16-09-2026, 02:26 PM
(16-09-2026, 12:53 PM)McDurban Wrote:(16-09-2026, 11:36 AM)wassy04 Wrote: Feels like this essentially says they can decide whether it hits his hand or not and the ref view is irrelevant, so then its just a case of determining whether it did or not. They have gone for the view that on the balance of probability it did hit his hand, which to be honest I personally think it likely did at least touch his arm so they probably were correct to rule it out. Suspect, this is not a popular or majority viewpoint on here though!
HOWEVER, as with the Haaland one at the weekend, they micro focused on one issue and just ignored the fact that when the defender missed the ball trying to clear it he booted Neco in the head. Sadly, they don't seem to have discussed that here.
Balance of probability is insufficient to overturn a ref decision. It has to be a clear and obvious error.
Later evidence showing a handball is irrelevant, they did not have that evidence at the time of overruling the ref.
Their point is that this is not accurate when it comes to "factual" decisions like offside or whether someone handled it so the clear and obvious part doesn't apply (not saying I agree with the logic, that is just how they are justifying it)