EXPLAINED -Why Germany were not given penalty in Euro quarters vs Spain? What does handball rule say
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 07. 2024
- We talk sport 24x7, 365 days a year. Come join us for the latest analysis, exclusive interviews, news, and updates. Part of the AajTak and India Today Group.
For more content follow us on -
Instagram - / sportstodayofficial
Facebook - / sportstodayofficial
Twitter - / sportstodayofc
#EURO2024 #Germany2024 #germanyvsspain #football - Sport
Its NOT about the rule... Its about how the rule was used the hole tournament... Every little contact with hand was a penalty, but in the most important game the VAR is non Existent
bro ....the shot was on target ...and it hits his hand not by a slight angle........it hit the entire wrist..............germans are robbed
Byt the gk was in that direction so i dont think it would have been penalty but if there were no gk in that direction then i would agree that it would have been a penalty
It would be offside anyways.
@@oriprogamer1404when? Musiala was not offside and he took a straight shot on goal. Füllkrug was clear offside, but he had no chance to touch the ball.
Fullkrug was offside when he received the pass to head it back to Mus. Play would have been dead there.
@@onlyhydro500die I Watch the Game? Ofc füllkrug got. the Ball. Thomas Müller passed to him and hi passed to musialla
Germany seems to have forgotten 2010 and 2014. They took out England with a disallowed goal in 2010. In 2014 Higuain scored a good goal that was called for offside. So, in recent times they too have profited from wrong calls. However, against Spain in Euro 2024, they lost based on the rules. They should learn how to take a chill pill
maybe you should take that pill - looks like you so angry about those decisions back in the days that you now defend a clear handball. Asking myself if you would have still the same Opinion if we would swap the team names. Imagine this would have happen in Spain vs England you would be on the fence - 100% !
Revenge for Wembley, the first of many😊
The day England stolen the title.
Chai...VAR wasn't there that time...
Even Cucurella KNEW, what are some people trying to justify here
Fr, He was smiling 2 seconds after the ref said no penalty
@@shadowfire3655 which is what he said. 2 seconds after. you will get it. i hope.
@@shadowfire3655 Um, why wouldn't he be happy that it wasn't a penalty?
@@JeppeSeverin it proves that it is supposed to be a penalty
@@shadowfire3655 Absolute nonsense. Do you really believe that yourself?
If that one againsd Denmark was a penalty (no shot on target, closer distance, much more "natural position" of the arm), there's no way in 1000 years this one her is not. Plain and simple.
It was a mistake in that game obviously. Plain and simple. It’s 100000% not a handball.
That wasn't a pen. It was a wrong call by the ref. Possibly a biased decision to help England win and advance to the final.
@@davissebastian9129 *germany not england
Lol. How can this be a penalty if before that Fulkrug controls the ball with his left arm before he passes it to Musiala? Gotta love how hypocritical Germans are by just neglecting what is not convenient to them. Spain was robbed. Kroos should got a red card
@@testingforyoutube I have replayd the match and this incident again.
The big mystery here is why we were never shown a digital close-up inspection and/or a slow-mo replay of neither Füllkrug's allegedoff-side nor his left-arm handling of the ball before he passes it to Musiala - so we have never publicly got to know the cause of ignoring taking a closer look at Cucurella's claimed handball.
An entire video to say b*****it. That was penalty all day
fullkrug was offside, so was not penalty
@@iscocl I agree with that, but the referee never gave offside, they just evaluated the penalty episode as not a penalty which is ridiculous
@@iscoclhis arm is not offside. Arm doesn’t count in offside
@@iscocl knee of spanish defender is infront of fullkrugs shoulder. arm doesnt count
@@iscocl i don't know if it was offside or not, but definetly fullkrug's handball was there
Deliberate or not we will never know. When the shot was taken his arm was away from his body and he then moved it towards the incoming ball and fortunately for him, it was towards his body as well. So we will never know if he was trying to block the ball or trying to put his arm behind his body 😂. We can assume it's deliberate when we see him smiling after the penalty wasn't given.
If you watch it in real time the ball hits quite fast. I don't think Cucurella had the time to react. He even looks surprised.
We will never truly now if it was deliberate or not.
But I'm inclined to agree with the ref. It was too fast and too close to the body.
@@juanjo2dbut it was going in even u said it was fast and powerful shot, even if accidentally he should've atleast gotten a yellow card.
@@xx_aidenplays_xx but if you yellow card, it means penalty. The ref thought it was accidental and the arms were in a natural position. Ergo no offence. That's the refs interpretation.
I also believe another ref could argue that the arms were reaching and unaligned with the rest of the body.
It's a fine line.
False. His arm was moving towards his body so it’s not intentionally making him bigger
@@xx_aidenplays_xx why would he receive a yellow card with no foul
the real reason is because this action came right after an offside that they didn't call out
bunk...his arm was straight away from the body...The ref should have consulted VAR, but chose not to. A ref who's country is still playing should not be allowed to referee a match, and England is still in the draw
VAR only interferes when the main referee didn’t see the situation clearly
@@emperorxitler he clearly did not see it or else he would’ve called it. It is impossible not to call it a penalty if you saw this. He should have called it, then consulted VAR. This way he robbed Germany of a chance on goal (it could have been a goal even) and a penalty would be the absolute least in this case. The UEFA should scrutinize refs for egregious mistakes.
@@sven1914 he clearly saw it hence said it’s not handball. he didn’t need to consult VAR when the situation is obvious, otherwise we don’t need a ref running in the pitch. that’s 100% not a foul no matter how much you try to fool yourself or just to make yourself feel better. actually a. taylor should be awarded for making the right call at this critical moment. sorry. the jerries deserved the loss. cry me a river
@@emperorxitler you got this wrong. Congrats to Spain, they didn’t rob Germany. Germany was better and should have won despite horrendous officiating. But you’re right, If you are the better side and you fail to win, you deserve to lose. But that’s how you wake a giant and watch what happens in 2026
@@emperorxitler I'm confused; so it wasn't the alleged off-side on Füllkrug that caused the no-penalty ruling?
When your arm is away from your body even by 1mm it is must be handball. The cited rule is contentious
Roberto Rosetti, UEFA's head of referees told officials that he did not want to see penalties for incidents where a defender's arm is close to the body and in a near vertical position. Not every touch of arm, hand is a penalty. We want to consider the movement of the players. Biomechanical movements. You know, this is a clear situation. This is never a penalty. Therefore, the referee was right in his decision and Germany wasn't been robbed.
On the other hand, Germany was ignorant despite Tony Kroos frequent harsh play that amounts to foul but never a free kick awarded to Spain and his subsequent penalise.
1:45 The player with the 14 has his hands beside the back to avoid accidental handball. this is how you do it. The 24 has his hands all over the place and blocked a clear shot by accident directly on the goal. in 99 out of 100 handballs this would be a PENALTY
He was trying to be like 14 but the ball hit him in the process
@@KentchessLe Too bad that means he was too late to defend the situation which is a bad play on him, but that is his problem his failure but germany got screwed for the fail of a spanish defender.
So we can agree that he had a problem while trying to do something right
Thats why he wasnt penalized for it
@@KentchessLe Its a professional sport and him beeing late therefore taking into account that this could happen is called deliberate and that has to be penalized, that is what pro sports is all about forcing your opponent to make a mistake. If that does not get penallized and everyone plays perfect then where is the competition, that would be boring and the outcome would always be the same.
So no we cannot agree on it, he had to penalized, period.
@@godwrote01 late ? he did it just in time in order to not get penalized, and he succeded
That is a penalty any day of the week. You select some choice examples to argue it is not, I can show you many many more examples under identical circumstances where penalties were given. Very clear penalty. To be clear, I am neither a Spanish or German fan, it was a great game, but that was definitely a penalty, and I'm pretty sure most Spanish fans watching would in that moment themselves have believed a penalty would inevitably have followed. Lucks a fortune. Cheers
In this rate we will soon be playing handball instead of football.
I will never understand why that penalty was not given and why it was not double checked...disgrace really.
Oh, really? Don't be so hard on your self. There's a chance you'd might understand after I have explained it to you:
Accorind to the rules, there's a difference between having your arm waving/being lifted (unnaturally) and then keeping your arms straight down.
Now, some might argue that Cucurella's arm was unnaturally out of his body, but that's unfair. It certainly wasn't unnatural. See, in this situation, he both have to try to defend the goal while being faced with great risk of having the ball smashed right in his face. So, what to do?
Cucurella obviously choses to lean to the left while his facial expression shows that he's at the same time very nervous that he'd might still get the ball in his face. He's clearly not thinking about where his arm/hand is.
Let's say that he, without thinking about it, by reflex had put his arm out at a 90 degrees angle from his body and then blocked the ball. Then, yes; nomatter how much it wasn't intentional, it's still an *unnatural* blocking of the ball.
But this simply wasn't unnatural - and certianly not purposedly.
Now, did you get it...?
@@JeppeSeverinthe other rule states that if your arm makes your body unnaturally bigger it's a faul. Which it does. His arm is like 30 centimeters away from his body, and he stopped a clear goal shot in the goalkeepers den. It's an undisputable penalty. You can't in any way prove that it isn't. So don't even try please
look the video before you write your frustation
@@acevaptsarov8410 you didn't see the video till the end, otherwise you wouldn't write this nonsense
@@gerritdeheij Nonsense? What are you talking about? I saw the game live, with the replays, and then saw videos afterwards. It's one of the most clear penalty fauls I've ever seen. People who say it's not a handball are absolutely incorrect and baffle me. The only thing you could argue here is that maybe there was an offside before or after. But it should have been called if there is one, and I certainly didn't see one myself... but did see a clear handball stopping the ball from a goal shot. It's not even arguable. that's it
it happened maybe because they banned Merih Demiral for 2 games, because he was doing 🤟🏽 celebration after he smashed Austria out of the tournament with two header goals, assist was wonderfully both through Arda Gülers magical corner.
it was a wolf gesture, not a I-L-U one
He interprets that rule in his own way picking word "purpose" (2:31) as if it meant you deliberately play ball with your hand in the situation when the rule says " accidently or intentionally play the ball with the hand " (google translated text) and the text goes on like this " if the hand or arm moves towards or away from the body, it is a hand foul " " if the hand or arm is in place and the player has no chance to react to the ball, it is not a foul " CONCLUSION: ABSOLUTELY PENALTY NO DOUBT. Multiple referees have said that it should have been penalty ( in radio, TV, podcasts and so on) I have not anyone say anything else.
Antony Taylor don't want Germany get the Final, that's all.
Or he didn't want to be unfair to Spain for the umpteenth time in that game; Cucurella's arm was hanging legally naturally straight down and not in an "unnatural lifted/waving" position - at a critical split-second where he focused on leaning to the left in order to avoid having the ball slammed in his face.
That's all - unless you have some insider knowledge about Taylor's personal opinions about Germany?
The ref could have awarded the penalty by the same rules.
why would he award a penalty when it’s not a handball
It was a penalty, the hand was completely open , it stoped the shot from reaching the goal , it was a clear penalty and the ref should at least booked him
The arm was naturally hanging downwards in accordance to body movement/balance. No "making your body bigger" here - no pen.
@@JeppeSeverin The hand LITERALLY prevented the ball from flying to the intended direction. How is that not making your body bigger?
@@user-bs4gg8sq7h Sigh... bcause his arm/hand was *down* not in any unnatural position, which is legal. And he even pulled it in towards his body as he should. That this concidentally resultet in blocking the ball doesn't matter, since it was still naturally downwads and not lifted high up and out/away from his body.
Imagine that he hadn't moved his arm inwards which would have caused his made-his-body-bigger angle to be even *wider* , it would also have let the ball pass through the space between his arm and his body. And *no one* would claim that *this* type of making-his-body-bigger - that'd most likely result in a goal - would be any problem, right?
So, therefor, you don't punish Cucurella for both keeping his arm downwards while actually attempting to do the right thing. That would be absurd.
It was. He saw the shooter going to shoot. He moved his arm to black the shot out off its target that could be a goal. Yeah. His right arm was closed to his body but his left want. It was away. You clearly saw his eyes stared at the shooter‘s shot. By the way, for those who said it was offside. How do know that it wasn’t check. Maybe it wasn’t or wasn’t. Fact check…the lineman even wasn’t waving or raising his flag. If Taylor checked var then u would know, he decides he was var himself and let them continued to play..in this tournament, the ref have been giving some match easily than this, this was sure a penalty. Bc his hand was blocked the ball from scoring a goal.
did not make his body bigger???? dafuq!? He had his Hand 10 to 20 cm away from his body. Yes it wasnt deliberate, but he prevented a attempt on goal with his Hand only. THAT in itself should be a penalty.
ALSO pick a picture of when the Ball struck the Hand not like afterwards! Thats what needs to be taken into account. In the example you showed Cucurellas Arm gets knocked back and to the side by the force of the ball. And this is exactly why the ref should AT LEAST check it.
He was pulling his arm in towards his body in attempt to "do the right thing" - even though he didn't have to since his arm was already naturally being kept pointing straight down which i legal as opposed to a hand/arm being clearly lifted/waving far up and away from your body.
The pictures shown in German media were taken a second too late. Because you can see that Marco was putting his arms along his body.
At that moment, the ball hit his wrist and his arm was therefore not close to his body as the picture was taken, and also from a not ideal angle.
It was not on purpose. And point two, there was an off site situation as with the Netherlands where the goal was not approved because of disturbing off-site position of the Dutch player.
The same was here the case. In the play with the Netherlands, the keeper could never ever reach the ball and the player was too far away to be an obstruction at all.
In this case, the player was a lot closer, and therefore it would not be a goal anyway.
bull$hit. you crazy or just can't see? lol
If it didn’t hit at the hand,the ball would ripped the net. Can't believe how unlucky a team could be....Disgrace
the play was already in offside so there is no enough amount of tears that can justify penalty
Had the ref given Kroos a well-deserved yellow card for his flagrant foul on Pedri (08'), Germany would have played with 10 players after he received a yellow for foul on Dani Olmo(67')
So, the hand ball "controversy" would have never happened en the extra time...
It´s penalty. With an extended arm, he stopped a ball going in the direction of the goal line. If that arm had not been extended, the ball would have continued its path to the goal. So he deprived Germany of a potential goal by stopping a ball with an extended arm within the penalty area. Why do you think many players tuck their arms in their backs or their sides when someone in front of them is going to kick the ball? Because they don´t want a handball call. if you read the handball rule the key point is the "unnaturally bigger" concept, why did Cucurella have his arm extended to his side? To be bigger, to cover more volume. It doesn't matter if in the last milliseconds, he had the intention to remove his arm. It was not natural for him to have his arm in that position.
Anyway Neuer´s knee strike on Higuain´s head was also a penalty in the 2014 World Cup Final, and it was not given. So Germans shouldn´t cry as that was a MUCH more important game.
the rule says clearly that if the player is not unnaturally making his body bigger then it’s not a handball, which is exactly the case
@@emperorxitler So, do you naturally stand with your hand 1 meter away from your body? No. You stand with your hands very close to your body. He was making his body wider by extending his arms.
My god,go through the rules.This is not the first time.
You cannot determine whether an action was "deliberate" or not short of being a mind reader. If the defender was trying everything in his power to block the shot with his hand, he would have moved it exactly as he did. If this isn't a penalty, defenders can now simply extend their arms away from their body in the box and move them downwards when a shot is directed at them with the excuse that they were "intending" to get their hands out of the way. His hands were extended, he moved them downward and struck the ball, blocking the shot. It simply has to be called a handball. I didn't have any rooting interest in this match at all, but this is just a horrible call.
Check the handball from Fulkrugg before. That was intentional
He had his hands out and his hand stopped the ball who was going in goal direction. This was a 100% penalty and the referee make a misstake. A misstake that should not happen in a match of this magnitude
I say second point with „touches the ball with their hand…“ is fulfilled since it is unnatural to have your arms spread out, standing inside the box. So from the natural position, which is to have arms leaned or at least not spread out, he did make his body bigger
Why was a handball given to Davide Frattesi then? From what I'm seeing, ANY contact with the hand and the ball regardless of position/intention is called
As a neutral, why in such a sensitive match, the suspicious scene was not referred to VAR?!!! When there is a difference of opinion the clearly suspicious scene should be at least reviewed by the VAR, so what is the role of VAR ? Obviously,It has created for such moments. Maybe if it went to VAR, the referee would have had to take a penalty. 99% of the referees have declared even less suspicious scenes than this as penalty. With all due respect to the referees, the optimal VAR substitution rules should be made more efficient so that no team's rights are lost.
Try to make videos about cricket
stupidest rule in football
Then Why Lukaku's goal was ruled out for Openda handball even though Openda didn't do it deliberately, it was checked with
Snickometer was just a mild touch but still it was ruled out and also France awarded with plenty in the Fifa Final there also the Play didn't touch it deliberately.
You cannot see the movement on 3 photos. The new hand rule makes it possible, to stop shots to the goal by the hand, if not deliberately moving the hand to the ball. Thats against the intuition of every footballer.
Blatant intentional handball - penalty kick, red card, expulsion - Taylor and the VAR suck
I would agree with everything said here except the fact that the ball was going towards target and most likely resulted in a goal or the keeper saving it. If it was a handball anywhere else like near the edge of the box or corner line then it wouldn't be a penalty.
So if he does a cartwheel and the ball touches his hand it's ok, it's a normal position? Germany was robbed by incompetence.
The reporter is confusing the word bigger and smaller. I'll give you an example. If a person has dysfunctional growth hormone and grew very tall. You would say he is unnaturally bigger. Which is correct. But say he started to shrink (get smaller) because of illness however stayed unnaturally bigger (taller). Then the reporter seems to thinks it means to be made unnaturally smaller. As if smaller is a verb. An action that is happening. The rule is referring to a noun that your are bigger more or less. You can tell this by the word "made". The word made does not have direction. It doesn't take into account if you are in the process of growing or shrinking your body. If it is made bigger it is made bigger the how doesn't matter.
It is like you molded a clay model. At first you made it bigger than all your peers but then made it smaller in size but it remained bigger than your peers. It is still unnaturally bigger.
It’s so easy to abuse this rule and manipulate it to your advantage as a player…
Another major tournament fixed by FIFA. That's a total handball. If Spain was playing any other team it would have been a handball.
Dude watch the video. The hand is closing in toward the ball, and that’s the hand movement regardless of the intention.
Only Spain was robbed because tbe referee saved several red cards to Germany.
Then again, they weren't robbed because they had a blurry off-side - that we weren't allowed to see clearly and digitally - cutting off a VAR decision on the "handball" situation.
You can call it karma.
Clear penalty, this guy should stick to watching cricket
Fullkrüg was offside in the build-up and the play was dead there, you should stick to watching cricket.
The linesman were so terrible that Germany had double the opportunities, and some of the offsides were extremely clear that even a blind dog could see it.
@@thebraincell1 No for the milllionth time it was not OFFSIDES
Instead of tellling others to watch cricket you may want to learn the offside rules first before making such a statement. You just proved you have no clue abiut the offside rule
PLEASE PLEASE TELLME EXACTLY HOW FÜLLKRUG WAS OFFSIDES
@@reinerhoch1357 I don’t know when the ball was played but the Fullkrüg touched the ball in an OFFSIDE position, and hence was the VAR check for the ball didn’t go any further. Bro thinks I am a detective and know exactly when everything happens, I can’t even watch highlights on my phone to see the moments of the build-up. I just heard on the timeline section on Google that Fullkrüg was considered offside when checking the Cucurella handball.
@@reinerhoch1357 And anyways if I “didn’t know the offside rule”, why would I have even talked about offside in this discussion? I would have happily agreed to this statement. Use logic please 🙏
@@thebraincell1 Why would you have tallked about it? Because you think you know but calling offsides proof you have no cluee and stilll you talk, straight out of your arse.
Offsides only considers bodyparts that can score a goal, füllkrugs arm does not count for offsides, get that into your thik brain
If the hand is not sticking to the body and it gets hit, then its intentional handball.
Nope - not when it's low/hanging downwards while nothing suggests that the arm is in an unnatural position with regards to his body moving.
Are we also going to pretend like Kroos didn’t commit 2 yellow card fouls in the first 5 minutes of the games? If Germany is robbed why were they allowed to play with 11 players when they should’ve been down to 10 for the whole match almost
That's not the topic here. And Kroos would not have been playing like this if he had gotten a first yellow card. Don't try to make things up.
Also Spain dived like 5 times with no punishment and tried their best to injure Kimmich and Musiala
he should get at least 3 yellow cards if the rule allows
@@torstenkaudt4793 he absolutely could have got another one for intentional foul, just like Caravajal and countless other players have
@@unknownplayer978 you forgot germany dived at least ten times throughout the game
From the 1st moment i ve heard you speaking I knew you re a varcelona fan and you could not realise it was a penalty
You are saying the referee read the mind of cucurella and knew he had no intention to touch the ball. I can only say the referee is a super human
while countless of sore losers read his mind and believe otherwise
When the ball is going to touch the hand it was away from his body, it was high speed shot that bended his hand to look like this photo you're showing so he didn't try to bend his hand ,the ball did ( scientifically: the ball speed around 60m/s , the hand bended in less than 0.5 m so it took 0.8 m.s to bend his hand ( there is no human has such a fast reflection even cats don't have)
The arm was away, and most importantly the ball was going fast to the goal dead corner
If Antony Taylor went back to the var he'd give penalty kick no doubt, but he refused to go to the var as most English referees do
I think maybe they are free to do that in the premier league but not in such international competition,
Maybe Taylor is one of finest referees in the world, but he did a terrible mistake,
I believe that the var room most contain more than one referee , they should have the upper hand to force call the referee in such critical cases
if the defender tries to block a shot he should be aware of his arms and have them close to his body and if he doesnt and he gets the ball at his hand he is responsable for not doing so espacially if that ball is a direct shot on target and even really dangerous to save as a goalkeeper
It was a penalty, and Kroos should have been red-carded, and against Denmark it was never a penalty, and it was a clear goal by Lampard in 2010.
End of discussion.
Plus that goal Denmark scored is onside
This video is complete gibberish and misinformation. People who try to argue that this isn't a penalty are completely ignorant and I truly cant fathom it
This explanation is complete nonsense and so was Taylor's decision to not give the penalty. Taylor in refusing the penalty clearly did so because he claimed by his words and body posture that Cucurella had his hands by his sides in a "natural position". But that ignores the context ie. what happened before his arm was by his sides where he blocked Musiala's shot which was going into the goal with the keeper beaten. Fact is, Cucurella had his arms out to his side, away from his body at about a 90 degree angle before the shot was taken. The shot is taken and then Cucurella moves his arm and hands downwards directly into the direction of the ball, then to try and fool the ref, Cucurella lets his arm go backwards and go limp. The fact is, it is hand to ball and a deliberate obstruction of the ball. It was 100% a penalty. Hand to ball whether up or down under the rules is a penalty if it is in the 18. Show the whole video Sports Today. Not just one frame.
You don't know the rules.
still don't know whats the deal, there was previous offside and handball by the german attacker
All you people claiming Offsides only proof to the worldf that you have no clue about the offside rule.
YES Füllkrugs arm crossed the Offside line BUT when will you braindead poeple learn that Offsides ONLY considers bodyparts that are allowed to score a goal. Füllkrugs Arm can be inside offsides all dqay and nioght and it still wouldn´t be offisides. Learn the rule or STFU!
Lmao to ppl in comments ignoring the rules. Not every handball is an offence. It doesn't matter if the shot was on target or not. It was too fast and too close to the body for it to be intentional.
Although we will never now if it was truly deliberate or not.😂
Watch it again in real time.
If we will never know the penalty should be given, by your logic defenders would start trying blocking the ball with their hands all the time while making it look not deliberate that would be awful. Apart from that I think the rule about it being deliberate or not should not even matter when the ball is going straight toward the goal, no matter if intentional or not if you prevent a goal by illegal means that must be a penalty. It being deliberate or not should only decide if you give red or not penalty should be given either way.
@@XBloodyR well, that's a fair opinion. But the rules states otherwise. It doesn't matter what's the ball trajectory. What matters is if the player had an "unnaturally bigger position" and if it is intentional or not.
By your rules, defenders should play with their hands behind at all times because every shot could turn into penalty. That's why current rules invites for a middle ground. And this handball is an edge case.
this was the clearest penalty in the whole euro cup (to say the very least). You're talking nonsense, sorry
Not according to the rules.
@@JeppeSeverin The full sentence was: "According to the rules it was the clearest penally in the whole euro cup."
@@xyzrt7 Interesting - because the rules say that as long as your arm is straight down/vertical and its position is no where in an unnatural position with regards to your body movement/balance, there's no handball.
Cucurella even pulled arm in towards his body in attempt to "do the right thing" - which makes this incident the *opposite* of "making your body bigger".
But let me hear where you get your Taylor + VAR-disagreeing fantasies from.
@@JeppeSeverin indeed it was not even slightly along the arm: the whole world saw it
@@xyzrt7 Not sure what you mean "it was not slightly along the arm"? What wasn't?
Regardless, the whole world saw that his arm was pointed - naturally in regards to body movement - down, moving in towards his body (even though he didn't have to align it with his body since it was already straight down) and not being lifted high up and away/out from his body. That was why there was no fault and no pen.
Learn to deal with it or complain to those who make the rules.
😅 wow... a penalty explained in 5 minutes ..
Others are making a video of second,1min😮
If I'm not wrong there's two types of Penalties in FIFA rules
Handball and Ballhand.
The German player was offside. They would have called offside anyway. You have to look at the play before the handball
Well, I think I start to put the puzzle together - while we still miss to hear an explanation from Tailer himself:
There was the "handball", which wasn't a penalty-causing one due to it being in a natural, hanging-low position as oppsed to unnatural hand-lifting/-waving up in the air.
Then (or maybe alrady before that), the ref rules the off-side, so that the whole question about the penalty became irrelevant.
What I want to know is: if it *was* the off-side that dominated the decision, why weren't we allowed to see it digital-details style?
@@JeppeSeverinthe refs never talk about offside. The VAR referee was the same, as in the germany- Denmark game. And where are the Videos from the offside? Nobody from these offside guys name a video title, where its shown.
@@noen08 Well, if the VAR referee was the same as in the Germany-Denmark match, doesn't it say it all? Apparently he sticks fully and robotically to the rules, which - as I understand it - are as follows:
There's an off-side - even if it's by a toe nail.
There's a difference between a naturally vertically hanging arm (no pen/Spain) and an unnaturally lifted/waving arm/hand (pen/Denmark).
Now, the problem here clearly is that we are publicly uncertain about whether it was the alleged off-side or the "natural-hanging vertical arm" that made the no-pen decision. I mean, if it was the off-side, they should have shown the digital graphics. It's scandalous that we haven't had an official announcement.
@@JeppeSeverin they shouldn't use the same referee twice, it may have caused an internal conflict. In addition, Tayler has already had a similar situation where he denied Roma a penalty against Sevilla. I agree with you, they should show that it was off-side, but there is no credible official source on this anywhere. Those outside Types should just say where they got the information from.
@@noen08 I have to disagree about the referee; This VAR referee is perhaps the most competent of all since this showed that - contrary to what I actually thought - his ruling about both the cancelling of Denmark's goal plus the pen Germany was given against Denmark had nothing to do with him being intimidated to favor Germany over their opponent. He rules stricktly - some might say too robotically - according to the new digital world of rules.
But we 100% agree that the off-side case stinks.
If it's a shot on target and it hits a defenders hand it's a pk
The most penalty in history of football. Germany robbed in their own country
Anthony Taylor smh
Ok then......why did germany get a pen against denmark? Under these rules that pen shouldnt have been given. Andersen was in a completly natural movement
Plus Denmark scored a onside goal but out of nowhere it was offside
Actually not. As much as I, as a Dane, loathe the pen being given, Andersen's arm/hand was "unnaturally" lifted/waving compared to Cucurellas arm hanging down naturally-vertically as part of keeping his balance in a split second where he leans to the left in order to avoid having the ball slammed in his face. You can argue forever whether he should have kept his arm tight to his body, but his arm position wasn't "unnatural."
You can also argue all day that Andersen's arm too was a natural balance thing. (Of course it was since he was running-hopping and that's how your arm(s) and hand(s) go), But if there's a difference between lifted/waving hands/arms and arms hanging vertically straight down, that settles it. Still, the ruling over Andersen wasn't fair since that shot wasn't directly on target.
Do you know that the ball was going straight on target which could have made a goal?
Wrong. It could not have been a goal, as Wirtz was in the way of the ball and he was offside. Meaning, if Cucurella does not touch the ball with his hand, Wirtz would have blocked the shot. Or if not, he would have been offside and Spain must have had a free kick 😉
@@pprimi06 Hmmm... interesting. No one seems to have noticed. Thanks.
English referee.. 😂
Took 5min to explain handball rule. What has happened to football. 😂
Footnall ruined by var
Penalty and I say that as someone with an inner bias against Germany 😉
sure
Bro a handball is a hand, that was on target and should have been a goal. English refs🤦♂️
It was offside so none of this matters
¿? The play was disallowed because Fullkrug was offside (not to mention that Fullkrug controlled the ball with his hand).
That is not true and Füllkrug was not offside. Arms don’t count in offside and he controlled it with the part of the arm that doesn’t count as handball. Read the rules again
@@unknownplayer978
On the play:
1- Fullkrug receives in offside.
2- He controls ball with his arm and passes the ball to another German.
3- another German shoots and touches Cucurella's arm.
Football says: everything after offside no longer counts.
It's like after an offside, the play ends in the goal. That the goal is annulled.
Then lets block all shots on goal with the hand right?
it does not make a difference if he tries to move it away or not ... he makes his body bigger ... and he moves his arm in the direction of the ball ... so its not right ... the worst is he did not go to the screen ;P
No. If the arm is hanging/pointing straight down as opposed to being lifted/waving clearly up/out and away from your body while there's no indication that your arm's position is anything but a natural balance-thing with regards to body movement, there's no "making your body bigger" trigger.
@@JeppeSeverin the hand is about 40 cm away from th hip .... if thats a hanging arm .. enjoy your day running around normaly ;P ... doors will be not wide enough all of the sudden ;P
@@JeppeSeverin and dont forget ... we ar not talking about a ball that would have gone nowhere .... its a shot on target and maybe a goal ... and the arm is clearly expanding his body size ...
@@JohannesTenbieg Those 40 cm and the angle it creates is not an i issue here since it's first of all a natural position for the arm to reach in that split-second Cucurella leans to his left side in a blend between wanting to block the ball with his body and avoid getting it in his face.
His arm is *downwards* - not being lifted/waving high-up, out-n-away from his body - and he actually still pulls it in towards his body to "do the right thing", even though he didn't need to because his arm was already down.
he didn’t make his body bigger
I dont spent my time with you to explain: YOU HAVE NO IDEA FROM FOOTBALL
Clear penalty!
Clearly not according to the rules.
GREAT Comment! I Think Taylor was spot on, following the law! UEFA should be pointing that out - but u did!
Following what law? If this isn’t a handball, then players can just play fucking basketball instead of football and it would be fine
@@unknownplayer978 The rule that says that you are allowed to have your arm(s) hanging/pointing straight downwards as opposed to lifting/waving it cleary out/up and away from your body. And if nothing suggests that the arm/hand is in any unnatural move/position with regards to your body moving/balance, it's not a pen.
cucurella was trying to AWOID the ball... what is awoid?
First things first, there is no such thing as
nandball, the foul is called handling, as in
"handle the ball", if the ball-hand contact is
unintentional and the hand/arm is in a
natural position, then its not a foul. This is
100% clear in the laws of the game.
And this was a natural position in regards to balance and not being able to think about hiding your hand behind the back while your main focus is on hoping to avoid having the ball - that you have no idea about what direction it's about to take - slammed in your face.
Keeping your mind on having to hide your arms/hands behind your back is unnatural.
Helow my bro....
Don't try to act smart when u can't even justify the fact.
I supported Spain but that handball was not given coz of the handball offences but it's a totally different story.
Actually it was an offside.
So he accidentally kicked the ball too soon so that the defender could finish moving his arm out of the way. So now defenders get a pass for slow reflexes? And get to increase their area to block shots now? Hot Diggity dog. The defender was too slow moving his arm out of the way oh well tough shit for him. Nice try but Germany was robbed.
He was keeping his balance in a split second where he was more focused on not getting the ball slammed in his face.
Besides, the arm is hanging naturally low, with balance in mind, as opposed to an *unnatural* lifting/waving of the arm/hand.
Indian guy interpreting football😅
Your picture is unusable. It was after the handball. When the ball hit the arm his arm was making the body unnaturally bigger. The only question is, if the position of the arm was justifiable by the body movement. But if you use this rule no handball can ever be given except intentionally going for the ball. Because if it is not intenional then it is a result of the body movement. What else should it be? A player moving his arms against the natural body movement, but not with the intention of handball? For what reason then? It should have been called a handball because every other handball given this tournament is now ridiculous.
Not quite. Cucurella's arm/hand was hanging low in a *natural* position based on balance and on the premise that what went through his head right at that moment was to avoid having the ball slammed in his face.
If we should have a 100% fair ruling, they have to use lie detectors and ask - in this incident: "So, mr. Cucurella. Did you purposedly place your arm right there because you intended to block the ball, if it would go that way in stead of hitting any other part of your body or perhaps pass to the right of you?" (It actually looks like Cucurella leans to his left in order to avoid having the ball slammed in his face. He's not thinking about his left hand at all imo.)
But still: it's a question of a low-hanging natural position of the arm/hand versus an unnatural lifting/waving of it.
@@JeppeSeverin Based on balance his other arm should have been stretched out and the arm hit should be close to his body. The only situation to put the arm on the side you are leaning towards so far away from the body is if you try to catch a fall. And he didn't try to protect his head or else both arms would be up.
The other defender trying to block the shot put his arms behind his back, Cucurella did not and should have been punished.
But the referee thought differently. But following this line of argument all other handball decisions this tournament were wrong and only actions like Maradonas "hand of god" would be punishable. All positions are natural if not intentionally forced otherwise. And then we are back at mind reading.
They should stick with the increased body area and cut the "natural position". Defenders should put their arms on the back if they want to block a shot like many already do.
@@torstenkaudt4793 Now, you're absolutely wrong.
Try standing on your left leg only and lean to your left. Your right leg will naturally come out to balance to the right, but what happens with your left arm the more you lean to the left? Does it feel safe to keep it close to your body or do you experience that you actually want, at some point, put that arm up/out to balance as well?
Besides that, according to the rules, there's a difference between (unnaturally) lifted/waving ams/hands and arms being kept (naturally) straight down. You want to blame Cucurella for having his arm straight down and call that "unnaturally not close enough to his body" - because he leans to the left at the same time causing that distance/angle his arm/hand away from his body?
That's bollox, man, and you know it.
@@JeppeSeverin Ah, now we are on this level of internet discussions? I thought you were different.
Ok: It's in the rules? It depends if the position is natural? No way! Amazing! Wait, that's what i wrote all the time. Try reading and understanding.
And you are completely wrong by the way. I did what you asked and it was fine. Completely save with my arm by my side. Because arm and body balance out. Now try this: lean to one side, both feet on the ground, close together and stretch the arm out to the side you lean in. Just like he did. You fall down. It's called physics. And you can't argue with physics. Don't try to make up situations that are totally different.
@@JeppeSeverin Look, you seem nice so I try one more time.
Do I think it's a natural position? No
Would I have given a penalty? Yes
Do I understand the decision of the ref? Yes
My only problem with the decision is that the ref didn't go to the screen to have a second look. If he would have and still think: yes, for me that's a natural position of the arm. I would disagree but it's ok, he didn't make a judgement in a second but took his time. I'm not asking to double check every foul in the midfield. But a handball in the box, in a knockout game of the euros? Come on!
And, as I wrote, they should change the rules to prevent this kind of discussions. Simplify it to increased area of body to reduce the interpretation of different refs. It's easier for the fans, the refs and the players. As it is right now the danish and the belgian players and fans can look at this decision and ask why they got punished and not the french.
stop drinkin lol. check the vita of the referee.if this is not a clear penalty tell me what is.
Hi why on first half tony did not get red card even not yellow card either so that’s why referee didn’t check var
Why would I listen to an Indian to be a football expert lol. Please talk about softball
That’s bullshit
Shot was on target mate , period
Massive flaw in the video.
Cucurella was not trying to avoid the ball. His hand moved towards the ball until the ball hit it.
In natural movement your arms will.move close to you in the direction you are moving in and away in the direction you are moving away from. E.g. if you kove sidewaya left your left arm is pushed against your body.
Cucurella was moving left and his left arm was moving away from him. That is not natural and ofc it just so happened to be moving to the side a ball was possibly comming from. That we call a reflex. It can not even always be contolled.
Cucurella knew he was to far away to stop the shot and tried to get between the ball and the goal. So he pushed his entire body in that direction. Therefore the hand play is against the rules even if done subconsciously
Also rule 2 states that it is against the rlues if it makes your body larger, which it also did in cucureallas case. So both of those are clearly broken, the second one is indesputably broken.
The ref was simply to proud to even bother looking at the VAR
His arm was hanging/pointing straight downwards and not being lifted/waved at an 90+ degree angle out/up and away from his body.
To tell defenders to think about keeping their hands behind their backs is what's unnatural with regards to balance. And this was actually a dangerous situation for Cucurella since what he first of all had to think about was avoid getting the ball slammed in his head. Absolutely nothing unnatural about the way he had his arm at that split second.
@@JeppeSeverin his hand was around 50cm away from his body.. that is far away from"straight down"
he came from a right wards movement which put his left hand away from his body, he stopped just before the shot was taken causing his right hand to move away from his body, but his left hand stayed at roughly the same distance as before, indicating that he was trying to go the other direction as fast as possible. Further more he already started moving left when the shot hit his hand, meaning the hand should have been close to his body and not far away.
He forced his hand to go against normal physical forces simple as that. i donˋt think he did it with intent, but by reflex alone. But his hand was not in a natural position.
And defenders are training to keep their hands as close to their back as possible to avoid such hand play. So by no means was this unavoidable.
Hand play in football almost never happens with full intent it is very often pure reflexes, but that does not make it not a foul.
He is in a position which purpousefully enlarges the surface area of his body, which is illigal and constitutes a foul as per the rules on hand play. Even if all of it happened by reflex alone. Reflexes are of no relevance when deciding a foul, just when deciding if a card (red/yellow) should be issued.
if he had dived across the field parallel to the ground the natural position of his hand would be parralell to the ground. So just because his hand is pointing down does not mean anything his body was not straigh, it was leaning, therefore his hand should be parrallel to his body and not angled away from him.
In any case, the ref should have stopped the game after the action was over, which was just seconds after the hand play, and then made an informed decision. But the ref just let the game go on as if nothing had happened. Or in other words, the ref did the only thing he was not allowed to do.
I do not care if a penality was given or not, I only care about the fact that the ref did not do his job and by doing so caused this whole contoversy. A single person on that field managed to ruin the conclusion of a great match. simple as that.
@@1996Horst No, his hand - at the end of his arm - was about 25-30 cm away from his body.
You see this as an incident of "making his body bigger" because he at the same time leans towards his left, making the straight-down arm coming more away from his body at an angle as oppsed to be aligned with his body - but it's still hanging/pointing naturally staight down - not being waved/lifted - in a split second that is actually dangerous to Cucurella. (And actually, he *did* pull his arm inwards towards his body to do the right thing at the time of the kick + hit.)
So, no reason to stop the game really. This was - contrary to what so many believe because they don't know the rules - obviously *not* a "making your body bigger" incident. It was all too clear to the ref and VAR that Cucurella had his arm straight down in accordance to what you are allowed to with respect to the "natural vs. the unnatural" rule and body movement/balance.
@@JeppeSeverin so clear that the VAR advised pausing... sure. It needed pausing in any case. Every hand play needs pausing. It is really simple.
@@1996Horst So you know the rules better than the rule-makers? Interesting.
Clearly no penalty
The ball hit Cucurella's hand in the box, and anyone with half a brain can clearly see that Cucurella's hand was away from his body. The ball hit his wrist, so if his hands were at his side the ball would at least passed near his leg. This guy on Sports Today spent an eternity trying to convince people to unsee something that happened in front of the entire world, must be a Spain fan for sure.
His arm/hand was hanging straight downwards as oppsosed to being lifted/waved high out/away from the body, and it wasn't in any unnatural position with regards to his body movement at the time. No pen accoring to the rules
@@JeppeSeverin use your own eyes
@@sunrisesunset1734 Uhmm... I'm not using sombody's else's!
@@JeppeSeverin then get some spectacles, the whole world sees this guy's hand stop the ball
@@sunrisesunset1734 You sound as if you're not so old or maybe a little...slow, pardon me?
Do you understand that I have never denied that the ball slammed hard into the hand throwing it backwards?
Do you understand that I have tried to explain to you that regardless the hand-slamming of the ball, it is still not a penalty?
What a load of bullshit. the rule says if he made his body bigger it is a penalty, yet he somehow added 30 cm to body and people react like that it is nothing.
You have no knowledge of ball, shut your channel down.
it is handball & a penalty. don't defend a bad referee
No it is not - according to the rule that says that your arm is allowed to hang/being pointed straight down as opposed to being lifted and waved unnaturally up and away from your body to "make yourself bigger". Also, there was nothing unnatural about Cucurella's arm-position with regards to his body movement and balance.
Given that Cucurella actually was pulling his arm in towards himself to "do the right thing" - even though he didn't have to with a vertically hanging arm - this was the opposite of a "making your body bigger" pen-resulting incident.
Don't speak your opinion without being certain about the rules.
@@JeppeSeverin What? not his body bigger? Didn't you see that his body was leaning towards the ball and his hands were from an open position and moving down to block the ball which was going to pass through his lower body? His hand was thrown off when it was hit by the ball. he has acted like a goalkeeper. your eyes are clearly blind if you can't see that

@@he-man168 His body was leaning towards the ball? And so what? That has nothing to do with what we're duscussing here.
He was in no way "moving his hand down *to* block the ball". That's all in your head. He had no way of knowing in what direction the ball would go and not a chance to react to its direction + speed from such short distance. What happened was that he moved his hand inwards towards him either purely coincidental or to align it with his body. Regardless, this position and moving of his arm is both legal since it is still being being pointed straight down as opposed to high, up-and-away-form-your-body lifted "hand-/armwaving" that clearly "makes your body bigger" - plus there's nothing unnatural about his arm's position.
It's not me who is blind. It is you who don't understand the rules while you throw wild accusations at Cucurella.
@@he-man168 Sure, he leaned to the left in order to both attempt to block the ball with his *body* because he took a guess the ball might'd go that way - while wanting to avoid the ball hitting his face. And so what? We're not talking body but alleged "handball" here.
Incidentally, the ball hit his hand, which was more or less straight down. He didn't "lower it to block the ball". That's like calling him the best goalkeeper in the wold with supernatural powers based on the distance from Musiala's shot. He could't react to its direction in that split second so what he did was obviously pulling his arm/hand in towards his body - which is only the right thing to do. And since the arm was in a downwards position all the way, there was nothing unnatural about it.
And yes, the ball made the hand/arm go back - because the kick was that hard. And so what? It still doesn't cause a pen due to the reasons I have explained.
In that buildup Fulkrug was offside
Don't know why anyone is not talking about that
If fulkrug offside refree why no give offside no check var this is clearly handball
@@user-sh2ed4gf5m the commentators said that it was not a penalty
@@sayanbanerjee202 Commentators of which country? How do commentators have any power to decide?
@@XBloodyR they are experts
They are doing commentary for years
They are experienced
I think they understand football more than you and me
@@sayanbanerjee202 I ask again commentators of which country, I doubt that you watched the match in every language and understand every language.
Indian commentating on football
At list show some video replay
Ofcourse it was a Penalty....This Englishman referee is polemic in many games even in England . AN ENGLISHMAN REFEREE SHOULD NEVER REFEREE A GERMANY GAME...BECAUSE THE ENGLISH HAVE A wW2 PHOBIA ....Hey AUTHOR of this video YOU INVENTED A LIE !
ОПЯТЬ ИНДУС УЖАСНЫМ АКЦЕНТОМ ЧТО-ТО ОБЪЯСНЯЕТ ,НО ЕГО РЕЧЬ НЕ ПОНЯТНА!!!
It's interesing how all comments here disagree with the ruling. But i think it is nonsencial to blame Cucurella for guessing correctly where Musiala would shoot. Think of how hard it is for a goalkeeper to save a penalty. Now, from that distance, did Cucurella in any way unnaturally block the ball? Imo, he leaned over towards his left to avoid getting the ball in his face - because he was guessing that Musiala would kick the ball to the right of him/his face. He didn't, in that split second, think about his left hand/arm at all. If he did, he would make an all too obvious attempt to block the ball, which indeed would have resulted in a penalty - but he simply didn't have time to consider that based on how close Musiala was to him.
Point is that Cucurella totally coincidental had his arm hanging there as part of his left-leaning in a split second where he was more concerned about not getting the ball in his head. Then Musiala slams the ball right up on his left hand and Cucurella would not have a chance in the world to avoid that.
Besides, Fullkrüg was off-side. End of story.
you sure its not simply also because the german guy was like 3 metres offside behind him?
You are misunderstanding the offside rule if you think it was 3 metres, if it really was offside then by a really close margin but there never was a clear check and never an offside line drawn, which UEFA would have definitely done if it was the case to make the decision less controversial. Them not releasing clear footage of this speakes volumes.