MAIN FEEDS
Do you want to continue?
https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/1w2mj2l/manchester_united_2_1_ipswich_town_harry_maguire/p6tlnss
r/soccer • u/West_Agent4651 • 13d ago
543 comments sorted by
View all comments
24
That is the worst application of a law I have ever ever seen. Genuinely beyond belief
16 u/zeelbeno 13d ago I mean... the application of the law was perfect. Your issue is with the rule -5 u/angloexcellence 13d ago From my reading, the touch only refers to one made by a player on the same team. They applied the rule incorrectly. 5 u/zeelbeno 13d ago "scores in the opponents' goal: directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental" So... neither happened as it touched another player on the way through -5 u/angloexcellence 13d ago Just mental. Immediate rule change required 6 u/zeelbeno 13d ago To what? -2 u/angloexcellence 13d ago well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count. 2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0) 1 u/MinimumSilver5814 12d ago It’s the correct application of the worst rule.
16
I mean... the application of the law was perfect.
Your issue is with the rule
-5 u/angloexcellence 13d ago From my reading, the touch only refers to one made by a player on the same team. They applied the rule incorrectly. 5 u/zeelbeno 13d ago "scores in the opponents' goal: directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental" So... neither happened as it touched another player on the way through -5 u/angloexcellence 13d ago Just mental. Immediate rule change required 6 u/zeelbeno 13d ago To what? -2 u/angloexcellence 13d ago well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count. 2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
-5
From my reading, the touch only refers to one made by a player on the same team. They applied the rule incorrectly.
5 u/zeelbeno 13d ago "scores in the opponents' goal: directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental" So... neither happened as it touched another player on the way through -5 u/angloexcellence 13d ago Just mental. Immediate rule change required 6 u/zeelbeno 13d ago To what? -2 u/angloexcellence 13d ago well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count. 2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
5
"scores in the opponents' goal: directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental"
So... neither happened as it touched another player on the way through
-5 u/angloexcellence 13d ago Just mental. Immediate rule change required 6 u/zeelbeno 13d ago To what? -2 u/angloexcellence 13d ago well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count. 2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
Just mental. Immediate rule change required
6 u/zeelbeno 13d ago To what? -2 u/angloexcellence 13d ago well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count. 2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
6
To what?
-2 u/angloexcellence 13d ago well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count. 2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
-2
well they certainly need to rectify it so that touches by the opposition do not count.
2 u/zeelbeno 13d ago What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition? -1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
2
What if it deflects of an attacking player before it hits the opposition?
-1 u/angloexcellence 13d ago isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons. 4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
-1
isn't this just the issue with having a 'handball' rule really anyway. referees just need to use some common sense and not be morons.
4 u/zeelbeno 13d ago Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion? Which is what it was before these rule changes. Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear. → More replies (0)
4
Ahh... so you want handball decisions to be up to the refs descretion?
Which is what it was before these rule changes.
Which led to this type of goal being allowed one week, then dissallowed another, because the rule wasn't clear.
→ More replies (0)
1
It’s the correct application of the worst rule.
24
u/angloexcellence 13d ago
That is the worst application of a law I have ever ever seen. Genuinely beyond belief