@watfly, not exactly. In this video, the trainer introduces a concept of "taking a risk," in order to determine the intent of the player. That's all. Because the Referee can only determine the intent of the player through circumstantial evidence, the trainer's advice is that we should give weight to taking an unusual risk (i.e. slide tackle in the box) in determining whether the player's handling of the ball was deliberate. Taking a risk doesn't overturn a determination of "unintentional." We already take into account whether the hands/arms are in an unnatural position (i.e. player making himself bigger) and the movement of hand to ball. The taking a risk concept is simply an extension of these considerations in that a player undertakes a risky move (red flag) that has an "intended" secondary effect of making the player bigger and increasing the chance of the ball hitting the players hand/arm through the use of his arms as part of the risky move. The trainer's advice is we should give great weight to the possibility that handling was intentional.
With regard to "youth" players the considerations are more liberal than high level pros. At the end of the day, handling requires a "deliberate" handling of the ball. The considerations of hand to ball, unnatural position, time to react, etc. are much more liberal when the player is 10 v 14 v 20 because the level of player must be taken into account in determining intent. My standard tightens up as we work from a 14 year old Rec v. 14 year old Flight 3 v. 14 year old USSDA.
Was the handling deliberate? Run through the considerations in .9542 seconds to figure it out.
