Why can you have benefit of a doubt for defenders but not attackers?
Ridiculous rules - they’re following them here but the rules are badly written on this
Why can you have benefit of a doubt for defenders but not attackers?
Rules are if you score it doesn’t matter. Ball to hand or not the goal is ruled out. The ball hits his arm then his chest. Its the right callEven if it hits his hand it’s bullshit, as it’s been cunted right at him from 5 yards away - ball to hand as it used to be called in more sensible times. But it fecking doesn’t touch his hand at any point? What have they even seen?
So that’s a handball but the Gabriel one wasn’t one? Where’s the consistency?
At this point they might as well make handballs binary. As long as the ball touches the hand it’s a foul.
fecking shambles. As always it's worth reminding ourselves about the Middlesbrough one.
Don't blame the decision, blame the rule, it's a texbook application.
Rondon. Jesus, he’s a player that just seems to exist and do nothing.
Im sure he’s been around since like 2003.
Yeah I know, it’s the rule I have an issue withRules are if you score it doesn’t matter. Ball to hand or not the goal is ruled out. The ball hits his arm then his chest. Its the right call
Exactly, ridiculous ruleSo ridiculous, because if Rashford dribbles past Pickford and passes it to Bruno who slots it into an open net from 2cm out then it's not a handball.
Those people exist?McT gets carded within 2 minutes of subbed in and some of you want him in over Casemiro…
Yea it's a definite handball by the rule. It's the rule that's the issue.
Or Scamacca.So the Gabriel one from earlier today was also a handball?
This is about as guaranteed as you can get.Suspecting will end up in 2-2
David Coote