by Emmer Green Royal »
15 Feb 2015 16:05
[quote="Ian Royal"][quote="SCIAG"][quote="Mr Angry"]
That law is specifically designed to send off a player who deliberately handles the ball to prevent an obvious goal scoring opportunity, such as Suarez in the WC quarter final 2010. The penalty incident yesterday was when the ball hit Keogh's hip, then went onto his outstretched arm; anyone who thinks that is worthy of a red card is an idiot.[/quote]
If it is a penalty, then it is deliberate and potentially a red card. The only question then is whether Keogh denied a clear goal or obvious goal scoring opportunity.
Non-deliberate handball is not a foul. Assuming this was a potential DOGSO case, the options are penalty+red card, or nothing.
I would suggest that this piece (from legendary Reading referee Dick Sawdon Smith) is worth reading for anybody in confusion:
http://www.readingrefs.org.uk/ftmpages/FTM314.htmlLots of similarities between these two incidents, but I think I have to come down on the "no penalty" side.[/quote]
Largely agree, but refs clearly have been ignoring the 'intent' aspect for years. Or at least not applying it consistently. I note our resident ref says it's no way a red card, but doesn't say anything about it being a penalty or not. As you say, both or neither.[/quote]
As the ball was travelling towards the goal it seemed a clear case of DOGSO. HobNob's reaction at the time was "stonewall, nailed on and blatant". (And we know how unbiased HobNob is.) The Telegraph said that Derby were lucky as "a shot by Danny Williams appeared to bounce to safety off defender Richard Keogh's outstretched arm."
Outstretched arms stopping shots in the penalty box usually earn a penalty, so he should have been off.