The rule of hands leaves no room for doubt in Muniain’s action

Many controversies are raised about the hand of holy before the purpose of Inaki Williams which was finally repealed by Gil Manzano after examining the VAR. First we need to start with rule 12 International Board currently in force and which clarifies that “to clearly identify violations by hand, the upper limit of the arm corresponds to the lower point of the armpit”. Based on the explanation, it seems clear that the player from Athletic Club he touched the ball with his forearm, or a little higher, but it was his hand.

And then there is also an explanation about when contacts are or are not. The same rule clarifies that “not all contact with the ball with the hand or arm is an offence”. And the following situations are considered a violation: “

1.-Voluntarily touch the ball with the hand or arm, for example, making a movement in the direction of the ball with these parts of the body;

2.– Catch the ball with the hand or arm when the hand or arm is positioned unnaturally and causes the body to take more space. A player shall be considered to have unnaturally made his body occupy more space when the position of his hand or arm is not a consequence of the movement of his body in that particular action or cannot be accommodated by such movement. By placing his hand or arm in such a position, the player risks the ball hitting that part of his body and this is an offence.”

The circle of CTA of the current season issued by the refereeing establishment also says that it will be a hand: “When a player voluntarily touches the ball with his hand or arm, for example, making a movement in the direction of the ball”.

And about the hand in an unnatural position: “Player who occupies a larger space with his arm/hand, takes a risk and, as a result, cuts off the opponent’s pass, a shot at the goal, etc. This type of situation covers cases where:

– The hand or arm is clearly separated and away from the body.

– The hand or arm is clearly separated above the shoulder.”

So there is no doubt that it is considered as a hand according to the current regulations of IFAB and that rules Spanish football. in the act of holy, the act itself favors the subsequent attack. In addition, the action was continued within the last goal of the Basque club player; which allows for VAR can act.

And finally there is the intervention of VAR a matter stated in the arbitration circular as follows:

“The “line of intervention” of VAR It should be high, so that, in case of doubt about the intervention or not recommending the review to the arbitrator, the decision is not to do it. He RFEF’s Technical Committee of Referees thus complying with IFAB recommendations and guidelines.” The referee of VAR Gonzalez Gonzalez He understood that this was a clear and transparent play, not a gray action, and this explains his intervention; the field referee is urged to check the monitor and being Gil Manzano to make the final decision because the field referee has the final decision. According to sources consulted by MDthe play is perfectly arbitrary from VAR and in the final decision of Gil Manzano. It was also a difficult game to see live, which explains why the international referee from Extremadura did not initially indicate anything here.