Why a Handball Does Not Always Lead to a PK

[@TheSpecialk929]

I think in MTL DC it would have been a Red if it was later in the game but I am sure refs are hesitant to give a red 5 mins into the game unless it was REALLY bad, i think in real time its harder to see how hard he was hit by the tackle, if there was var review it might have been upgraded though

[@jasonm5945]

Some weird silhouettes this week from Wiebe

[@rockytalkndawoods3057]

That ball was winding the dial on that blokes watch. 💛💚🌲💚💛

[@newguyiswinning]

I agree with Bruce Arena on the long VAR process. It has to be clear and obvious error to overturn. If you are looking for an extended period of time, it's not clear and obvious

[@choduffield]

There were 2 potential handballs on the long delay. One may or may not have been in the penalty area. Then there's the one actually talked about on this show. So I could see this taking a little longer than normal if they were looking at both. That said, I totally agree that these handling calls are taking way too long. I blame a lot of that on how the law is currently written making it difficult for everyone, including the CR and VAR, to have clear black and white decisions. There's always a subjective aspect, but handling laws are really tough the last couple years.

[@patjablonski9739]

lol Carles Gil handled the cross initially but no mention of that (not sure if he was in the box though)

[@jackwelch6017]

very last play of the Los Angeles vs LAFC game was a handball at the top of box

[@freewheelingsubtextual]

I'm surprised there was no talk of Cincinnati, their conduct in the first half of the game was wild and the refs definitely had some interesting decisions to make

[@RyMcQ]

On the RSL call, the replay was shown once from only one angle. How do we not have more angles on that play? Garbage production by Apple. I do agree that if that was the only angle we have, it would be harsh to overturn the no-call.

[@choduffield]

As much as I'm all for bashing Apple, they don't control the cameras. Apple is nothing more than the streamer of the games. It's not their cameras. Also note that there may very well be other angles available but Instant Replay chose only to show this one. It's happened in the past.

[@tomazevic007]

100% handball

[@connor6766]

I say revs handball, not because he tried to hit the ball with his hand, but because he made a clear attempt at the ball regardless. Something that the casters have said before on previous episodes. But just like the refs, commentators can't keep it consistent either.

[@tsler610]

Disagree on the handball, but can understand why no call. To me, as rev defender jumps in the air, yes his arms will come out. But talking about moving arm into the path of the ball, and the fact that a crew player is right behind him at the time of the ball hitting his arm, I would lean toward it being a deliberate moving of the arm towards his body to block the ball. But, I do concede that is hard to definietly say was that was the intention of the player, especially when jumping arms are in play. On another note, why didn't that ref make a call on the field if it was a handball or a throw in? Let the ball go out of play and signaled NOTHING. I'm assuming that the ref wanted it to be a throw in with a check on a missed handball, but without him calling it on the field, it could have been easily a handball called and checking for obvious ERROR. From a fan viewpoint, I want to know which it is because the indication of clear and obvious on which direction is vastly different.

[@choduffield]

Referees do not make calls hoping that they get reviewed. They make calls which they think are correct and if VAR recommends a review, then they go review it. This video doesn't show what happens after the ball is cleared other than the referee putting his hand up to hold up what I assume is a throw-in. The fact no whistle was blown and he was holding up the restart is a pretty clear indication of how he called it. The center referee often does not signal for every single throw-in especially when they are obvious and everyone is looking at the AR who made the correct call.

[@davidhemsworth4098]

If the call on the field was penalty you'd have heard a whistle. Given there was no whistle, safe to assume no penalty.

[@TheDonDCAC]

With the one in Columbus, if it took that long for the VAR official to decide whether or not to have the field ref look at it...seems like there was enough doubt to justify asking the ref to look at it. What's the harm in asking the field ref to take a look? From a Crew fan's point of view, they had NE down a man, pinned back, and putting the pressure on. The process gave NE an extended break in the 89th minute.

[@choduffield]

"enough doubt to justify asking the ref to look at it." ...... You have VAR backwards. VAR is not there to allow there referee to 're-referee' plays. It's there to correct clear and obvious errors. The fact it took so long for VAR to review it says to me that it wasn't a clear error. The VAR officials are all referees. They know the laws just as much as the center referee does. So the 'harm' is that it is not what VAR was designed for nor something we really want. VAR recommends what they think is a clear error. This wasn't. It was subjective. The game has already been slowed down enough by legit on field reviews.

[@TheDonDCAC]

@@choduffield The field ref is the "boss" ref for the day. He's the guy that should have the final say. If it takes VAR official 3+ minutes to figure it out...that's an indicator to me that the call on the field wasn't "clear and obviously' correct. Agree, it's subjective, the ref upstairs should recognize that and get another set of eyes on it. In any other high stakes job, if you're unsure of the correct decision, you'd get someone else's opinion before making a final decision. They had it on the replay screen in the stadium, I watched it multiple times, the players were all standing around the ref and pointing at the big screen, he's just shrugging his shoulders because he hasn't been told to go look at the small screen. After 3 minutes of replays on the big screen, the whole stadium thinks it should be a PK, the Revs get a 3 minute break when they're down a man trying to hold onto a lead....then they just move on without taking a look...that's a bad process....that's my point.

[@choduffield]

​@@TheDonDCAC Yes, the Center Referee (CR...'field ref') has the final say. The CR does even when it comes to his ARs ('linesman'). He doesn't have to blow the whistle just because the flag for offside goes up. It happens at lower levels with newbie ARs more than people probably realize. The CR and ARs discuss plays constantly on their headsets. "Hey CR, I have a clear PK for handling." There is a quick discussion. CR either decides he had a better view and saw it differently or he rules with the AR. The VAR is just an extension of that headset conversation except VAR gets the advantage of video. The VAR can and will not say, "Yeah, I don't know if it's right or not. Maybe you should stop the game and come take a look." Without the VAR saying they think it is the wrong call, then the decision on the field stands. He doesn't get a 2nd chance at it because someone just as qualified as him, and often more qualified, can't tell from video if it's right or wrong. What an entire stadium, especially a home crowd, thinks should be a PK is highly irrelevant. They are the worst group to make an unbiased opinion and 90% of them have no idea what the laws of the game are anyway especially when it comes to handling. The CR not caring about the big screen is exactly how it should happen. It is no different than him listening to a coach's or player's shouts for a call or not. I do have an issue with how long these reviews are taking. It's very possible they were looking at the cross itself as well which was a potential hand (elbow) and may or may not have been in penalty area. If they were only looking at the handling in the middle of the penalty area, then the amount of time was unacceptable. It's something they need to address as these delays have been taking longer and longer.

[@miracletutoring2123]

Red card definitely with studs exposed

[@bradleyklemetson375]

Huh…completely missed reviewing the double stomp with cleats showing by the FC Dallas player to the RSL player near the end of the game. They were both on the ground and he kicked out with both feet? How is that not a red?? Also, please explain why the ref stopped the game when the ball had not gone out of play just for a review. They can keep reviewing the potential handball call while play continues until there is a stop in play. This is how it has always been done? Why the screw up this week? Someone PLEASE explain!!!

[@choduffield]

As they say every week, if you think a play should be on this show then tell them on social media. There are a lot of games and over 1400 minutes of film to potentially review. As for stopping play to review, it's not new. If you watch Inside Video Review from PRO here on KZbin you hear the audio where sometimes the VAR says to stop play. Typically, it's for when they are absolutely certain a review is needed for a PK. I've never heard them stop it so that they could keep reviewing. I didn't see that here either.

[@bradleyklemetson375]

@@choduffield I did. But guess they didn’t feel it was worth covering. That’s ok too.

[@jordanhorne7700]

Toronto spent all night arguing for fouls. Ted Unkel is t the type to do that with. And yea, it wasn’t a PK. Next!

[@andrewearnest1]

im an atlanta fan but i agree that a ton of those should have been calls/cards/PKs

[@Adz2]

That was a pen, didn't get any of the ball and tripped the player, Unkel completely missed the blatant shove in the middle of the pitch too, Atlanta very lucky to get away with so much in the game

[@twodudesnape2990]

Daniel Radford doing a bad job?? Color me surprised. VAR reviews shouldn't take 3+ minutes just for the ref to not actually go to the monitor

[@KevinMyers5280]

How is that NOT a handball on Dallas?!?! How is he NOT making himself bigger??? His arm is extended AWAY FROM HIS BODY.

[@adrianguta886]

Have you ever jumped in your life? Have you ever walked in your life? The arms are not going to be by your side, they do swing a bit. As long as the arms are down and in a natural position it is not considered a handball offense. The "making himself bigger" explanation needs to be accompanied by additional context. Did he make himself bigger by "extending his arms in an unnatural position"? Were the arms extended in an unnatural position? I will say no.

[@noahtalley4351]

How is it away from his body? His arm only moved because the ball hit it. And it was far from away from his body!

[@KevinMyers5280]

@@adrianguta886 how much daylight is between his arm and his body... I would call that making yourself bigger. I've jumped plenty. I've also played soccer for well over half of my life.

[@davidringold2347]

Why is there no discussion regarding the clear handball by Gil at the corner of the box on that CLB NE play?

[@BradDux]

Isn't DOGSO a yellow + PK?

[@choduffield]

DOGSO outside the penalty area is a red and a free kick. DOGSO inside the penalty area is a yellow and PK if the defender was determined to be playing the ball. This includes making a side tackle but still fouling. DOGSO inside the penalty area is a red and PK if the defender was determine to not be playing the ball during their challenge. This includes things like holding or tripping when they clearly were playing the man rather than the ball.

[@gerryparker1390]

I get no sense that there is any consistency on the part of Instant replay in regards to the handball rule. Not that it is easy to have consistency, as the current handball rules ( laws? ) are hot garbage.

[@choduffield]

I don't think it's just this segment. These calls are so subjective these days that there is no right answer most the time. When you bring VAR into the mix analyzing frame by frame what really was a split second movement in real time it's just utter nonsense half the time.

[@newguyiswinning]

Another week of Pro missing red cards, big surprise

[@masclark30]

I understand the no handball against the revs, you have to give some wiggle room. They are only professional athletes and it can be difficult for them to judge where the ball might be.

[@noahtalley4351]

Glad to see referees with some common sense! Just because the ball hits your hand doesn’t make it an automatic pk! Context is important!

[@takisback]

Your content is great, but please get a new microphone.

[@choduffield]

Really? I thought the sound was about as clear as you could get.

[@takisback]

@@choduffield Either he's eating the microphone, the gain is too high, or it's a potato.

[@choduffield]

@@takisback Maybe his voice just burns your ears. It really sounds good for me and just like other videos on here.

[@Cthulhu3C]

Nothing on the shove onto Maxi in Austin? Clear pen

[@heidimark]

The clear and obvious language needs to be removed. If VAR spots any mistake, it should be corrected. Plain and simple.

[@choduffield]

That guideline language is there to acknowledge that many calls are subjective. If cameras do not provide any evidence to the contrary of what the referee decided on the pitch, then they can't provide any further benefit. If a referee has to go stare are slow motion video for 5 minutes (even 2 minutes) to be convinced he got it wrong, then the cameras weren't clear enough to help. It's about what level of evidence do we need from the cameras in order to even consider it an error.