The difference between Kewell's and the two Serbians and the Algerian handball's is that they did NOT deny an obvious goalscoring opposrtunity

Kewell's arms were in constant movement during him being on the line and probably did not work in his favor

Hard to have any sympathy for Kewell. After 6mths off he was straight back to snarling at the ref over imaginary fouls from the second he got on the park. Its his own sense of personal entitlement that has ruined his cup..not the ref...Just shut up and play HK.

1) Harry should not have left his man to run over to the post

2) Harry braced his arm for impact instead of pulling it out of the way and just leaning across to block with his body

3) Harry is an experienced player and should know not to even RISK putting his arm near the ball in the penalty area

4) The shoulder is counted as part of the arm (this is a grey area, and depends heavily on the ref)


Conclusion:

Any experienced player should know that conceding an early goal is better than conceding an early red card and a penalty. Harry fucked up, and he put himself at the referees mercy. Despite the referee's shit overall performance, 99% of refs would have also given a red card, especially given his viewing angle and the fact that he doesn't get slow-mo replays.

We deserved the red, they deserved the penalty, it was Harry's own fault, not the ref's.

I thought the Aussies did well with 10-men, and if Harry let that shot go in without touching it, we could have easily come back (we still had 70 minutes to play).

It was a clear red - he made himself big on the goal line. Even at lower league level, if your on the line or even attempting to block a shot in the box, put your hands behind your back. Once it hit him in the arm and denied a goal while he was making himself big on the line, the ref had no other option.

I was gutted that you guys couldn't put that final chance away, after playing so well with 10 I really thought you deserved the three points - other than optimistic long shots, Ghana really only had one chance on top of that penalty.

Poll: Rate the decision to send Harry Kewell off against Ghana.
Spot on
9%
Unlucky, but fair
26%
Harsh call
66%
This is what the public are saying, you people who say it was a fair decision would be a minority

If the roles were reversed and it was a Ghana player instead of Kewell we would have still been calling the ref a c*nt if he didn't send him off. That's the breaks in soccer unfortunately.

In '06,
-Cahill gave away a penalty at 1-1 against Japan but ref missed it
-Kewell manhandled and abused the ref after the Brazil game and didn't get suspended
-Kewell's goal Vs Croatia 'looked' offside
so really we were 'lucky' to advance to the 2nd rd but 'unlucky' to get knocked out by Italy.

We were always playing for luck in this WC. That's what countries like Australia rely on to get anywhere. Hasn't gone our way so far.... but if Ghana beat Germany in the 92nd minute and we get a dodgy offside goal against the Serbs............

Edited by smfc and proud: 20/6/2010 07:56:38 PM

Then call me a c**t

You're a c**t.

Seriously though. It's a 50/50 decision and you see it turned down all the time. We were unlucky.

Precisely. It was a denial of a goal scoring opportunity, last man on the line. Rules are rules.

Should Harry Kewell have been given a red card for handball in the Socceroos' clash with Ghana?
Yes - it was deliberate
19.82% (9201 votes)
No - he couldn't avoid the shot
80.18% (37219 votes)
Total votes: 46420

Yeah like 442 forumites make up the majority of football fans :lol: :oops: ](*,) :-" :-k :-k :-k :-k :-k :-k :-k :-k

How many of the 46420 voters have read and understood the rules of the game?

A hell of a lot more than the people who post on here.

was still a 50/50 call at best, it was a clear penalty - but I still do not think it past the 'deliberate' test. The ref made his decision based on the fact that Kewells arm moved so much after the ball smashed into the top of it rather than because he had a clear view of what occured.

If you want to talk a bout clear interpretations of the rules is there any leeway for a studs up late challenge from behind being anything other than a straight red?

he better play in 2014.

It was a clear red card and penalty. I'm sorry he moved his hand, maybe he should moved his hand behind his back instead leaning his hand towards the ball or he should have done a bicycle kick. He's our best player in a generation isn't he?

Cafu and Robert Carlos can do bicycle kick so it shouldn't be to hard for Kewell isn't it?

Giovanni Coppola wrote:
Poll: Rate the decision to send Harry Kewell off against Ghana.
Spot on
9%
Unlucky, but fair
26%
Harsh call
66%
This is what the public are saying, you people who say it was a fair decision would be a minority

Minority think it isn't a red? Actually the general public of Australia is a minority compare with 6.5 billion people!

Thing is, if it was a penalty then it had to be a red card.

Laws of the game should be changed to allow non-deliberate hand balls which is what happened here.

A deliberate HB is one where the hand/arm moves towards the ball. A stationary hand/arm and a ball hitting it in a goal scoring situation is non-deliberate, but is still a red as the laws are written.

In these situations it should be a penalty and a yellow. Dunno how hard that can be.

What about a situation where a ball is smashed in the direction of a player's face and he raises his hands to protect himself? As it stands now it would be a red and a penalty, but should be a yellow and a penalty.

If Harry was diving to stop it, then yeah, fuck him off with a red.

How do you make quotes in comment?