New penalty rules disaster

Starting Anew

Well-Known Member
If his arm was at his side it would still have hit his arm. Why is it different that his arm was raised when it hit it?

Was a terrible decision.
Ok. So his arm was in a hugely unnatural position, increasing his area and making it harder to cross. Maybe if his arm was at his side, the cross would have gone where his arm was blocking and led to a goal? Having his arm up highlighted the issue and made it inevitable the decision was given. If he was playing with his arms not blocking crosses, maybe he would have got away with it.

But, even if I give you that the initial contact was not a foul, the ball was still live and deflected off him towards the penalty area where Liverpool players were waiting. He then brought his arm down and, in so doing, controlled the ball along the whole length of his arm and finished with a little basketball dribble off his hand to stop it moving towards goal and deflect it down into a bounce. You cannot watch football and claim that it isn’t a penalty if a defender starts bouncing a ball off his hands in the penalty box!
 

Ponientebear

Well-Known Member
It’s yet another rule that will be a completely grey area with referees having to decide/guess whether it’s deliberate or not, the inconsistencies will be many and given Scottish referees fondness in playing to the Tarrier’s rules then it’s yet another rule that will work against us.
 

TinyRick

Well-Known Member
This is nonsense, just like the criticism of VAR, there hasn't been a single wrong decision yet - Mane in the CL final?? Sissoko is standing pointing like a fuckin goon in his own box with his arm above his head, of course its a stonewall penalty!
No different to the one we got against the sheep, which some in the media were saying wasn't a penalty because McKenna had his arm up to claim for offside. If your arm is up and the ball hits it in the box, then it's a penalty.
 

Buster

Well-Known Member
Mind you this rule has been brought in by FIFA to apply to all teams . The refs book that they seem to use for us might not have this new rule change in it.
 

Drumchapel-Bear

Well-Known Member
Pretty sure it’s if the arm is not in a natural position by your side
What even is a ''natural position''? Everyone runs differently, some people run with their arms by their side some with their arms swinging about etc.

Football is played at 100mph if you're a defender charging out quickly to try and block a cross / shot coming into the box the last thing on your f*cking mind is ''oh, is my arm in a natural position here?''.

It's a total farce and the game we grew up loving is being ruined by this sh*te.
 

TQ3

Well-Known Member
Add in the rule that a goal won’t count if it hits a hand on the way in, means defenders can turn goalie, at the cost of a yellow and a penalty.
The trouble is, the fat cat uefa Boys have to justify their massive wages and expenses, so a annual rules change does just that. No need to make sense as a rule revert also justifies them being there all year.
It’s a money merry go round, we would all love a seat on!
 

blueman14

Well-Known Member
In theory this will be good for us as we do most of the attacking in the league out with the tims maybe.
 

Bigbluebear

Well-Known Member
Ok. So his arm was in a hugely unnatural position, increasing his area and making it harder to cross. Maybe if his arm was at his side, the cross would have gone where his arm was blocking and led to a goal? Having his arm up highlighted the issue and made it inevitable the decision was given. If he was playing with his arms not blocking crosses, maybe he would have got away with it.

But, even if I give you that the initial contact was not a foul, the ball was still live and deflected off him towards the penalty area where Liverpool players were waiting. He then brought his arm down and, in so doing, controlled the ball along the whole length of his arm and finished with a little basketball dribble off his hand to stop it moving towards goal and deflect it down into a bounce. You cannot watch football and claim that it isn’t a penalty if a defender starts bouncing a ball off his hands in the penalty box!
It was clearly accidental.
 

bornabluenose

Well-Known Member
That’s not the rules though.
Your hands don’t need to be behind your back.
Whatever the pedantry of the rules do you really think we need more ambiguity in the penalty box , especially here in the land of the shit referee , trial by sportscene and no VAR .

In my opinion they are fucking with the rules for no particular reason
 

TN8

Well-Known Member
Thing is “The Rules stink”
“Intentional handball “is the only sensible way to go.
That's also a huge grey area tho.

I think the new "natural silhouette" rule sounds about right. If your arms are in a natural position and the ball gets blootered off it from a yard away then no penalty. Everything else, you've got to give it imo.

I'm assuming the people saying Sissoko wasn't a penalty also didn't think our one at Pittodrie was? Where the big donkey McKenna has his arm up claiming for offside and the ball gets headed onto it?
 

StuGers

Well-Known Member
Whatever the pedantry of the rules do you really think we need more ambiguity in the penalty box , especially here in the land of the shit referee , trial by sportscene and no VAR .

In my opinion they are fucking with the rules for no particular reason
The new rule reduces the ambiguity though.

I’m not saying that will help Rangers much as the referees tend to throw the rule book out the window when it comes to us.
 
Top