Cricket Player Manager
Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4121314
Results 196 to 206 of 206

Thread: *Official* Uruguay vs Ghana (Quarter-Final Two)

  1. #196
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Remembering The Prince - 63*
    Posts
    49,376
    I'm not really just talking about the current rule, though. Loads and loads and loads of people felt it was a deliberate handball by Kewell. Check back through the match thread, if you had all the Aussies on ignore then a massive majority felt it was intentional by Kewell. So I don't see how you can say they were different. One guy stopped the ball with his hand to stop a goal....and so did the other.

    Again, if you don't think it was intentional then yess they are different, but otherwise it's nothing to do with application of rules.
    Phillip Hughes 1988-2014

    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.

  2. #197
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    Quote Originally Posted by GeraintIsMyHero View Post
    I'm not really just talking about the current rule, though. Loads and loads and loads of people felt it was a deliberate handball by Kewell. Check back through the match thread, if you had all the Aussies on ignore then a massive majority felt it was intentional by Kewell. So I don't see how you can say they were different. One guy stopped the ball with his hand to stop a goal....and so did the other.

    Again, if you don't think it was intentional then yess they are different, but otherwise it's nothing to do with application of rules.
    Fair enough.

    Obviously I don't think Kewell's handball was deliberate. Unless he's a thalidomide baby and his hands start just below his shoulders of course. Assuming he had the time to set himself and decide to handball it (which I don't think he did) I can't see where the advantage is in the 20th minute of the game. I do realise he's not the most popular guy in some places though.

    Even if both are considered deliberate by some I'm surprised that, discounting the fact there's only one penalty to be applied if they were, some consider them to be exactly the same thing.

    I think the point myself (and maybe some others) are trying to make is that it has everything to do with application of rules as there's only one option for referees in this situation as it stands. If a bloke takes advantage of that and deliberately bats the ball away with his hands there's nothing in the rules to apply further punishment. He gives his team a chance where there's none if he doesn't use his hands.

    It's an easy choice at the moment.
    "What is this what is this who is this guy shouting what is this going on in here?" - CP. (re: psxpro)

    R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best

    R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi

    Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath

    "How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.

  3. #198
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    Fair enough.

    Obviously I don't think Kewell's handball was deliberate. Unless he's a thalidomide baby and his hands start just below his shoulders of course. Assuming he had the time to set himself and decide to handball it (which I don't think he did) I can't see where the advantage is in the 20th minute of the game. I do realise he's not the most popular guy in some places though.

    Even if both are considered deliberate by some I'm surprised that, discounting the fact there's only one penalty to be applied if they were, some consider them to be exactly the same thing.

    I think the point myself (and maybe some others) are trying to make is that it has everything to do with application of rules as there's only one option for referees in this situation as it stands. If a bloke takes advantage of that and deliberately bats the ball away with his hands there's nothing in the rules to apply further punishment. He gives his team a chance where there's none if he doesn't use his hands.

    It's an easy choice at the moment.
    You surely don't think that for it to be handball the ball has to make contact below the wrists? Any part of the arm no matter how near the shoulder is considered part of the hand.

  4. #199
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Lillian Thomson View Post
    You surely don't think that for it to be handball the ball has to make contact below the wrists? Any part of the arm no matter how near the shoulder is considered part of the hand.
    I do know that yes.


  5. #200
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    I do know that yes.
    So why did you say "Obviously I don't think Kewell's handball was deliberate. Unless he's a thalidomide baby and his hands start just below his shoulders of course."

    You appear to be saying he deliberately controlled the ball with an area of his person just below his shoulder.

  6. #201
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    Because that's the obvious difference between Kewell's handball and Suarez' - one bloke threw up his hands to stop the ball, in the other instance it's debatable as to whether there was intention or not. If Kewell had hands just below his shoulders and used them then there''d be no debate (or threw his arms out to impede the path of the ball - which I guess some people think he did). In the rules there's no difference between the two, that's what some have an issue with.

    I'm not arguing that Kewell didn't handball at all.
    Last edited by Son Of Coco; 06-07-2010 at 07:24 AM.

  7. #202
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,846
    You could argue that what Kewell did was worse. In my opinion his handball was deliberate but it was far more cute and a deliberate attempt to con the officials into believing he hadn't handled it.

  8. #203
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    You could, but then we'd be here all night.

  9. #204
    International Captain
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    england
    Posts
    5,846
    Quote Originally Posted by Son Of Coco View Post
    You could, but then we'd be here all night.
    Not really. There's no argument to be had. In my opinion that's what he did. In your opinion he didn't. The only person who really knows is Kewell himself.....and he'd probably lie anyway even if it was deliberate.

  10. #205
    Hall of Fame Member Son Of Coco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    17,229
    Exactly. Now we've got that sorted, I'm going back to some online golf and a movie. Playing terribly as I've played some accidental shots clicking on here.

  11. #206
    R_D
    R_D is offline
    International Debutant R_D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,940
    Quote Originally Posted by pasag View Post
    From an outsiders pov, for whatever that's worth, reckon the Kewell one should have certainly been a goal but at the same time didn't really see the merit of a red (or the rule that leads to that).

    As a fair compromise here I suggest if a player handballs on the line, the aggrieved side gets a penalty kick without a goalkeeper present. That would appease Uppercut at least
    Hehe... I like the idea.... that should satisfy the whole... Not goal until crossed the line folks.

    I think there should be special provisions made for situations like this where the it is 100% clear that it will goal.

    As for Harry Kewell situation.... Refree deemed it to be handball so same rule be applied.... Seeing as the ball was definately goig in.

Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 4121314


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Punters stake $70 million on final Test
    By silentstriker in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 23-08-2009, 01:20 PM
  2. The Final Season
    By Simon in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 12-08-2009, 10:49 PM
  3. Twenty20 Cup Final
    By Simon in forum WCC - Team Sheets
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-07-2009, 05:51 AM
  4. ACT grade 1 grand final
    By Simon in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 29-04-2003, 07:40 AM
  5. CA Cup - Quarter Final & Marc Cup Teams
    By Rich2001 in forum World Club Cricket
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 05-07-2002, 06:09 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •