From our other sites
The story
Brazil forward Raphinha looked back on the friendly match against Japan, “MIZUHO BLUE CHALLENGE THE KALLANG FOOTBALL SERIES SINGAPORE,” held in Singapore on the 14th, and voiced his displeasure with the referee’s decisions. Japan took a 2-0 lead in the first half, but Brazil drew level thanks to two goals from Vinícius Júnior, before a goal from Tatsuhiro Sakamoto in second-half stoppage time gave Japan a 3-2 win. Brazil’s bench protested furiously that the Japanese press that set up the winning goal was a foul, and both manager Carlo Ancelotti and Raphinha were sent off with red cards. On 5ch, opinion was also split over whether Daizen Maeda’s first goal involved a handball.
Brazil forward Raphinha looked back on the Japan match in “MIZUHO BLUE CHALLENGE THE KALLANG FOOTBALL SERIES SINGAPORE,” held on the 14th. The news was reported the same day by Planeta do Futebol.
Brazil, fired up after letting Japan take a 2-0 lead in the first half, equalized with two Vinícius Júnior screamers, but fell 2-3 after conceding the go-ahead goal to Tatsuhiro Sakamoto in second-half stoppage time.
Brazil had shown frustration with the referee’s calls throughout the match, and that anger boiled over at the moment of Sakamoto’s goal. Brazil’s bench protested fiercely that the Japanese press that led to the goal was a foul, and both manager Carlo Ancelotti and Raphinha — who had already been substituted — received red cards and were sent off.
Source: soccer-king.jp / Original article here
What people said
Isn't it "Nanya"?
You don't get to make the call yourself (smirks)
all we get is a blurry shot from far away, which is why it ends up like this
You don't know about VAR?
The crowd here only ever watches national team matches anyway
This one's a handball for sure too.
So basically none of the goals should've counted, huh
LOL trapping it dead with his hand.
Why isn't that a foul?!
The third goal conceded was definitely a foul, and like you can see in Re: #27, the first goal was a handball too.
Doesn't matter since it's a friendly, but if this call happened in a real match it would've blown up big time
Felt borderline
It's not borderline at all.
Wao fully extended his arm, shoved him down, and touched the ball after that — that's a guaranteed penalty
I checked, and he touched the ball before pushing.
If he hadn't touched the ball there, it'd be a penalty,
but since he touched it first, I get why it's a no-call
This ref seemed to be going by "as long as you touch the ball even a little bit first, it's fine"
Zoom in and look — the opponent's foot touched it first, and Wao touched it after, so to begin with…
In a real competitive match this is 100% a handball.
But since it's a friendly, it's a no-call
These days they don't call handball unless the arm movement looks unnatural, right?
Can't you see he's passing it with his hand?
Does that look natural to you?
I'd think attacking handballs that lead to a goal get called pretty strictly though
Cases where handball isn't a foul
Not everything counts as handball — the following are treated as no-fouls:
• Natural body movement: a natural arm swing while running, or an unavoidable, natural hand placement to brace yourself when falling.
• Rebound off your own body: when the ball hits your own foot or body and accidentally bounces onto your own hand or arm.
Not intentional, so it's a no-call
Isn't that for the defending side?
That's a really old standard
For the attacking side, if the ball hits your hand it's a handball whether it's intentional or not.
But that was the rule from a few years back, so maybe it's changed since then?
Whether it's intentional is the standard used to judge it.
So Maeda's first goal clearly doesn't qualify.
Cases that count as a handball foul
• Intentional contact: moving the hand or arm to deliberately touch the ball.
• Unnaturally enlarging the body: the arm is in a position that can't be explained by motions like running or jumping, expanding the area that can block the ball (e.g., spreading the arm way out to the side).
• Directly leads to a goal (attacking side):
• Scoring directly into the opponent's goal off the hand or arm (invalid even if accidental).
• The same player scores into the opponent's goal right after the ball touched their hand or arm.
These days it's handball even without intent.
And being on all fours on the pitch is about as unnatural as it gets lol
You're mixing it up with defensive handball
This ref didn't call it handball, so it's not handball.
Doesn't matter if it's competitive or a friendly.
That's the answer
For the attacking side, whether the hand contact was intentional or not, if the ball goes straight into the goal from there, it's a handball
That's exactly what I've been saying
Background and Key Points of This Debate
The standard for handball fouls changed under IFAB’s 2019 revision of the Laws of the Game. Under the current rule, if an attacking player’s hand or arm touches the ball immediately before a goal is scored, it’s a foul regardless of intent. The clash in the thread between the “it’s not handball unless it’s intentional” camp and the “even unintentional contact is a foul if it leads to a goal” camp appears to stem from this gap between awareness of the old and new rules. There’s also no rule stating the standard loosens just because it’s a friendly, but international friendlies often go without VAR, and Japanese broadcasts tend to be thin on multi-angle replays, making it hard for viewers to verify calls themselves — likely another reason the debate never settled. For what it’s worth, both manager Ancelotti and Raphinha were sent off this time.
*This article is excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (Geisoku+) thread “[Soccer] Ejected Raphinha: “It’s very hard not to bring up the officiating. Handball, a penalty… the third goal was a foul”.”
Leave a Reply