Why Harry had to go
20/06/2010 9:20 AM
Bren O'Brien in Rustenburg
Sportal


Harry Kewell said he was devastated, Pim Verbeek said he was perplexed but Italian referee Roberto Rosetti got it exactly right when he sent off the Socceroos striker early in the World Cup match against Ghana.

Kewell's red card and penalty for handling Jonathan Mensah's goal bound shot will no doubt draw plenty of criticism back home. It is a devastating blow to lose your most dynamic player with your team leading 1-0 and on the verge of resurrecting its World Cup dream.

The immediate reaction, both at the stadium and on social networking sites was that Australia had once again been dudded by a cheating Italian. Rosetti had somehow conspired to send Kewell off as a means of punishing Australia and perhaps helping an African team into the second round.

That is utter rubbish and belies the fact that the referee followed the law regarding handling the ball in the area to the letter. Yes, Kewell was unlucky, but Rosetti had no choice.

Verbeek, Kewell and several other Socceroos said they felt that why it was probably a penalty, it did not deserve a red card. Clearly they have not read the FIFA regulations which state that:

'A player is sent off, however, if he prevents a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball. This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored.'

In considering a handball decision a referee must take into consideration, the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) and the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball).

Kewell gave himself away when he admitted post-match that he moved his shoulder and chest towards the ball in order to block Mensah's shot. While he didn't deliberately use his arm, his movement put his arm in a position to be hit by the shot which was hit from more than seven yards away. Kewell had a chance to move his arm from the ball's path and had he done so, the ball would have gone into the net.

As such, Rosetti had no option but to send Kewell off and point to the spot.

A couple of Australian players asked how Kewell's offence was any different to that of Serbian defender Nemanja Vidic 24 hours earlier against Germany. The difference was that the ball which Vidic handled was not heading goal-bound, so while the penalty is fair, the red card is not.

There is no doubt that Kewell is extremely unlucky to be in that situation but in the heat of the battle, players make decisions which shape their games. Kewell made a decision, no matter how split second, to lean towards the ball with his arm outstretched and for that reason, he was sent off.

Of course it is devastating to Australian fans and it makes it very hard to be objective on Rosetti's decision, but it not a disgrace as some may have expected.

The only disgrace on the day was the behaviour of some Australian fans at the ground in the second half, who rained some 30 bottles of beer onto the running track around the pitch in protest at the referee's decisions. That is a blight on the game.

http://sportal.com.au/football-news-display/why-harry-had-to-go-93456

'A player is sent off, however, if he prevents a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball. This punishment arises not from the act of the player deliberately handling the ball but from the unacceptable and unfair intervention that prevented a goal being scored.'

Kewell gave himself away when he admitted post-match that he moved his shoulder and chest towards the ball in order to block Mensah's shot. While he didn't deliberately use his arm, his movement put his arm in a position to be hit by the shot which was hit from more than seven yards away. Kewell had a chance to move his arm from the ball's path and had he done so, the ball would have gone into the net.

Well then the studs up tackle from behind on Breciano should have been a straight red too. I feel sorry for Kewell. The ref was very average.

A penalty can not be awarded for accidental handball - if Harry accepts a penalty, he has to accept the red-card, rough as it may be.

He says it hit his shoulder, but if you watch the video it's quite clear that it hits his bicep, that his arm is away from his body, I think his fist is also clenched (which indicates a tensing of the arm).

As one of the studio experts pointed out - it's instinct when you're on the line to make your body as big as possible - that includes holding the arms away from the body rather than flat to the sides. Away from the body is a natural stance but it IS considered by referees to be a deliberate attempt to make yourself bigger.

A penalty can not be awarded for accidental handball - if Harry accepts a penalty, he has to accept the red-card, rough as it may be.

He says it hit his shoulder, but if you watch the video it's quite clear that it hits his bicep, that his arm is away from his body, I think his fist is also clenched (which indicates a tensing of the arm).

As one of the studio experts pointed out - it's instinct when you're on the line to make your body as big as possible - that includes holding the arms away from the body rather than flat to the sides. Away from the body is a natural stance but it IS considered by referees to be a deliberate attempt to make yourself bigger.

Well then the studs up tackle from behind on Breciano should have been a straight red too. I feel sorry for Kewell. The ref was very average.

Amazed that this is not getting moire coverage, how the hell he didn't get red carded for that tackle is beyond me. The refs have taken a stance to crack down on fouls in this cup and we have seen cards left right and centre as a result. That was, by the standards of this cup so far, a send off offence without a shadow of a doubt.

[-(

Sorry, was not deliberate. ](*,)

[quote=Tyson_85]Agree 100%. It doesn't affect whether the handball decision was right or wrong, but it was a very poor decision by the ref and a clear red card.

A penalty can not be awarded for accidental handball - if Harry accepts a penalty, he has to accept the red-card.

The question for me is what should players in Kewell's position actually do? The ball was shot at Kewell at a high speed from relatively close range. Until the ball hit Kewell he could not have known it would hit his chest/upper arm rather than just his chest (or head). Must players in Kewell's position dive away from the goal in these circumstances?

IMO it was a penalty but not a red card. The shot was fired from about 8 metres out (just outside the 6yrd box). I timed the shot from foot of the strike to KEWELL, with it taking 0.3 seconds to hit him. I couldn't press the stop watch fast enough it was that quick. The ball hit him on the upper biceps. No person can react that fast in 0.3 of a second. In my opinion it was not intentional and therefore not "DELIBERATE" and should not have been a red card. When you watch it the Ref could not wait to get the red card out fast enough and in his mind it was a deliberate handball. From watching it over and over it is clear that it is not and it is a indictment on his performance as a supposed world class ref. Is it an uncanny coincidence that we get 2 crucial incorrect red card decisions in 2 matches? The 2nd being a match altering one.

Edited by cratra: 20/6/2010 08:32:32 PM

[youtube]ruqYya6aeyA[/youtube]