Hand Ball Rule

Definitelynotanotherref said:
It meets the criteria for a foul in the laws that begins with the word "usually". The law was never meant to be applied in a black and white fashion like that. The only law that actually matters is section 1: was it deliberate. Its only confusing to you because it would be easier to understand if it was black and white, but its not. The referee has to look at all the situations leading up to the ball hitting the hand above the head. I can personally think of several situations where I would not call a pk handball even if it hits someone's hand above their head. and all of those would be "unusual". It is my prerogative because I am the only unbiased person on the field that tries to call a fair game, and if in my opinion, a pk for a ball to hand above the head is unfair, then I won't call it.

I don't understand what is so special about handball. Everyone understands the gray area that can go into calling and not calling fouls, giving and not giving cards, etc. But everyone seems to want handball to be called like offside.

Get over it, the only reason the handball rule existed in the first place was to make soccer a game played with the feet, otherwise it would just turn into rugby. Everything else is just nitpicking because the original purpose of the law has already been met. And I'm okay with nitpicking because we need to draw fuzzy lines somewhere. I think Handling should just be a IFK unless its a DOGSO personally, but I just call it the way the law intends.
Click to expand...

You should run for office.

Look, my original point to the OP was that your not going to find anything in the LOTG that would explain why "play was directed to continue" after a ball hits an extended arm. The reason being because the laws, particularly handball, are highly subjective. You've proved that point repeatedly. Yes, terms like usually, game management, or the concepts of ref's prerogative and the ref's sense of fairness are some of the reasons that make it highly subjective. The new rules (although I agree with you that there not so much new, but a "codification" of ideas already implemented by some refs) have only served to increase that subjectivity, particularly where it appears that a ref ignores them to apply his personal sense of fairness. Maybe I'm jaded by American sport officiating, but when you allow officials to materially deviate from the rules in favor of the refs own personal concept of fairness you're going to get some really controversial results. Its nothing to get over, its just the unfortunate evolution of the modern game.
 
So, to check my understanding - If a ball is kicked in the middle of the field (so not leading to an immediate goal scoring opportunity) and hits the forearm of an opposing player nearby (not a deliberate contact) and results in a change of possession, it is not a handball?
 
SDMama said:
So, to check my understanding - If a ball is kicked in the middle of the field (so not leading to an immediate goal scoring opportunity) and hits the forearm of an opposing player nearby (not a deliberate contact) and results in a change of possession, it is not a handball?
Click to expand...

Yes, as the LOTG are written its not a foul as long as it doesn't lead to a goal or a goal scoring opportunity.
 
watfly said:
Yes, as the LOTG are written its not a foul as long as it doesn't lead to a goal or a goal scoring opportunity.
Click to expand...
Ah. This is helpful to know. We always get upset if there is a handball that seems to give the offending player’s team (read: the OTHER team ;P) some advantage, even when it is inadvertent and doesn’t lead to a goal. But I guess it’s just part of the game and isn’t a foul as long as there is no goal scoring opportunity that results.

It seems to me that most of the time, contact with the hand/arm/etc. is accidental, so most times there would be no foul called (at least at the ages I’m watching). (I apologize to all the referees that called this correctly while we mumbled to ourselves on the sidelines! ... We usually aren’t too bad, but imagine it must get annoying.)

Thanks to everyone for helping to clarify my understanding!
 
For even more confusion (and apparently there's a big split developing for how the EPL is calling handballs v. how it's being called on the continent). IFAB is gonna have to issue a clarification of the new rules if even the so-called experts can't understand it.


 
Grace T. said:
Some in the Premier League and media are pushing back on the new handball rule....
Click to expand...
Really no surprise at all. Didn't take a rockets scientist to know that adding the completely subjective and vague "unnaturally bigger" clause would FUBAR the game. I'm so tired of these calls and watching defenders play with their arms behind their backs in the box.

How hard is this?

Did the player stick their arm out to block the ball?
Did the player reach out and touch the ball?
Did the player deliberately leave their arm out in way of the ball, or did the player have sufficient time and space to get their arm out of the way of the ball?

If the answer to any of those questions is yes, than its a handball, otherwise, no handball. It's not that complicated.

I'm ok with not allowing a non-deliberate handball to lead directly to a goal.
 
Even the manager of the team that benefited from the penalty said this
 

Attachments

  • SmartSelect_20200927-202745_Instagram_854339477050340.jpg
    SmartSelect_20200927-202745_Instagram_854339477050340.jpg
    443.7 KB · Views: 6
watfly said:
Did the player stick their arm out to block the ball?
Did the player reach out and touch the ball?
Did the player deliberately leave their arm out in way of the ball, or did the player have sufficient time and space to get their arm out of the way of the ball?
Click to expand...

The referee responses to those requires his opinions.

I'm ok with not allowing a non-deliberate handball to lead directly to a goal.
Click to expand...

Hypocrisy. Any non-deliberate handball (however that is decided in the referee's head) should be treated the same as a bounce off the player's butt.
 
Dier's handball was effectively highway robbery, since the header was going away from goal, Dier had his back turned, was steadying himself in the air from a push, and couldn't see the ball coming to bring his arms down even if he tried. If VAR is going to be used this way for handballs, then VAR should also be used to check contact and issue immediate simulation yellows or reds.
 
notintheface said:
Dier's handball was effectively highway robbery, since the header was going away from goal, Dier had his back turned, was steadying himself in the air from a push, and couldn't see the ball coming to bring his arms down even if he tried. If VAR is going to be used this way for handballs, then VAR should also be used to check contact and issue immediate simulation yellows or reds.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't the VAR. The problem (as with the goalkeeper leaving his line rule on a PK) is the rule itself, not the review.
 
Grace T. said:
The problem isn't the VAR. The problem (as with the goalkeeper leaving his line rule on a PK) is the rule itself, not the review.
Click to expand...

The problem is also the application of VAR. The on-field ref didn't originally call the handball-- he was summoned over to the replay station by VAR.

I watched the VAR machinations in the build-up, including the minute or so where VAR also did the "is the guy's armpit offside on the free kick" little dance, which is also complete crap. Five minutes before this atrocity of a call, there was another sequence of events where Newcastle had a player slipped in behind who was clearly offside, the assistant ref doesn't raise his flag because of the VAR rule, and there's a sliding tackle that nearly causes an injury.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top