Peterhead seek handball clarification from Scottish FA after Raith Rovers cup defeat

The incident during Saturday's cup tie which has enraged Peterhead (pic: Duncan Brown)
The incident during Saturday's cup tie which has enraged Peterhead (pic: Duncan Brown)

Peterhead have asked the Scottish FA's refereeing department to clarify what constitutes a handball offence following their Scottish Cup exit at Raith Rovers.

Blue Toon boss Jim McInally was angry that his side had been denied a penalty after the ball seemed to strike Raith Rovers defender Kyle Benedictus on the arm.

READ MORE: Jim McInally - We are out of the cup due to refereeing decisions
McInally insisted Ben Armour's shot was going in until it was blocked by Benedictus and said refereeing decisions by Stephen Reid had cost Peterhead a place in the last 32 of the tournament.

Now, having studied a photo of the incident, Peterhead have called on Scottish football's ruling body to explain exactly what constitutes a handball offence in the penalty area by a defending team.

In a statement on the club website, Peterhead say they were told at the start of the season that no intent was required for a defensive side to be penalised with a penalty.

A club spokesperson continued: “Handball incidents seem to be in vogue at the moment. Aberdeen had a penalty appeal turned down at St Johnstone and we had one turned down at Stark’s Park and there have been plenty of other incidents as well.”

“There seems to be a lot of confusion over how the rules are being interpreted. We were told one thing at a meeting at the start of the season however there were two incidents at the weekend where penalties were not given in situations where we believed they should be.”

“We have sent down our picture which shows the ball against the arm of the Raith player. It would be good for everyone to understand why a penalty was not awarded in that instance and clarification over what is and what is not going to be penalised going forward would be welcome.”