On this weeks TSNFC podcast we spent a long time discussing the handball decision that effectively ended Vancouver Whitecaps season. Discount Yeezy Store . Much has been said and written about whether or not World Cup referee Mark Geiger made the right call to penalize Kendall Waston in last weeks playoff match at Dallas, with many differing opinions on the matter. There doesnt seem to be a consensus, although Geigers boss - referees chief Peter Walton - said it was the correct decision and a standard call. As a veteran Premier League referee who now runs the Professional Referees Organization in North America, Waltons opinion should be respected, but the controversy surrounding the decision - and many other handball decisions we see all over the world each week - could easily be avoided if there were a change to the law. In my view, there are two things wrong with the current law. Firstly, the punishment doesnt fairly reflect the size of the crime. Secondly, there is too much room for interpretation of the referee which makes consistency of decisions almost impossible. Here are the main points of the current FIFA Law: Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm. The referee must take the following into consideration: ? the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) ? the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) ? the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement Deliberate - done consciously and intentionally I dont think Kendall Waston made a conscious and intentional decision to handle the ball inside the penalty area in the last 10 minutes of a playoff match. In my mind it was a momentary lapse in concentration from the towering defender rather than a deliberate act. In relation to this law, it seems deliberate can also mean a player didnt react quickly enough to move his hand/arm out of the way of the ball. But the fact the law allows such ambiguity means officials are in the spotlight more than necessary whether or not they get the decision right. There must be a better way. Although video replays will certainly assist officials decision making in other areas, in the instance of Waston it wouldnt have made much difference because even with review, the decision would have been made depending on the officials interpretation of the law. One suggestion I have seen is to award a penalty anytime the ball hits a hand or arm inside the area whether it is intentional or not. A clear rule - it doesnt matter how it happens, if the ball strikes the hand, it is a penalty. Theres very little room for argument and interpretation there, but I think it would lead to far too many penalties and also an excessive number of game changing moments. Again, the punishment wouldnt match the offence. New Law So how about this. In order to provide clarity, I would be in favour of a rule change along the following lines: Anytime a player makes contact with the ball inside the penalty area with his hand or arm, an indirect free kick will be given. There is no room for interpretation - if it hits the arm or hand whether deliberate or not, it is an indirect free kick. There is one exception. If a player handles the ball to prevent a goal or an obvious goal scoring opportunity, a penalty is given. With this rule applied, Kendall Wastons handball would have been penalized with an indirect free kick, still giving the opposing team the benefit of a set piece close to goal but eliminating the need for a referee to award a penalty for an incident that was not going to end in a goal. For me, that far better reflects the size of the infringement and also would remove much of the debate surrounding penalty kicks awarded for handball. Im not na?ve enough to expect that changing the law would eliminate all problems. Im sure in some instances there would still be controversy and debate surrounding what is or isnt an obvious goal scoring opportunity. But I believe it would drastically decrease the amount of times a game is decided by a referees decision and therefore lead to more post-game talk about players instead of officiating – and that can only be a good thing. Clearance Yeezy For Sale . Both the top-seeded Djokovic and sixth-seeded Fish took relatively easy paths, with the Serb winning when opponent Jo-Wilfried Tsonga retired in the second set with a sore arm and Fish dominating Janko Tipsarevic in two quick sets. Wholesale Yeezy China . -- Seattle Seahawks wide receiver Sidney Rice tweeted an apparent goodbye after a report about his pending release. https://www.yeezychina.us/ . Hes still nowhere close to throwing yet. The four-time MVP was in good spirits when he made his first public appearance on the field since having neck surgery Sept.LAS VEGAS, Nev. - A race for a gold medal could bring lots of green for gamblers in Nevada if state officials approve requests from sports books and a casino owner to allow wagering on Olympic events.The Nevada Gaming Control Board is hosting a workshop Thursday to consider the proposal. A final decision is expected in late February.Along with the Olympics, sports books want a change in the law that could allow bets on nonsporting events such as the Academy Awards, the most valuable player in Major League Baseball, or even American Idol.The state currently bars casinos from accepting wagers on events such as the Oscars in which the outcome is known before it is officially disclosed.Olympic betting has been frowned on because the most prestigious sporting event in the world involved amateur athletes and, in some cases, decisions made by judges. But that thinking is changing as more professional athletes compete.International sports books in Great Britain and Ireland, and offshore Internet sites already allow such bets. Nevada casinos want to do the same.Anytime you can increase the amount of betting options to customers is a good thing, said Jason Simbol, vice-president of risk management for CG Technology, which operates sports books at The Cosmopolitan, Hard Rock Hotel, Tropicana, Venetian and Palms casinos.The changes in Nevada regulations were requested by South Point casinoo owner Gaughan South LLC and Las Vegas-area sports books. Fake Yeezy Online. The South Point proposal pointed to the dream team of U.S. professional basketball players in the 1990s as an indication that more pros are competing for Olympic gold.What about Olympic events that require a judges subjective score?South Point officials said such events would be no different than wagering on a boxing match or Ultimate Fighting Championship fight in which winners can sometimes be determined by judges.I think the time was right, A.G. Burnett, chair of the Nevada Gaming Control Board, said about the proposals to expand betting.Ahead of the Winter Olympics in Sochi, the Nevada board announced it had signed an agreement with the International Olympic Committee to share information on Olympic betting allowed elsewhere as a way to protect against illegal wagering activity.Burnett said that has paved the way for Nevada to consider Olympic betting.Regulators have gotten similar requests in the past. One sports book wanted to allow bets on basketball, soccer and tennis during the 2012 Olympics in London but the proposal was denied, said Karl Bennison, chief of the gambling boards enforcement division.Last year, regulators approved wagers for Horse of the Year but requests involving other possible wagers were rejected because there was no way to provide the state with verifiable results. ' ' '