Harsh penalty decision

So, according to VAR, if you have your arm against your body, it's in an unnatural position and also, if it's against your body it's making your body bigger. A total joke.

Nonsense if he had been a forward and control it like that would have been disallowed

Sorry... the VAR rules say, if your arm is against your body and you're not making your body bigger, it not handball. That's the rule.

Tarkowski knew,tried to say it hit him in the ribs.

Well obviously Tarkowski knew it hit his arm

But that doesn't mean its definitely handball - what is he supposed to do with his arm, they're not detachable.

Right decision to me.Ref gave it in real time.

Haven't seen it yet but will be quite happy if the refereeing does not continue to be always favouring the defense... The Man utd keeper on Sunday would have been given a free kick in his favour for the minimal contact in previous seasons, imo

What has the ref giving it in real time got to do with it ?  Are you really saying refs never get it wrong

Linesman gave it by look of it.

Once it's given, and it's hit his arm
and arm is moving to ball it's tough for
var to overturn.

Still not a pen for me, but...

VAR never over turned it ,did they.
My opinion it was a penalty,your obviously Everton,you won't think it was.

If you think its a penalty then that's fine, opinions will differ.

But some validation or logic always helps

The balls on target,he's leant into it, it's hit his arm,he's tried to say it never when it did.
That's how I see it.
If that was given against West Ham, I wouldn't be moaning.

Tarkowski always tries to block everything, thats the kind of player he is and why he's captain. On target or not is immaterial. In actual fact the shot was pretty much going straight at Pickford which is the galling thing.

And have you ever seen a player say to the ref, yes mate it hit me on the arm

It's pretty easy to say you would have accepted that decision had it been against the Hammers, i can assure you my brother, cousins and every other Hammers fan i know (and that's a heck of a lot !) would most definitely not have done, they'd have been baying for the refs blood !

Anyway, as i said opinions differ. Have a good night.

He leant into the ball, good decision imo

Just seen it, have to agree with the penalty being given, imo
He definitely leant into the ball, with the intention of stopping it or deflecting it with his torso, but unfortunately did so with his arm
As said earlier, if a forward had controlled the ball like that for himself or another to finish, you would expect the goal to be disallowed

Not sure obviously I was happy to get it for my bet. What I would say it's poor defending because he is giving the referee the decision to make, and perhaps Everton would be better adopting that view internally.
Good start for Leeds which I anticipated, although they huffed and puffed and for all the dominance didn't create that mutch.
Everton well they nearly got away with a point but you wouldn't watch them out the back garden if that's way they are going to set up throughout season.
Great atmosphere, but on the pitch a poor advert for "greatest league in the world"

If the rule was that if the ball comes into contact with your hand in the box then its a pelenty, by however or whatever means. Simple rule which can have no argument and is same for everybody.

if it hand been ball to hand/arm then no penalty
the fact it was hand/arm to ball then it has to be a pen

the problem will be consistency and im sure there will be decisions like that and no pen

someone made the good point that if a forward took the ball like that in the box a free kick would have been given

Harsh, consistency all issues. However he with his arms by his side he moved his body towards the ball deliberately. It did not just hit him, he misjudged the move. That is a penalty.

English football is the only sport in the world where the Referees are encouraged to make the rules up as they go along.

Arms by your side -unnatural position,arms away from your body - unnatural position ,officials have lost the plot ,never a pen ,you think they make same decision if Everton were home team ,no chance .

By the way I backed Leeds ,so did me a favour .

It's a grey area. If he doesn't move and it hits his arm there, no penalty. The lean towards the shot to try to block it and then it hitting his arm, you can see the strong case for. But also, it was not deliberate so what's the difference between leaning and not leaning. There clearly needs to be very definitive rules on this.

Aug 19, 2025 -- 10:14AM, nineteen points wrote:

If the rule was that if the ball comes into contact with your hand in the box then its a pelenty, by however or whatever means. Simple rule which can have no argument and is same for everybody.

If that was the rule the number of random crosses, shots or little dinks when close to defenders would increase lots. A uniform rule is required though, for sure.

I would say that if your arm is by your side then it counts as part of your body and isn't handball.

Got to be about as perfect a 50/50 as you get.

Still not a pen for me, but see why it's given.

Sky sports analysis seems to have swayed a few too.

Stan Collymore makes a decent case for no pen



Tarkowski.

As a defender he has every right to try to use legal means (torso) to stop the ball. The fact he leant into the ball is irrelevant unless he deliberately used his arm to stop the ball. He is absolutely allowed to use torso and unfortunately humans can't yet detach an arm.

Secondly, he pulls his arm away ( in a split second, absolutely aware his left arm would be a problem if the ball caught it, so he's being honest, which should be taken into account) to try and get as much body on the ball as possible.

These two points are facts.

The problem then becomes poor interpretation of law( dogmatic, rigid, inflexible), rather than common sense which pieces all of the puzzle together rather allowing a referee to make a rational, informative decision.

The referee should have taken to the screen and said..

" Tarkowski, by attempting to move his left arm beside or behind his body showed that he did not attempt to deliberately handle the ball, indeed his unnatural arm position clearly showed the opposite. No penalty.."

Don't care who you support, it's not illegal to lean to stop a ball and it's not illegal to have an arm. A referee should see the whole picture not the bit that supports an argument.

It's finished now I'm sure there will be plenty more discussed in rest of league matches. Move on Everton you were rotten and you know it.

Aug 19, 2025 -- 1:36PM, ----you-have-to-laugh--- wrote:

Got to be about as perfect a 50/50 as you get.Still not a pen for me, but see why it's given.Sky sports analysis seems to have swayed a few too.Stan Collymore makes a decent case for no penTarkowski.As a defender he has every right to try to use legal means (torso) to stop the ball. The fact he leant into the ball is irrelevant unless he deliberately used his arm to stop the ball. He is absolutely allowed to use torso and unfortunately humans can't yet detach an arm.Secondly, he pulls his arm away ( in a split second, absolutely aware his left arm would be a problem if the ball caught it, so he's being honest, which should be taken into account) to try and get as much body on the ball as possible.These two points are facts.The problem then becomes poor interpretation of law( dogmatic, rigid, inflexible), rather than common sense which pieces all of the puzzle together rather allowing a referee to make a rational, informative decision.The referee should have taken to the screen and said.. " Tarkowski, by attempting to move his left arm beside or behind his body showed that he did not attempt to deliberately handle the ball, indeed his unnatural arm position clearly showed the opposite. No penalty.."Don't care who you support, it's not illegal to lean to stop a ball and it's not illegal to have an arm. A referee should see the whole picture not the bit that supports an argument.

That would be my conclusion too.

Could have been given either way

Some days you win

Some days you lose

Get over it!

He moved towards the ball and played it with his arm. As clear a penalty as you will see.The professionals agree with me. The amateurs remain clueless, as always.

Bodie and Doyle on the case, and dear old Hudson.

End of argument.

If you showed someone who'd never seen football before (and thus told them hands are not allowed) a video of the Liverpool basketballgate incident and this, which would they say was a def handball and which would they say probably wasn't?

Is it only football that people spend an inordinate amount of time discussing refereeing decisions?

Most rules are down to personal interpretation. Unless a foul, or a handball is 100% certain, then some of us will interpret it differently . It will always lead to debate, especially when it’s a 50/50 call.

Yes WD, because in other sports it seems that players and managers respect the officials decisions (Rugby being an obvious example).

So if football players on the field dispute and disagree with everything that goes against them then why would fans be any different ?

Totally agree Dixie respect refs decision, I know very little about Rugby apart from it's respectful sport and opposing fans respect each other, football should be looking to do likewise, however because  of ultras and social media that may not happen.
The football players all respect each other but sometimes play to crowd, IMO.

If football explained its decisions as rugby did
then refs would receive more respect and fans would
be better educated.

Referees in rugby also give warnings to players
who are in danger of offending on subjective calls.

You'll often here ref shout "shirt colour, number leave it" to a player
who should not be there, if he ignores ref then
is penalised..

Footy refs often give zero explanation

Hear, not here, ffs

Hear ref

Football players regularly surround the ref when fouls are given, claim every throw in, corner/goal kick etc. Managers have hissy fits on the touchline.
It's no wonder fans and followers of the sport behave accordingly.

When i played rugby 40/50 years ago we were told never dispute a decision, the same applies today. You might be seething underneath but had to keep a lid on it.

In cricket dissent is clamped down on if you are seen to be openly disagreeing with an umpiring decision. My own county Kent were docked 8 championship points recently for four reported incidents of dissent over the season and quite rightly too.

Only captain allowed to address the ref, or appointed player
if goalie is captain.

This is trialling in prem league this season

Should be a big improvement

If it hits a hand its a pen.Take all interpretation,opinion etc out of it.Seems simple enough to implement.