The story so far!

[OldBanksy]

Jatta clearly offside. DC clearly handles.

[LincsPie]

Jatta clearly offside. DC clearly handles.

And with JJ admitting his goal was a fluke and DC's other goal taking a wicked deflection we'd better petition the EFL to hand the points over to Grimsby then.

4-1, 3 pts, many happy Pies. Let it go, it was nearly a week ago. If we get the rub of the green, so be it.

[LaxtonLad]

There is no ball to hand excuse for an attacking player
"Defending players are subject to all the previously discussed laws, attacking players are not. Instead, the rule is very simple for an attacking player — if the ball strikes a goal scorer's arm while in the midst of a goal scoring move, regardless of arm position, intent, or any other qualifiers, a goal shall be chalked off."
As Pedro says, about time we got the benefit of some bad decisions. Jatta looks offside (but was probably level with the player behind him immediately after the ball was kicked so if the linesman couldn't see?) And DC handled the ball after it came off his chest (and was it handball when he controlled the ball onto his chest?) Anyway as mentioned, we won! YouPies.

Is that an accurate quote "...chalked off...?

[LaxtonLad]

Jatta clearly offside. DC clearly handles.

That's not what the scoreline says, yet you say they are clear - both of them clear!

[OchPie]

There is no ball to hand excuse for an attacking player
"Defending players are subject to all the previously discussed laws, attacking players are not. Instead, the rule is very simple for an attacking player — if the ball strikes a goal scorer's arm while in the midst of a goal scoring move, regardless of arm position, intent, or any other qualifiers, a goal shall be chalked off."

There is no excuse no, but - everything else being equal - if there are mitigations and no condemning actions (and arm to ball would be a condemning action, while deflecting from body to arm is a clear mitigating action), you can see why the ref might hesitate.

And the quoted text goes beyond what the rules say, which is a handball offence is committed and the goal disallowed if a player:

scores in the opponents’ goal immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

The laws give no guidance as to what "immediately" means, and referees seem to differ as to whether it's the next action, all part of one specific ongoing action, or as long as the attacker has the ball somewhere vaguely threatening. I think under the third interpretation it's definitely handball, under the second might be, and under the first I don't think so - he's facing away from goal at the moment the ball hits his arm.

Seems like refs generally hate the vagueness of several parts of the HB rule.

[marky]

We got lucky with both goals but there's nothing that can be done now so we need to take the points and move on.

[SmiffyPie]

Is that an accurate quote "...chalked off...?

Yes, from the page I got the information from.
This from the FA Law 12 (but boring).
HANDLING THE BALL

For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence.

It is an offence if a player:

deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the player’s body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
scores in the opponents' goal:
directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental

The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. However, if the offence is playing the ball a second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offence stops a promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity.

[i961pie]

If the scoreline was reversed, i.e. we had lost 1-4, some would be complaining how crap we were, letting in 4 goals.

And the ref would have been rubbish.