According to the BBC website, it sounds like they don't have rights to show MOTD on iPlayer, only certain ones like MOTD 2?
It's on sooner than last season:
Weekend episodes of Match of the Day and MOTD2 will be available on iPlayer from midnight on the Monday evening after they air.
Midweek episodes of Match of the Day will be available on iPlayer from midnight of the day after they air. So a Wednesday episode would be available from midnight on the Thursday.
Couple of things stood out but the worse was when he was discussing the penalty for QPR. He was right it wasn't a pen, but he stated that it wasn't because 'the defender was going to clear the ball'.
Another one was the Pen/Red Card. As Gullit stated, the ball would clearly gone in, so a Pen/Red Card was at the very least understandable. He only seemed to argue because Gullit suggested the Ref was right.
I'm not a fan of Shearer (or Gullit), both great players though. For me, Gullit makes the better puindit in spite of his shocking graps of English and bad translations from Dutch.
Another one was the Pen/Red Card. As Gullit stated, the ball would clearly gone in, so a Pen/Red Card was at the very least understandable. He only seemed to argue because Gullit suggested the Ref was right.
I'm not a fan of Shearer (or Gullit), both great players though. For me, Gullit makes the better puindit in spite of his shocking graps of English and bad translations from Dutch.
Forgot that one. He said the ref should use his common sense. Interesting.
Another one was the Pen/Red Card. As Gullit stated, the ball would clearly gone in, so a Pen/Red Card was at the very least understandable. He only seemed to argue because Gullit suggested the Ref was right.
I'm not a fan of Shearer (or Gullit), both great players though. For me, Gullit makes the better puindit in spite of his shocking graps of English and bad translations from Dutch.
I thought Ruud Gullit was plain wrong.
It wasn;t deliberate handball and shouldn't have been a penalty.
Even less a red card.
It was clearly going in, so denying a goal. Red and pen's the right decision, whether the handball was deliberate or not.
I think going by the letter of the rules Ruud was correct which is the point he was making.
Shearer was suggesting that is was a an accident more than deliberate and that a red card was very hard on the player.
In some respects they are both right. Shearer looks at the game with his heart in what is morally right and wrong where as Ruud looks at it with logic and by the rules.
It would be dull if they all just agreed. On which point I disagree with the comments on Ruud and his accent. Not perfect English but he communicates his point across well enough and I cannot see how anyone would fail to understand him. I think he is quite decent at least it is not Phil Neville
It would be dull if they all just agreed. On which point I disagree with the comments on Ruud and his accent. Not perfect English but he communicates his point across well enough and I cannot see how anyone would fail to understand him. I think he is quite decent at least it is not Phil Neville
It's better to listen to Phil Neville as a pundit than a commentator. I'd say the same about his brother.
You are strictly correct, the rule says 'deliberate'. However, FIFA have literally redefined the word 'deliberate' over the last few years and under their definition it was a handball.
You are strictly correct, the rule says 'deliberate'. However, FIFA have literally redefined the word 'deliberate' over the last few years and under their definition it was a handball.
Well, they need to remove he word "deliberate" from the laws of the game if that is what they mean.
Deliberate means intentional. It is either intentional or it is not. There cannot be an in-between.
It certainly didn't look a deliberate or intentional handball to me
Not if it's heading for the back of the net it doesn't.
If that is true, then that is an unbelievably stupid rule.
So a player who does not intend to handle a ball gets sent off for that offence because it prevents a goal (possibly, I think in this case there was a good chance the goalie was going to save the shot anyway).
Whereas,, in any other situation a player can only have a free-kick given against him if he deliberately handballs (not by accident).
After looking on BBC Sports' website, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference as to whether an unintentional handball prevents a goal or not. It is not an offence either way.
After looking on BBC Sports' website, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference as to whether an unintentional handball prevents a goal or not. It is not an offence either way.
FIFA have changed the rule on handball in the last few years, surprised you've not come across this.
Well, they need to remove he word "deliberate" from the laws of the game if that is what they mean.
Deliberate means intentional. It is either intentional or it is not. There cannot be an in-between.
It certainly didn't look a deliberate or intentional handball to me
If I was the ref I'd interpret it as deliberate. Players sometimes raise their arms like that in a situation near to goal "just in case" - anticipating the possibility of deflecting a shot or pass. If the ball does then make contact with hand or arm, it counts as deliberate in my book. He would have known that by raising hand and arm he was at risk of giving away a penalty if the ball hit it.
As for the red card, well that's down to the ref not the replays and from the refs perspective, he was entitled to judge that it was a clear goalscoring opportunity. I don't know if it was an intended shot chip or pass even after endless replays so the ref had no chance of knowing for sure and he with his linesman had to make a judgement call. If we can't tell, who are we to say it was a mistake?
If I was the ref I'd interpret it as deliberate. Players sometimes raise their arms like that in a situation near to goal "just in case" - anticipating the possibility of deflecting a shot or unpredictable richochet. If a shot then does make contact with hand or arm, it counts as deliberate in my book. He would have known that by raising hand and arm he was at risk of giving away a penalty if the ball hit it.
As for the red card, well that's down to the ref not the replays and from the refs perspective, he was entitled to judge that it was a clear goalscoring opportunity. He didn't have endless replays or Hawkeye to sort out any doubt.
Not in my book it doesn't. Deliberate is when you purposely direct your hand or arms towards the ball. If you don't, it is accidental.
You make yourself big by making your body as big as possible (including your upper body, and thus your arms).
To award something a referee has to be reasonably sure that a player has committed an offence (in this case, deliberately also). If a referee isn't certain he should assume that the player hasn't committed an offence.
And I have checked a FIFA website about the rules of the game. Nothing on that states that the handball rule has changed from the original rules of the game. Ie: it is only a free kick or penalty if you intentionally handball. (wherever on the pitch that may be).
Comments
rights, It doesn't appear on iplayer til about thursday.
According to the BBC website, it sounds like they don't have rights to show MOTD on iPlayer, only certain ones like MOTD 2?
It's on sooner than last season:
http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/motd
What ridiculous things did he say this weekend?
Couple of things stood out but the worse was when he was discussing the penalty for QPR. He was right it wasn't a pen, but he stated that it wasn't because 'the defender was going to clear the ball'.
Goal of the season from the shows history started this week.with Ernie hunt
Another one was the Pen/Red Card. As Gullit stated, the ball would clearly gone in, so a Pen/Red Card was at the very least understandable. He only seemed to argue because Gullit suggested the Ref was right.
I'm not a fan of Shearer (or Gullit), both great players though. For me, Gullit makes the better puindit in spite of his shocking graps of English and bad translations from Dutch.
Forgot that one. He said the ref should use his common sense. Interesting.
I thought Ruud Gullit was plain wrong.
It wasn;t deliberate handball and shouldn't have been a penalty.
Even less a red card.
I agree with that.
Unfortunately, that is not what the football rules state should happen.
It doesn't have to be deliberate to be a penalty.
It was clearly going in, so denying a goal. Red and pen's the right decision, whether the handball was deliberate or not.
I think going by the letter of the rules Ruud was correct which is the point he was making.
Shearer was suggesting that is was a an accident more than deliberate and that a red card was very hard on the player.
In some respects they are both right. Shearer looks at the game with his heart in what is morally right and wrong where as Ruud looks at it with logic and by the rules.
It would be dull if they all just agreed. On which point I disagree with the comments on Ruud and his accent. Not perfect English but he communicates his point across well enough and I cannot see how anyone would fail to understand him. I think he is quite decent at least it is not Phil Neville
For handball it does
In this case it didn't.
Not if it's heading for the back of the net it doesn't.
You are strictly correct, the rule says 'deliberate'. However, FIFA have literally redefined the word 'deliberate' over the last few years and under their definition it was a handball.
Well, they need to remove he word "deliberate" from the laws of the game if that is what they mean.
Deliberate means intentional. It is either intentional or it is not. There cannot be an in-between.
It certainly didn't look a deliberate or intentional handball to me
If that is true, then that is an unbelievably stupid rule.
So a player who does not intend to handle a ball gets sent off for that offence because it prevents a goal (possibly, I think in this case there was a good chance the goalie was going to save the shot anyway).
Whereas,, in any other situation a player can only have a free-kick given against him if he deliberately handballs (not by accident).
That doesn't make any sense at all.
FIFA have changed the rule on handball in the last few years, surprised you've not come across this.
If I was the ref I'd interpret it as deliberate. Players sometimes raise their arms like that in a situation near to goal "just in case" - anticipating the possibility of deflecting a shot or pass. If the ball does then make contact with hand or arm, it counts as deliberate in my book. He would have known that by raising hand and arm he was at risk of giving away a penalty if the ball hit it.
As for the red card, well that's down to the ref not the replays and from the refs perspective, he was entitled to judge that it was a clear goalscoring opportunity. I don't know if it was an intended shot chip or pass even after endless replays so the ref had no chance of knowing for sure and he with his linesman had to make a judgement call. If we can't tell, who are we to say it was a mistake?
Not in my book it doesn't. Deliberate is when you purposely direct your hand or arms towards the ball. If you don't, it is accidental.
You make yourself big by making your body as big as possible (including your upper body, and thus your arms).
To award something a referee has to be reasonably sure that a player has committed an offence (in this case, deliberately also). If a referee isn't certain he should assume that the player hasn't committed an offence.
And I have checked a FIFA website about the rules of the game. Nothing on that states that the handball rule has changed from the original rules of the game. Ie: it is only a free kick or penalty if you intentionally handball. (wherever on the pitch that may be).