Who changed the rules

[laurel]

Just seen the incident of Harry Kewell being sent off for handball.
I always understood hanball was use of the hand to CONTROL the ball .......for me it was clearly ball to hand , and in this case upper arm , ball being hit at a rate of knots. No way IMO was this a handball and certainly not a sending off..............however the reports i read say the ref was correct.
If that was an English player we'd all be up in arms....pardon the pun:)

[KeithD]

It was a sending off his arm stopped a goal :doh ... the rule is that simple.

[laurel]

It was a sending off his arm stopped a goal :doh ... the rule is that simple.

In Fifa’s laws of the game 2005, rule 12 states that a free-kick or penalty will be awarded if a player “handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)”.

[les_taxi]

I seem to remember if the arm deflects the flight of the ball to the advantage of the defender its a penalty.
Why not just award a "penalty goal" no need to send player off:)

[darren-b]

Attempting to play the ball with your chest (which he admits he was) whilst having your arms away from your body is asking for trouble.

Type of decision (the sending off not the penalty) that could go either way so in my opinion the ref wasn't incorrect to send him off.

[fred]

Anyone yet find out why the 3rd USA goal was disallowed? Looked like a perfectly good goal to me.

[KeithD]

Ball to hand is when you do not have time to move, he did, he stayed in the path of the ball to chest it but got it wrong, as he admits.

The USA goal was a GOAL, and if it wasn't then it should have been a penalty as 2 USA players were pulled to the ground. If the USA don't qualify for the next round it's a screw-up by FIFA.

[laurel]

Well for me i can see why he was sent off, and yeah he was trying to get in the way of it so he was being a bit risky, but the way i read that rule its just a bit dodgy.
I feel for kewell cos his hands stay down...hope we are not on the receiving end of a decision like that

[laurel]

Anyone yet find out why the 3rd USA goal was disallowed? Looked like a perfectly good goal to me.

A quite disgraceful decision.................good goal

[les_taxi]

Ball to hand is when you do not have time to move, he did, he stayed in the path of the ball to chest it but got it wrong, as he admits.

The USA goal was a GOAL, and if it wasn't then it should have been a penalty as 2 USA players were pulled to the ground. If the USA don't qualify for the next round it's a screw-up by FIFA.

I hope usa go through but if they don't then they will know how unjust our lovely game can be sometimes as England have found to their cost in past tournements (not the present one I might add)

[bornatbirth]

the ref was right, he used his arm to stop it :D