'intentional'
shoulder, bicep, hand

shqiptard

Shut the fuck up you clueless retard

it still hits your hand that is "pointed to god", doesn't matter how many deflections it takes or how little time you have to react, the ball still hits your hand that is way up in the air

if your hand is not up in the air, it won't be a handball no matter how many times the ball hits it

You should stick to hockey.

>two clearly different interpretation of the same rule by the same person
>both go in favour of the same team
>whataboutism

You should stick to dodgy VAR penalties to "win" you trophies.

"no."

lmao I forgot about the final being today hahahhahahahahaha fuck english teams

Ahmed, pls show me in the laws of the game where unnatural position = handling violation.
OH WAIT IT LITERALLY SAYS THE EXACT OPPOSITE:
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence

You didn’t miss anything

The game was subpart but it's still a final

the deflection is irrelevant, it will be a pen if you're intentionally spreading your arms which makes you bigger and it won't if you're not doing anything special with your arms

if your arms are normally at your side, it's not a pen even if it deflects off your chest

I should’ve done something else, but at least it was an excuse to hang out with a friend

France in complete meltdown mode right now

Attached: 0%survivors.png (477x724, 692K)

well, you clearly forgot the fact that the var is in effect since the start of this season and his decision making is affected by the way he sees the game

Attached: weren't really shit.jpg (840x450, 86K)

>poltards still think this wasnt a handball

keep seething

Attached: 1531690968023.webm (1280x720, 2.49M)

WHY WOULD ANY PLAYER EVER INTENTIONALLY CAUSE A FUCKING PENALTY FOR THE OPPOSITE TEAM

You know, now that I think about it, I like this change. I'm almost always in favor of rule changes which reduce subjective grey area.
I just don't like enforcing this change when the literal laws of the game literally say the exact opposite thing. That's not OK. Change the laws, then enforce the changes.

that is what it says, more or less. having your arm out in front of you CAN be a natural position, for example if you're swinging your arms as a part of a running motion. pointing with your arm extended while standing still is an unnatural position. you're wrong, please learn humility. listen to this guy

Attached: Liverpool wins.webm (1280x720, 2.42M)

It is the interpretation UEFA are using and well publicized. They also implement offside slightly differently (very literally and some would say not really in terms of the intent of the law itself).

>OH WAIT IT LITERALLY SAYS THE EXACT OPPOSITE
The exact opposite of unnatural position = handling violation is
unnatural position != handling violation
But the rules says
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
not
>the position of the hand does not mean that there is an offence
the "does not necessarily" portion means that USUALLY, this rule checks out, but SOMETIMES it's not. The rule you're greentexting does not deals in absolute 100%-0%, but in 70%-30% situation.

Complete disgrace

No. You made a factually incorrect statement, I called you out on it, and now you're giving me ineffective damage control because you don't like a kaffir proving you wrong. Let's review your factually incorrect statement:
>intent is not necessary because unnatural position
This is clearly implying that an arm/hand in a certain position is ALWAYS handling.
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
This is clearly implying that an arm/hand in a certain position is NOT always handling.

isnt liverpool the team with the hooligans that killed 96 people in hillsborough?

a 56%-er who can't comprehend English, truly a novel concept

>deflection half a metre from the hand
Pick-and-choose rule gerrymandering to push a racist agenda. Keep seething at never being considered a legitimate world champion. At least we have 1904 :^)

How many fucking people are going to fail at reading comprehension in this thread? This is pathetic. Learn to fucking read, Abdul.
The post that the post you're replying to is replying to is arguing that a hand in a certain position is always a handling violation, whereas the actual laws of the game clearly state otherwise.

No, I'm not talking about the post of the post of the post. I'm talking about your post, which states that the rule deals in absolute. Let me type that again.
You said that
>OH WAIT IT LITERALLY SAYS THE EXACT OPPOSITE
The literally exact opposite of unnatural position = handling violation is
unnatural position != handling violation
But the rules says
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
not
>the position of the hand does not mean that there is an offence
the "does not necessarily" portion means that USUALLY, this rule checks out, but SOMETIMES it's not. The rule you're greentexting does not deals in absolute 100%-0%, but in 70%-30% situation.

>Why does that matter?
Have you ever done sport? Or ever left your basement for that matter?

You're still wrong. X always = Y is the opposite of X does not always = Y. X always = Y is also the opposite of X never = Y. They're both opposites, since they both directly contradict one another.

>Why does that matter?
Because the laws of the game directly state:
>The following must be considered:
>distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)

It was far more annoying when Son got stopped for a handball when he was finally stood in a decent position for Spurs to equalise.

The teams barely showed up as it was, but the refs made sure the game stayed dead.

Imagine calling this """handball""" in the first minute of a final. What a disgrace

Fortunately, your post doesn't have an "always" in it.
Your post said
>Ahmed, pls show me in the laws of the game where unnatural position = handling violation
>unnatural position = handling violation
not
>unnatural position always = handling violation
The literal exact opposite of X = Y is X != Y

>hand ball
>ball hits between the shoulder and chest
how rigged is this shit. some oil saudi made out with millions didn't he

it would've deflected exactly the same way if his arm was at his side lmao. Imagine winning the champions league by kicking the ball into someones chest from a yard away. If it hit his bicep or something FIRST there'd be a case for it but this is legitimately embarrassing and that head ref should never work outside of his home country again and the VAR people should be investigated.

You're wrong again. My post was referring to this statement:
>intent is not necessary because unnatural position
This is CLEARLY arguing that X always = Y. My post quoted the rules of the game, which clearly state that X does not always = Y.
I used the word "opposite" as a noun. Let's see what the definitive English dictionary says about "opposite" as a noun:
en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/opposite
>A person or thing that is totally different from or the reverse of someone or something else.
X always = Y is "totally different" from X does not always = Y. It is also "totally different" from X never = Y.
Both are opposites. My statements were correct and yours have been incorrect. I win, you lose.

Attached: 1530033963044.jpg (698x963, 353K)

Ha ha Tottenham lost

>coping this hard
FPBP
fuck off loser

>Imagine winning the champions league by kicking the ball into someones chest from a yard away.

but they won 2-0

tbf aiming at someone's arm is probably harder than scoring

From like 5 feet away? No.

Nigga if you have your arms fucking spread out wide and someone bloots it at your arm from 2 meters it doesn't matter how much time you had to react, your arms were literally fucking spread out.

It must be considered. Must be considered. It's literally a guideline to every possible potential handball scenario, not just the type where your arm is spread out at shoulder level blocking a cross. Or do you honestly believe you can keep your arms however the fuck you like as long as you're close enough to the opponent?

Not when you're 2 meters away

Show us the rule that says you can't spread your arms in football

>Or do you honestly believe you can keep your arms however the fuck you like as long as you're close enough to the opponent?
Of course not. However, if your arm is very clearly giving non-verbal communication to a teammate and then the ball hits it from 5 feet away, I can't really call that deliberate handling, can I?

because the entire way the game was going to be played changed when that pen happened. tottenham had to chase the game and Liverpool literally just didn't have to play the game until they started to make panic subs and eventually made a mistake because of it. If its 0-0 a goal like that wouldn't have happened. If its 0-0 they don't sub a midfielder for another attacker.

tainted asterisk refball victory by slipperpool, resulting in the worst cl final in decades

Romanians calling you scum is objectively a sign of success

No, I'm not talking about the rule you're greentexting. I'm talking about the first sentence you wrote in which is
>Ahmed, pls show me in the laws of the game where unnatural position = handling violation.
That's clearly X = Y. And you said it' the literal exact opposite of that statement, which is X != Y.
But the rule said that
>the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence
not
>the position of the hand does not mean that there is an offence
the "does not necessarily" portion means that USUALLY, this rule checks out, but SOMETIMES it's not. The rule you're greentexting does not deals in absolute 100%-0%, but in 70%-30% situation.

Just cut your arms off bro

ERA

Attached: era_pby3qtMqWL1tf8a5ao3_400.gif (439x239, 2.27M)

>Abdul has now resorted to repeating himself and arguing that the meaning of the noun "opposite" is different than the provided Oxford dictionary definition

Attached: 1542225218932.webm (1440x810, 2.84M)

tottenham was literally the only team they could beat tonight, liverpool was absolute dogshit

Today's penalty was not deliberate handling, but this sure as fuck is. No deflection. Hand to ball, not ball to hand. Sufficient distance between the kick and the ball hitting his hand. ERA.

truth be told, it probably wasn't a pen if sissoko didnt have his arm extended. it was going to hit him either way. if it hits his upper arm while his hands are close to his body, its deffo not a pen. but because he made himself bigger by extending the arm, it is a clear penalty imho. there is a reason players tick their arms while defending crosses. it is totally his fault.

Moving your hand to control the ball is handball whether you like it or not, you dirty gypsy scum.

Please seethe on. It warms my heart.

Attached: 1532561145057.png (500x430, 843K)

both are pens desu, an arm this high and far appart from the body is always a penalty desu.

The distance between where the ball was kicked and where it hit him, and therefore his given reaction time, is sufficiently small that it could easily be argued that him moving his arm downwards was attempting to bring his arm back to his side, attempting to avoid contact with the ball.

>Muhammad is STILL directly contradicting the laws of the game as written

Attached: 1532179398417.webm (1150x720, 507K)

the absolute state of matuidi

He saw Sissoko's arm was not to his side and got 'em, shiettt

>Spuds BTFO by a Ngubu playing 4D chess

putting your arm in the air like that is deliberate

whilst it wasn't a penalty, spuds were never going to score even if they had 10 hours, could barely get on target

it shouldnt be a pen either way. It hit his chest first, then his armpit. It would've bounced off his arm even if it was at his side. Pointing to your defense to help them set up is not an unnatural way to move your arm. He didn't "make himself bigger" if it would've hit him the same way either way. There's no way he could've moved it out of the way when the guy is kicking it at him from within a yard. He should've been more careful but that's a fucking soft pen for the champions league final within a minute of the game starting.

they scored more often on target than liverpool and that include salah's penalty..
both team was so scared of losing they were all shit. liverpool still deserved they win, they scored more goals, simple as.

Your arm is in the way of the cross, it has no business being there. It is making you bigger. Most importantly it's there intentionally. Whether the thoughts inside your head are "communicate with teammate" or "make yourself bigger", it's still intentional. Reminder that one of the "things to consider" is that the position of the hand doesn't necessarily mean that there is an offence, which implies that the "default" is that the position does matter since it has to be explicitly stated that this is not always the case.

The new handball rule for next season is pretty clear about this and it just happens to be the official interpretation of the current vague rules.

You can if the ball doesn't hit them.

>they shot more often on target*

Ultimately, yeah. Remove the penalty and Liverpool still won. I honestly think Spurs could have had it if they didn't bother with Kane and started Moura, but all in the past now

Liverpool would have played better all game if it was 0-0 tho. Early 1-0 lead was the reason they played like such squirrelly dogshit.

Correct, and it's a handling violation if the arm was deliberately placed there with the intent of blocking a pass/shot.
However, the player deliberately putting his hand there does not necessarily mean he did so with the intent of handling the ball. The ref is supposed to have grey area in determining intent here. That's why the laws of the game are written as they're written in The new UEFA interpretation chooses to ignore this grey area.

After four far more tainted refball victories by RM? This dour show was unironically a beacon in a dire decade of CL finals

I thought it was quite obvious mane aimed it at his arm but at the same time I think his arm should not have been in that position.

Gonna be interesting when the new retarded rules hit next year

SEETHING. So many glorious tears!

Unnatural position = penalty. Cry more fags.

Attached: uber-smirking-gentleman.jpg (413x395, 38K)

the combination of deliberatly putting your air in the arm and the ball touching your arm is the definition of deliberatly handling the ball.
the problem with handball is that when it happens in the penalty box suddenly everybody lose their mind, IF that happened in the middle of the pitch, it would have been considered a handball and everybody would have agreed with it.

goes for you too.

The spirit of the law is supposed to be deliberate handling, not deliberate arm movements which coincidentally lead to handling. The spirit of the law has always been that the handling itself must be deliberate, not simply the action that creates the handling, regardless of how refs have interpreted it over the years. Any refs over the years who have bought into the "unnatural position always = a violation" meme have been objectively interpreting the language of the law incorrectly.

all shots in the last 5 minutes after shitting it up the whole game

>the combination of deliberatly putting your air in the arm and the ball touching your arm is the definition of deliberatly handling the ball.
This is a laughably easy statement to demonstrate as factually incorrect:
If I'm standing in a public park and I deliberately put my arm in the air, then someone I didn't know was standing behind me throws a ball at my arm and hits it, did I deliberately handle the ball?
I can only conclude that such a stupid statement was conceived by a brain which is not working optimally because its owner is fasting for Satan.

>intentionally picking the angle that cuts off the slight, off-putting deflection
>ignoring the MULTIPLE occurrences of this over the tournament
>ignoring the fact that other teams never got the same unquestioning straight-to-VAR choices for the same incidents

The officials handheld France to the Cup. FIFA was directly responsible for the results in 6 out of their 7 games. They might not even have gotten out of the groups in a fair tournament.

so basically you should be able to put your arms wherever you want before the ball is actually kicked at you? would make attacking pretty hard kek

>made himself bigger by extending the arm

Another unicorn that doesn't exist in the rules but is propagated by shitty sports commentators.

It doesn't even make any sense. Why would you even "make your body bigger" by extending your arms thus rising the chance of giving out a penalty? What's the point? What do you have to gain doing this?

Like it's said in the rules, the position of the arms is irrelevant. As long as you're not deliberately going to the ball with your hand, and not using malicious shenanigans, it's not a handball.

The whole "yeah but his arms shouldn't be there in the first place" is irrelevant, as there are no rule stating where your arms should or shouldn't be at all times.

If players tick their arms behind their backs, it's precisely because the rule is retarded and every ref has its own interpretation of it. Players choose to lose mobility for this shit (try to efficiently move and run without using your arms) while they should not act in a non-natural way because of some misconceived rule.

>so basically you should be able to put your arms wherever you want before the ball is actually kicked at you?
No. The laws are written in a way which puts the onus on the ref to determine whether the arm was in its position with the intent of handling or not.
Does anyone here actually honestly believe that his pointing was merely a ruse to let him make his body bigger?

>did I deliberately handle the ball?
yes you did because you deliberatly took the risk

so basically you're just mad that the rules were applied, but it's not fair because according to you it was applied to other teams as as such France should have been refballed to make it fair? hmmmmmmm

>dembele cost Barca
>ajax goalie cost Ajax
>lad who had his hand up cost Tot

What do all these have in common?

the ref interpretion always only happened when the hand was in a natural position during a movement in the play and if the player didn't have time to react to the ball.

putting your arm in the air is always always a penalty

>yes you did because you deliberatly took the risk

Let that sink how retarded this is.

OK. If you walk to the store and get shot, you deliberately got shot because you deliberately took the risk of getting shot by going out in public.

you forgot kimpembe handball against manure

The rule still doesn't say that there has to be intent to commit an offence. The act has to be deliberate, that's all it says. The "new" interpretation isn't new, it's just removing all all vagueness and clearing it up by making it into a general rule. Official rule interpretations that aren't based on literal intent have been the same for handballs for a while. There has never been a grey area where the ref has to decide whether the player literally tried intentionally to handle the ball. You would see that if you looked at what percentage of handballs in the recent years have actually been intentional, where the player's hand makes contact with the ball out of pure intent of handling the ball. It's absolutely miniscule.

>fair tournament
>multibillion sports industry
Pick one

it's not retarded at all.

You're talking about how you perceive refs have always ruled on it. I'm talking about how the laws of the game are actually written. We're talking about two different things here.

that's a dishonest comparison and you know it.

The word deliberate obviously implies intent.

and it is clear that he deliberatly handled the ball

>yes you did because you deliberatly took the risk
The likelihood of you being sincere and not trolling just dropped from 10% to 0.1% with this post.

you're right user, it must be a conspiracy to give a penalty or to consider it a handball. everybody is in it. thank god you know the truth!

en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/deliberate
>Done consciously and intentionally.
>intentionally
So yes, intent is required for a handling violation.

It's probably not a conspiracy. I mean, you never know, but it's probably not. I will readily admit that most refs would call a handling violation today. Most refs have bought into the "unnatural position always = violation" meme which has no basis at all in the laws of the game.

>I'm talking about how the laws of the game are actually written.
The laws of the game are written extremely vaguely and have billions of different ways to interpret them. There are and have always been confederation-wide official rule interpretations that set some lines and make the refereeing operations unified. The "player making himself bigger" has been a part of it for a while. I only know as a fact that this is how it works in Finland, but I've made the reasonable assumption that it's the same for the entire confederation since they are official Uefa guidelines.

yes, his arm was intentionally raised, unless you think its some sort of nervous issue he cant control?

Any rule interpretation which directly contradicts the laws of the game is pants-on-head retarded.
Saying that an arm in a certain position is always handling directly contradicts the laws of the game.

Your personal interpretation of what "a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with the hand" means is just as irrelevant as it was 20 posts ago.

>facts like dictionary definitions and official laws of the game are irrelevant

Attached: 1543663903951.jpg (599x605, 155K)

Are the people in this thread saying that a PROFESSIONAL soccer player couldn't aim a ball at a player's arm from 3 feet away joking?

>player is about to shoot
>keep your arm extended like a retard
>"wHy a pEnAlTy? REEEEE"

and they would've played more open so spurs woulda had more chance to threaten.

I've played an awful lot of low level football and that's always a penalty.
In fact I've never seen a defender retarded enough to go in with his arm sticking out like that, for fear of giving away a penalty.

They still lost without the penalty.

It's a pretty fucking vague rule that you interpreted your own way. What's your reasoning for saying that the outcome (contact with arm) has to be intentional and not the act (raising your arm)? It's incredibly vague and can be interpreted in many ways, just like the "to be considered" parts. It was literally made that way.

The official rule interpretation (and future rule) is the only thing that matters, not your personal interpretation that you are fixated on, or your opinion of the official interpretation.

The ref's job, according to the official laws of the game, is to determine the intent behind him raising his arm. This is clearly implied by the section provided in because:
- The definition of the word deliberate is intentional;
- The clear spirit and intent of the phrase "The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offense" is that no single hand position is automatically an offense. This implies that the ref's job is to determine the intent of the hand position, since deliberately means intentionally, or with intent.
It is my opinion that the ref, today, ruled correctly according to UEFA guidelines but incorrectly according to the laws of the game, because UEFA guidelines directly contradict the laws of the game. I feel that this contradiction is problematic and will lead to unnecessary future controversy.

>What's your reasoning
See:

>implying Liverpool defend better when trying not to choke a lead than when they're playing a free and open offensive game

Outing yourself as a mental midget that can't understand the matches he watches m8

In addition, I feel that, according to the laws of the game, a referee should only rule handling today if the referee honestly believes that Sissoko's pointing was a ruse and that he actually had his arm there with the specific intent of blocking a shot/pass. Who knows, maybe the ref actually thought that. In that case, he'd have ruled correctly according to the laws of the game, too.
I really fucking doubt he thought that, though.

>open offensive game
>CL final
>open offensive game

Attached: yoko_skeptical.jpg (300x396, 18K)

>nigger puts arm in most unnatural position in penalty area
>smarter nigger takes advantage of it
what's the problem?

The first 20 seconds were.

It was an all-around terrible final
Good thing Pool managed to score an actual goal in the end, cause winning a CL thanks to a questionable penalty not even 1 full minute into the game would have been next level shitty.

Yeah, it would have been almost as bad as winning thanks to intentionally injuring the opponent's star player without even being given a clear red card.

>implying I'm merengue
If it were up to me Sergio Ramos would have been executed long ago.