Interesting one today - handball ?

[jnwright71]

Had a interesting one today.

Green team attacking and win a corner.

Corner comes in and purple defender, who has arms by their side, moves arms slightly away from the body as ball reaches them. The ball hits an arm and deflects away from the strikers in the goal area. In my opinion, the movement was instinctive but made the body bigger and I awarded a handball and hence penalty, but no caution as I wasn’t convinced it was deliberate.

The defender was apoplectic and adamant the arms were in a natural position (they would be though). Despite having a clear and unrestricted view of the corner coming in, no attempt was made to move the arms away from the ball (I.e. to put them behind the back).

I’d welcome thoughts on whether I got this right, but appreciate it is probably a case of YHTBT

 

[bester]

Why do you think a player should be expected to make his body unnaturally smaller? ie put his arms behind his back

 

[Runner Ref]

Always hard to comment on circumstances in which we weren’t there for. But players don’t need to move their arms out of the way, as long as where they are can be deemed natural for that action. If anything, putting them behind their back is the most unnatural movement.

 

[jnwright71]

Thanks folks.

I’m not suggesting that defenders need to make the body smaller, I’m just pointing out the arm movement wasn’t away from the ball. Natural position is always difficult to assess. The player was standing still and the arms were clearly away from the body, then they moved as the ball came towards the player.

I’ve played a lot of football, watched a lot of football and ref’ed for a bit and IMO moving arms so they are closer to the body or even behind the back is something defenders often now do if they feel there is a risk that a ball will hit the arm and it could be classed as the arm having made the body unnaturally bigger.

Always a difficult one …

 

[Redref34]

From your description potentially could have gone either way.

My general starting point for handball based on my interpretation of the law at the moment is, it has to be a pretty unnatural position before I’m even considering giving it, especially in the penalty area. That said, a movement towards the ball with a hand obviously forms part of my decision.

 

[jnwright71]

From your description potentially could have gone either way.

My general starting point for handball based on my interpretation of the law at the moment is, it has to be a pretty unnatural position before I’m even considering giving it, especially in the penalty area. That said, a movement towards the ball with a hand obviously forms part of my decision.

Thanks and I agree, so rarely give a handball offence unless it is clearly deliberate or the body shape is clearly and obviously unnaturally bigger. Players always call for a decision every time the ball touches a hand but I have a pretty high bar. However, sometimes your inner instinct screams YES, rather than the more regular NO, and that was what happened today.

Probably a YHTBH situation and hey, can’t always get every decision correct, despite best efforts.

 

[Redref34]

Handball, for me personally, is one of the most difficult aspects I find in football at the moment. I am quite black and white as it is anyway so as you can imagine this plays with my OCD!

My go to for handball explanations on the pitch is exactly how you described.. lads it has to be pretty obvious and an unnatural position for me to give a handball today and you will get that consistently with me on the pitch anywhere end of conversation.

That said, dog and duck Sunday league game at the weekend and an awful missed clearance that then rebounded off of his hand so far it nearly went in the goal from the halfway line - I gave that one despite it being completely accidental

 

[RustyRef]

Players don't have to put their arms behind their back to avoid the ball hitting them. As a referee all you need to determine is was the arm in an acceptable position for the footballing action being performed.

 

[one]

Handball is one of those things, no matter how prescriptive you make the wording in law, it will never be consistent in the way it is given or not given in game situations. It is also one of those things, no matter how well you describe a non-obvious case, no one can give 'their' true opinion, unless they actually see it.

In the OP case, agree that players should not have to put their arm behind their back. However I am concerned that, even if the arm was in a natural position by their side, if the player has ample time to avoid ball-hand contact, should that not be consider deliberate handball?

When a player has ample time, ball speed is reasonable enough to react to, and player has freedom of movement, my expectation is that the player moves the arm and body to make a legal play of the ball rather than allowing the ball to hit their arm, even if it is in a natural position.

 

[OIREF!]

Reminds me of an incident i saw in a local park game a few years back (as a spectator rather than referee). Defender jumped to block a shot with his arms tight by his sides but in doing so he clearly twisted his body around so that the block would be with an arm rather than torso. My immediate instinct was penalty which was also the decision of the referee.

 

[DavidObs]

Reminds me of an incident i saw in a local park game a few years back (as a spectator rather than referee). Defender jumped to block a shot with his arms tight by his sides but in doing so he clearly twisted his body around so that the block would be with an arm rather than torso. My immediate instinct was penalty which was also the decision of the referee.

Playing devils advocate, if an arm is outstretched above a player’s head or outstretched from the side of the body - if not done, the ball would travel in its original trajectory. In your scenario, if the player didn’t have his arm to his side when he turned, would the ball have hit his side/ribs, or travelled in its original trajectory?

 

[Archer]

If you saw it and interpreted it as such, then it’s a penalty. Similar to the post above about the guy turning side on.

Doesn’t sound like either should be penalised, but if you can justify it in Law then give ‘em.

 

[socal lurker]

late to the game, but a few thoughts--I don't think the OP provides enough info to really have n opinion

If, as @one reads it, the player had time to move his arm out of the way and chose not to, then natural position has nothing to do with it--the player deliberately let the ball hit is arm and that has been a HB since the beginning of time.

If the player was moving and jostling and the arm was in a natural position and he wasn't able to avoid contact, then it is nothing.

I really have trouble with the description of moving the arm to the ball. I think the instinctive exemption from deliberate is about actions such as protecting oneself from fast moving ball towards the face, not an instinct to block the ball with the arm. As I picture that piece of the description, it seems a standard deliberate HB.