Chelsea first goal

I will always agree if you are correct.

I will always agree if you are correct.

I'll start talking crap then.

Read the rules you tool. The goal shouldn't have stood.

You don't appear to have commented on point 1

No, but I corrected you on point 2

But if point 1 is correct, point 2 is irrelevant, surely?

It would have been a yellow card for Marshall as the Cardiff defender was closer to the ball than the Chelsea attacker.

The location of other players is irrelevant in this situation. If the keeper had slid out of the area whilst holding the ball, it's "unintentional" and therefore a yellow card. Catching the ball out of the area (as per Marshall today) is "intentional" and therefore a red card[/quot



What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

I will always agree if you are correct.

I'll start talking crap then.

Start?

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

WRONG

accidental handling outside of the area is yellow, deliberately handling outside of the area is a red card offence, its all down to the referees interpretation on whether the handling was accidental or deliberate

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

WRONG

accidental handling outside of the area is yellow, deliberately handling outside of the area is a red card offence, its all down to the referees interpretation on whether the handling was accidental or deliberate

Nope. Im afraid that isnt the case. Caps lock or no caps lock.

I couldnt care less either way, but just a note...

If a keeper handles outside the box its a red card, it doesnt matter if it isnt denying a goaldcoring opportunity etc. and also it doesnt matter if its intentional or not. If you are a defender, scratching your head while on the line not even looking and the ball rockets into your hand and you save it, you are off. If the striker is bearing down on goal and you trip up and barge him over from behind - you are off. So on and so forth.

But i havent seen either incident. Just telling you the laws of the game as lots of people seem to be rewritting them in this thread.

Wrong. It's a common misconception that handling outside the box for a keeper is an automatic red. It isn't.

It' is a red if it prevents an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

I will always agree if you are correct.

I'll start talking crap then.

Start?

Yeah well I suppose you would be the first to pick up on it.

I couldnt care less either way, but just a note...

If a keeper handles outside the box its a red card, it doesnt matter if it isnt denying a goaldcoring opportunity etc. and also it doesnt matter if its intentional or not. If you are a defender, scratching your head while on the line not even looking and the ball rockets into your hand and you save it, you are off. If the striker is bearing down on goal and you trip up and barge him over from behind - you are off. So on and so forth.

But i havent seen either incident. Just telling you the laws of the game as lots of people seem to be rewritting them in this thread.

Wrong. It's a common misconception that handling outside the box for a keeper is an automatic red. It isn't.

It' is a red if it prevents an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

Nope its not, they are completely differing offences as explained above. And one doesnt have to be present to validate the other.

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

WRONG

accidental handling outside of the area is yellow, deliberately handling outside of the area is a red card offence, its all down to the referees interpretation on whether the handling was accidental or deliberate

Nope. Im afraid that isnt the case. Caps lock or no caps lock.

Sorry roathy, you got this one wrong. Can't argue your way out of this one.

I will always agree if you are correct.

I'll start talking crap then.

Start?

Yeah well I suppose you would be the first to pick up on it.

Its not hard to spot. I genuinely havent seen a well constructed opinion from you in the years ive been here, and thats not a dig im just saying it as it is.

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

WRONG

accidental handling outside of the area is yellow, deliberately handling outside of the area is a red card offence, its all down to the referees interpretation on whether the handling was accidental or deliberate

Nope. Im afraid that isnt the case. Caps lock or no caps lock.

Sorry roathy, you got this one wrong. Can't argue your way out of this one.

Theres nothing to argue my way out of. Handling outside the box is a red card.

Nope its not, they are completely differing offences as explained above. And one doesnt have to be present to validate the other.

Yes Roath, you are wrong I'm afraid.

A keeper handling outside of the area isn't automatically a red card offence.

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

Absolute nonsense, he wouldn't even have needed to caution Marshall never mind send him off had they picked up on it.

Nope its not, they are completely differing offences as explained above. And one doesnt have to be present to validate the other.

Yes Roath, you are wrong I'm afraid.

A keeper handling outside of the area isn't automatically a red card offence.

Ok, if you can provide proof of this then I will concede.

Absolute nonsense, he wouldn't even have needed to caution Marshall never mind send him off had they picked up on it.

Not even a caution

Some people amaze me

Okay chuckles after some research it seems i am wrong on this occasion. Consider my point conceded.

But as for the person who said not even a caution

Absolute nonsense, he wouldn't even have needed to caution Marshall never mind send him off had they picked up on it.

Not even a caution

Some people amaze me

It's no different to giving a handball on the halfway line given it wasn't denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Ok, if you can provide proof of this then I will concede.

I'm not spending my morning looking for a sentence in the rules of the game, but I am a qualified referee and this is the case.

Example: Chelsea vs Juve in CL a few years ago.. Cech handled outside of area and given a yellow.

Absolute nonsense, he wouldn't even have needed to caution Marshall never mind send him off had they picked up on it.

Not even a caution

Some people amaze me

It's no different to giving a handball on the halfway line given it wasn't denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Yes it is, its a different offence altogether.

There is no way in the world a keeper will get penalised for handling outside the box and not even get a yellow.

What utter Bollocks your talking, it would certainly be a yellow, due to it not being an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to the covering defender, knobhead....

No it wouldnt. The law broken wasnt "denying a clear goalscoring opportunity" it was " goalkeeper handling outside the box". Both are red card offences and one doesnt have to be present to validate the other. Meaning the lack of goalscoring opportunity is irrelevant.

WRONG

accidental handling outside of the area is yellow, deliberately handling outside of the area is a red card offence, its all down to the referees interpretation on whether the handling was accidental or deliberate

Nope. Im afraid that isnt the case. Caps lock or no caps lock.

Sorry roathy, you got this one wrong. Can't argue your way out of this one.

Theres nothing to argue my way out of. Handling outside the box is a red card.

Apology accepted

Apology accepted

Ill never apologise for being incorrect, if thats the case gameshows would have to leave a 10minute segment at the end to read out apology letters for all the incorrect answers.

I will however thank you for bringing it to my attention in order for me to read up on it and get a definitive answer from the horses mouth. Learn something every day and all that.

Absolute nonsense, he wouldn't even have needed to caution Marshall never mind send him off had they picked up on it.

Not even a caution

Some people amaze me

It's no different to giving a handball on the halfway line given it wasn't denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Yes it is, its a different offence altogether.

There is no way in the world a keeper will get penalised for handling outside the box and not even get a yellow.

Some will caution but it's not a caution that has to be given. It happened at a game where a mate of mine was being assessed as a referee and he was marked down for cautioning the goalkeeper and it was exactly the same as yesterday.

Handball is handball anywhere in the park except where deemed to be denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity which you have already acknowledged it wasn't.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one. There is no way on this planet that without proof I will be convinced that a ref wouldnt even caution a keeper handling outside his area.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one. There is no way on this planet that without proof I will be convinced that a ref wouldnt even caution a keeper handling outside his area.

Fair enough and for what it's worth I would have cautioned every time had I not seen the incident in the game I refer to, we live & learn as they say.

It's two poor spots by the officials in the grand scheme of things though. I'd be dissappointed not to flag for those yesterday abd these guys are way more fitter and knowledgeable(sp?) than I'll ever be.

Never should have been given. Marshall bounced the ball and was therefore in control so it was a foul. Also the ball hit Eto on the way in who was offside too.

As for some saying you don't get any luck with refs, did you not see the nailed on pen for the foul on Baines against Everton. Swings and roundabouts as they say.

Also as pointed out the ball hit player on floor who was offside! So goal should not have been given on that basis. Double wammy!

Also as pointed out the ball hit player on floor who was offside! So goal should not have been given on that basis. Double wammy!

If you want to go down that road, before the offside offence was commited Gary Medel took out Samuel Etoo quite balatently. If the goal didnt stand it would have been a penalty and a red card. Highlights below....

http://www.ibtimes.com/video-chelsea-4- ... in-1432934


Thats the second time Medel has got away with flying in with a foul in the box.

Apology accepted

Ill never apologise for being incorrect, if thats the case gameshows would have to leave a 10minute segment at the end to read out apology letters for all the incorrect answers.

I will however thank you for bringing it to my attention in order for me to read up on it and get a definitive answer from the horses mouth. Learn something every day and all that.

Technically on a game show a contestant wouldn't argue with the host claiming he's correct, so no apology would be needed. You on the other hand.. Well, you catch my drift.