RateTheRef

I get that misreadings/misunderstandings of the LotG happen, but Dermot really needs to be doing his homework and fact-checking himself before he goes on air stating false information. And it's especially concerning that two SG1 referees (one being FIFA list) have both failed to correctly understand/apply the Laws here.

The ONLY situations where accidentally touching the ball with the hand/arm is automatically an offence is when a player scores directly from it, or scores immediately after the touch. The fact the ball was otherwise going in the goal is completely irrelevant. No-one who understands the game and the LotG would reasonably deem the player's arm to be making him unnaturally bigger here, and no-one for a moment thinks that it's a deliberate handball. There is no offence here.

I have to say that Dermot and the officials on this match are correct. When the ball is clearly going into the goal and has been stopped by the arm the correct decision is penalty + a sanction (as we know red card for deliberate, yellow card for non-deliberate).

UEFA have clarified that this is in line with their interpretation in the latest UEFA RAP. Specifically they highlight this interpretation in clip C32 from Croatia v Czechia where in the 70th minute, Tomas Holes blocks a shot on the goal line, however the ball hits his arm which despite being in a natural position, prevents the ball entering the goal. The official explanation from UEFA is "As the defender's arm actually prevents the goal, this must be considered a handball offence. However, the defender should only be cautioned, as the action is deemed to be a non-deliberate handball offence."

While we may not like it, ultimately what does football expect here? Personally I suggest football expects that justifiable position or not, that we can't accept that a player can use their arm to prevent a goal being scored

As an FYI, I believe the next instalment airs this week coming at 10.15pm on Sky on Tuesday, and 6.30pm on BT sports on Wednesday - or so Sky Go would have me believe!

Watched most of the first half live, and caught the highlights after so can't give a thorough opinion on it. Certainly from what I did watch live I thought 007 was having a good game. My gut instinct for the potential DOGSO watching live was a caution (which those at home with me can attest to having heard me shouting yellow at the TV screen) and the delay in producing the caution certainly gave me pause to think Bond might have gone for a red, personally pleased he didn't. Personally I have too much doubt over retaining possession there, you can see that both the Ipswich goalkeeper and covering defender slow up immediately after Wilson goes down so the 'obvious' nature of DOGSO isn't quite there for me as I feel both of those players have a reasonable chance of getting to the ball if Wilson isn't fouled. Equally though if Bond issues a red card there, I'm not entirely sure VAR intervenes depending on what information he relays.

 A common theme that I really dislike watching the premier league of late is seeing the match officials be surrounded after decisions and certainly would've liked to see a caution issued to one of the players surrounding him as he deliberated with his team - though that's coming from the context that I've now been officiating with a diluted version of the UEFA captain's policy for nearly 6 months.

I do agree that the back to back penalty shouts for the handball by Woolfenden and potential foul by Morsy were correctly left. In my opinion the ball ricochets a lot from close and unexpected angles onto Woolfenden's arm, and that the Morsy challenge I feel definitely is closer to a coming together than a foul.

Looking at the first penalty incident, something I feel has been left aside is that Bond plays an excellent advantage to Fulham in the build up to it. Observing from the live angle on the replay it is very clearly a trip and a penalty, however as others have rightly said it looks like his view is obscured, and I fully agree that Wilson should be penalised for his reaction. You can see his teammates shove him away knowing he's likely to get himself in trouble for that. The reaction of Silva isn't shown in the highlights but from talking to a colleague of mine who did watch the match live I'm reliably informed as others have noted he's lucky to have escaped without a sanction as well.

2nd penalty I agree clear cut and happy to see Bond give it live. Again has a load of Fulham players running towards him in the aftermath.

Good call on the penalty awarded for the foul by Davis on Jimenez, looks like AR2 provides some input over the headset on this incident too. Certainly would've had a much clearer view of it than Bond.

Can't comment too much on the overall performance as said but to echo what others have said I do worry about the precedent being set in the PL at the moment for allowing a high level of mobbing by players, abuse by players and team officials and the impact it's going to have at grassroots in England and further afield. Certainly by my count there's at least 3 times in this match Bond has players running at him to surround him from distance.

Another cause for concern is that Wilson escaped a sanction for calling Bond a f****ing cheat, considering the fuss that was made I believe it was last season when Anthony Taylor dismissed Dunk for using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or action(s) being the first such dismissal in a number of years in the PL I worry that officials are being too hands off dealing with it. I can understand the perspective of it being considered harsh in some circles after getting a KMI wrong but as I think we can all agree it shouldn't leave an open door for players or team officials to have free reign to abuse match officials if they feel aggrieved by a decision.

Watched the game live last night and have to say I thought Mr. Harrington did well for himself. As others have mentioned my only point of contention, despite my liking for the red half of Manchester, would be that Bruno didn't receive a 2nd caution for dissent immediately after his 1st caution. The caution he received was well warranted for either SPA or LoR (take your pick) - was quite a petulant challenge and I personally felt his conduct immediately after was unacceptable. However, I do accept that 2nd cautions of that nature are rare at this level.

I was pleased to see that when the opportunity to issue the 2nd caution emerged that Mr. Harrington took the opportunity with confidence and conviction, the decision wasn't contested, and while I do understand the perspective of looking for a straight red for serious foul play certainly in my book anyway I was happy with a caution for that challenge, I felt the initial contact up high was glancing with the majority of the force directed onto the foot of Bruno's opponent and definitely didn't feel the challenge endangered the safety.

I must also express my apologies to Mr. Cann who, even though at times during the game gave me cause for concern that he may have struggled to keep up with the offside line, did again seem to get all his decisions correct. As someone mentioned previously, world class, and someone who I do hope when he does inevitably decide to hang up the flag goes into a coaching role within the PGMOL.

Nothing of note for me for the remainder of the officials who I thought did well