The Ref Stop

Handball conundrum

one

RefChat Addict
This has already been discussed in a different thread in a different form but here is a clear-cut question.

A defender (not keeper) standing on his own goal line between the posts clears the ball by kicking it towards the half way line. The ball travels 3 meters, accidentally hits and attackers arm and bounces directly back towards the defenders's goal. The defender deliberately stops the ball from entering goal with an outstretched hand and then clears it. What is your decision?
 
The Ref Stop
Although law says the attacking player has to 'gain possession/control', we know that the intention of the law (from it's application in professional football) is that any touch of an attacker's hand just before they score is an offence.

Therefore I would give a defensive free-kick, no sanction.
 
Can't be DOG because the ball couldn't score.

As the Law is currently written, can't be an offense on the attacker as it did not score nor create a goal scoring opportunity.

So defender deliberately handled, resulting in a PK. Not SPA, as there was not a promising attack as there was no ability, so the only caution option would be a disrespect for the game.

So the letter of the law is PK, with an arguable caution.

SOTG, is another matter. The spirit of the game, as embodied in the new attacker HB law would suggest that getting a PK from the handling by an attacker is inappropriate, and would suggest that the HB should be called against the attacker, even though it doesn't meet the literal language of the law change. And we know that language has been expanded by interpretation from how it was literally written, so this wouldn't be much of an extension.

That's the philosophical approach. In the real world? I think I'd probably call the attacker for handling and would probably not get any grief.
 
This has already been discussed in a different thread in a different form but here is a clear-cut question.

A defender (not keeper) standing on his own goal line between the posts clears the ball by kicking it towards the half way line. The ball travels 3 meters, accidentally hits and attackers arm and bounces directly back towards the defenders's goal. The defender deliberately stops the ball from entering goal with an outstretched hand and then clears it. What is your decision?

It would be an offence to score from a handball even if not deliberate, so if the defender had left it the goal would not stand. I'd give the defensive free kick because the handball by the defender has not prevented a legal goal scoring opportunity.
 
I think @socal lurker has nailed this one. The analogy I would draw would be with an IFK that was going directly into the goal before a defender on the line decides to deliberately handball it and succeeds in stopping it. In law, PK but no sanction. Reality is that (in both cases), defender should simply let the ball go in the goal as it will not count. Obviously this relies on the defender being switched on .... but in the OP, to be fair he was 'switched on' enough to make a deliberate choice to handle the ball. It's just a bad, if understandable choice!
 
Can't be DOG because the ball couldn't score.
Agreed

As the Law is currently written, can't be an offense on the attacker as it did not score nor create a goal scoring opportunity.
Not that simple. How about (creating a penalty = create a goal scoring opportunity)?

Although law says the attacking player has to 'gain possession/control', we know that the intention of the law (from it's application in professional football) is that any touch of an attacker's hand just before they score is an offence.

Therefore I would give a defensive free-kick, no sanction.
But the attacker(s) didn't score. (also see "how about" above.
 
Not that simple. How about (creating a penalty = create a goal scoring opportunity)?


.
I don't think the attacking handball 'creates' the penalty. That is caused by the defender choosing to deliberately handle the ball on the line when he has nothing to gain (and plenty to lose) by so doing ......
 
Agreed


Not that simple. How about (creating a penalty = create a goal scoring opportunity)?


But the attacker(s) didn't score. (also see "how about" above.
It's a match-control decision, anything goes!
 
Safe refereeing. Defensive FK all day. Unlikely the players would be interested in the rules paradox

I've just done a Laws of the Game quiz on my team. Simple stuff - can you score an own goal from kick off, can you pull the corner flag to take a corner, what is the restart for GK handling outside his area... Average score was 50%. This tells me one thing - players don't know the Laws.

So unless you're reffing two teams comprising of players who are also qualified refs (!) go safe.
 
That's a post of two halves. First half speaks of truth. Second half throws next week's ref under the bus.

EDIT: Just to make sure i get the context right, it makes sense when the law is not clear, football expects and all that. But when the law is clear (score from kick-off, keeper handling etc) go what the law says.
 
Last edited:
That's a post of two halves. First half speaks of truth. Second half throws next week's ref under the bus.

EDIT: Just to make sure i get the context right, it makes sense when the law is not clear, football expects and all that. But when the law is clear (score from kick-off, keeper handling etc) go what the law says.

Ah apologies - for clarity my flippant 'go safe' is purely in regards the OP.
My point is simply that a lot of players won't know the intricacies of Law nor start having a philosophical debate on the potential caution of the OP.

Most refs on this site are presumably here to try to make themselves better by asking questions and seeking advice. I am certainly not saying 'ignore the Laws because no one else knows them'. Indeed I qualified because I want to know as much as I can and back up my decisions on the FOP.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Back
Top