A&H

Another Handball Question

NOVARef

Active Member
So my son was in a scrimmage this weekend and his coach, who I would consider a friend, was reffing the game. A very common play...an attacker plays a through ball or hard pass near the defender. The defender attempts to intercept the hard pass, the ball hits his foot, and pops right up and catches him on his outstretched arm. His arm was outstretched as he was trying to keep his balance during the interception of the pass. everyone yells, "handball". The ref/coach/friend blows the play dead and calls a handball. The ref was about 5 yards from me and I said, "Hey John, that wasn't a handball." Everyone near me thought I was CRAZY! Even John was like...what are you talking about? I said...we'll talk after...I didn't want to continue because I didn't want to cause any more of a scene because every within earshot was staring at me like I had three heads. After the game I sent John this video and asked him to watch from minute 2:30.

After watching the video he agreed that it's not a handball under the new rules, but didn't like it. I sent the video to two of my referee "mentors" as I'm a new referee (only certified since August) and they said it was a handball and then I sent them the video and said...I don't care, I'm still calling a handball.

So again the play...the ball to arm was 100% unintentional. The arm was away from the body for sure. The ball hit his foot and immediately popped up and hit his arm.

Thoughts? Thanks!
 
The Referee Store
Since when those conditions become hard and fast rules? What happens to usually and not usually and the exceptions and the exceptions to the exceptions?
 
I've been told by my RDO to never give a handball if it is a result of a miskick / something similar (from the same player).

A case to look at was Otamendi in the world cup. My RDO showed us it and basicly he tries to head it away and ends up unintentionally heading it off his arm / hand.

RDO made it quite clear to never give handball in this situation.
 
I sent them the video and said...I don't care, I'm still calling a handball.

If it is as you say, then that annoys me.

I hope they had the sense to elaborate further on their decision making, that is the purpose of mentoring IMO. To give you some perspective on how they come to that decision, factors you may have overlooked etc, that would help you in your growth as a referee.

With the kicking the ball to hand situations as you described, I'd say the majority of them will be 'play on' incidents, but there is scope to give it if you feel that a player was waving his arms about trying to block the ball in the process, or if they move their hand towards it (as unlikely as it is).


I've been told by my RDO to never give a handball if it is a result of a miskick / something similar (from the same player).

Yes, I think common sense comes into it really. Miskicks, close range hits etc, that sort of thing is what we're supposed to give leeway on.
 
If it is as you say, then that annoys me.

I hope they had the sense to elaborate further on their decision making, that is the purpose of mentoring IMO. To give you some perspective on how they come to that decision, factors you may have overlooked etc, that would help you in your growth as a referee.

With the kicking the ball to hand situations as you described, I'd say the majority of them will be 'play on' incidents, but there is scope to give it if you feel that a player was waving his arms about trying to block the ball in the process, or if they move their hand towards it (as unlikely as it is).




Yes, I think common sense comes into it really. Miskicks, close range hits etc, that sort of thing is what we're supposed to give leeway on.
One of the "mentors" said...defenders need to know not to keep their arms out.
 
Keep in mind that knowledge of the LOTG between RefChat Members, far exceeds that of the general community of referees (and indeed some mentors and occasionally, observers)
 
Since when those conditions become hard and fast rules? What happens to usually and not usually and the exceptions and the exceptions to the exceptions?
Thought the same thing. I guess he's using a sort of shorthand way of speaking but I agree that anyone watching this video might well be influenced into thinking that these are hard and fast criteria when they're actually not.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: one
What would the exceptions be in this situation? All deliberate handballs are handballs. This was not deliberate. Any handball that causes a goal or a goal scoring opportunity is a handball. This is definitely not that. Can you expand on what else needs to be considered in these situations? Thanks
 
What would the exceptions be in this situation? All deliberate handballs are handballs. This was not deliberate. Any handball that causes a goal or a goal scoring opportunity is a handball. This is definitely not that. Can you expand on what else needs to be considered in these situations? Thanks

Law 12 has an additional list of what usually is and usually is not a handball offense. There are competing views as to whether those lists are (A) to help referees discern what "deliberate" means with respect to handball offenses, or (B) additional handball offenses that are not necessarily deliberate.
 
Law 12 has an additional list of what usually is and usually is not a handball offense. There are competing views as to whether those lists are (A) to help referees discern what "deliberate" means with respect to handball offenses, or (B) additional handball offenses that are not necessarily deliberate.
OK, So Law 12 is clear that any deliberate hand ball is an offence and any handball that scores a goal or a goal scoring chance is an offence. These two instances are always a hand ball. Then it says...directly underneath these two items that...It is usually an offence, if a player...touches the ball with their hand/arm when the hand has made their body unnaturally bigger. Then it says...except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player's hand/arm directly from the player's own head or body (including the foot).

So this is massively confusing. In my example, the Law basically says that it's usually an offence if it hits their arm when it has made the body unnaturally bigger. So in my case, the ball hit the defenders outstretched arm so this should USUALLY be an offence. Then it says, EXCEPT for this and some other offences. it is NOT USUALLY and offence if the ball touches a player's hand/arm directly from [own foot], which is my case.

Can someone make sense of this? It seemed to me like it was originally NOT a handball because of the exception, but now reading it again, I'm not sure the Exception applies. But if the exception does not apply in this case, when would it apply? So it must apply.

I'm very confused. Thank you for your thoughts in advance.
 
OK, So Law 12 is clear that any deliberate hand ball is an offence and any handball that scores a goal or a goal scoring chance is an offence. These two instances are always a hand ball. Then it says...directly underneath these two items that...It is usually an offence, if a player...touches the ball with their hand/arm when the hand has made their body unnaturally bigger. Then it says...except for the above offences, it is not usually an offence if the ball touches a player's hand/arm directly from the player's own head or body (including the foot).

So this is massively confusing. In my example, the Law basically says that it's usually an offence if it hits their arm when it has made the body unnaturally bigger. So in my case, the ball hit the defenders outstretched arm so this should USUALLY be an offence. Then it says, EXCEPT for this and some other offences. it is NOT USUALLY and offence if the ball touches a player's hand/arm directly from [own foot], which is my case.

Can someone make sense of this? It seemed to me like it was originally NOT a handball because of the exception, but now reading it again, I'm not sure the Exception applies. But if the exception does not apply in this case, when would it apply? So it must apply.

I'm very confused. Thank you for your thoughts in advance.

I refer you to this which was commented above.

As someone once said, "play on, next..."
 
I refer you to this which was commented above.
If the correct answer is "Play On", Good! I agree. That's what I thought in the first place as I stated in my original post, but how do I get to that decision following the language in the law. And it seems like that decision isn't as obvious as I would have hoped it to be.
 
If the correct answer is "Play On", Good! I agree. That's what I thought in the first place as I stated in my original post, but how do I get to that decision following the language in the law. And it seems like that decision isn't as obvious as I would have hoped it to be.
Sorry, the reason I said it's not as obvious is because there are a few comments on this thread implying it's not that simple. At least that's how I read their comments.
 
Back
Top