A&H

Burnley penalty v Wolves

Status
Not open for further replies.
I thought the high foot of the attacker would be considered to the offence.

So in a Sunday parks game i would be expected to give penalties for non-deliberate ball to hand scenarios? How do i sell this with an innocent player?

If this is the new laws how have the FA sold this as right?
 
The Referee Store
The defender's arm came up way before the overhead kick motion started.

It's a penalty, I'm struggling to see any doubt on this. Perhaps under the old laws it wouldn't be, but under the current ones it is 100% a penalty.
 
i was expecting something way more controversial after reading this thread before seeing it

i think it's a nailed on pen
 
I thought the high foot of the attacker would be considered to the offence.

So in a Sunday parks game i would be expected to give penalties for non-deliberate ball to hand scenarios? How do i sell this with an innocent player?

If this is the new laws how have the FA sold this as right?
When was the last time you saw an actual genuine deliberate handball in the general English language sense of the word? Almost never I would guess - short of a defender trying to make a save, or a player thinking he heard a whistle that wasn't there, there's almost no reason for a player to actually deliberately use his hands.

But as the laws make fairly clear, that's not all we're expected to penalise for - and it actually hasn't been for years. If a player raises his arms above shoulder height, or puts them in a position where they make his silhouette "unnaturally bigger" and that ball hits them, we have to penalise for that. Those are deliberate actions that make it harder for an opponent to get the ball past them - under the current laws, that's enough, even if it doesn't meet the commonly used definition of "deliberate"
 
Last edited:
I need a practical session on this.
Their was a really good presentation with videos released around the time of the law changes. I thought it was on here but I can't find it.
Other than ghat it might be worth petitioning your RDO or County FA to hold a session, or get one of the elites in to hold a session.
 
The defender's arm came up way before the overhead kick motion started.

It's a penalty, I'm struggling to see any doubt on this. Perhaps under the old laws it wouldn't be, but under the current ones it is 100% a penalty.
I can reluctantly agree it's a penalty but not because of this reasoning. His motion having started does not negate the obvious dangerous play by the opponent. I'm still leaning towards an IFK however I can accept that if people say it's not dangerous play, it's a penalty. Yet that has very little to do with his arm being out there already
 
The movement of his body and arm was pre-determined way before he realised there was an overhead kick close to him.

Under current laws there can only be one outcome and that is penalty. I agree that he didn't mean to do it, I agree that it is harsh, but that it totally irrelevant under the current laws. I find it more than a bit worrying that lots of active referees don't understand the current handball law. For clarity, I don't agree with it, but that is a different thing altogether and we can only apply the current laws.

While this was akin to my first read (andy my post), I've completely changed my mind. If you only look at the very close time to the handling, I think this is what you get. But if you look at the lead-in, I think it changes. The defender is approaching to head the ball, and he has a good chance to get there--until the boot comes flying up in close proximity to him, and his hands react to the flying boot. I think PIADM (which occurs before the ball touches his arm) is the proper call here. But if you don't call PIADM (which I know is very rarely called at that level), then I agree that under the current *******ization of handling, it is a handball.
 
Making a decision about a handball in the area (penalty) is getting very hard now then.

Attacker accidentally handles the ball - no goal

A defender makes accidental contact - penalty.

An attacker puts his foot near a defenders head with the ball close by - play on.

Where is this all going?
 
When was the last time you saw an actual genuine deliberate handball in the general English language sense of the word? Almost never I would guess - short of a defender trying to make a save, or a player thinking he heard a whistle that wasn't there, there's almost no reason for a player to actually deliberately use his hands.

But as the laws make fairly clear, that's not all we're expected to penalise for - and it actually hasn't been for years. If a player raises his arms above shoulder height, or puts them in a position where they make his silhouette "unnaturally bigger" and that ball hits them, we have to penalise for that. Those are deliberate actions that make it harder for an opponent to get the ball past them - under the current laws, that's enough, even if it doesn't meet the commonly used definition of "deliberate"
Is there a video for guidance / instruction on this?
 
While this was akin to my first read (andy my post), I've completely changed my mind. If you only look at the very close time to the handling, I think this is what you get. But if you look at the lead-in, I think it changes. The defender is approaching to head the ball, and he has a good chance to get there--until the boot comes flying up in close proximity to him, and his hands react to the flying boot. I think PIADM (which occurs before the ball touches his arm) is the proper call here. But if you don't call PIADM (which I know is very rarely called at that level), then I agree that under the current *******ization of handling, it is a handball.

No referee at that level will penalise an overhead kick unless it actually makes contact with the opponent or the defender is screaming blue murder. Disallow a goal from an overhead kick and the referee will become centre of attention with everyone blaming him for not understanding the game, which is why they are hardly ever penalised.
 
No referee at that level will penalise an overhead kick unless it actually makes contact with the opponent or the defender is screaming blue murder. Disallow a goal from an overhead kick and the referee will become centre of attention with everyone blaming him for not understanding the game, which is why they are hardly ever penalised.
Would you give an IDFK for this - at your level?
 
Last edited:
The only time I've seen a referee give and idfk for an over head kick in the premier League was maybe 4 years ago and I don't think the referee got any more games that season.
 
If a player raises his arms above shoulder height, or puts them in a position where they make his silhouette "unnaturally bigger" and that ball hits them, we have to penalise for that. Those are deliberate actions that make it harder for an opponent to get the ball past them - under the current laws, that's enough, even if it doesn't meet the commonly used definition of "deliberate"

This is what I was taught at my course. Most arms away from the players side, the player runs the risk of it being a foul. Sfa coaches words not mines
 
IF the FA want their refs to start giving penalties for accidental handball maybe a consultation would have helped?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top