Handball ref.

[Mick.]

Firstly, I would like to say that one of the things that I love about this site, is that I can come on after a match, pen a couple of incidents that are causing me concern and sit back and wait for the great and the good to give me their feedback.

So enough sucking up......handball.

Blue v Red. Fairly well contested game.

I know that there has to be a deliberate act of hand to ball for the offence to be made out, but I am also aware of players putting their hands/arms in a position which encourages the ball to touch their hand and that some refs deem this to be a handball. Every five minutes, even when the ball is nowhere near the hand the cries of "handball ref" go up. I even had it today when a player pushed their foot out at waist height and just made contact with their foot!! It's a bit like "In the back" every time someone goes for a header.

Anyway blue are attacking and red player comes in for a tackle. Red player has one arm across her body so that her forearm is parallel to the ground. Her other arm is in the same position but against the outside of the first arm. It is as if she is in the process of crossing her arms at just above waist height. That is how her arms are when she comes in with the challenge. Needless to say the ball is kicked against her, runs up her legs and deflect away from under her two arms.

I am satisfied that the ball has hit her arms, but equally satisfied that the arms are not in a natural position and that this position has been made to prevent the ball going past her waist. Cue shouts of "handball". I wait to see if there is any advantage to blue and then blow for the foul. Lots of protests from red.
The DFK is just outside the penalty D and blue score.

A couple of minutes later and I am getting grief from the red manager that I should have put on a blue jersey (another story). The game ends 2-2.
Red lino is a qualified ref and decides to tell me that he cannot understand my decision. He said that the ball went up and hit her elbow and at that close range it was never a handball. He says that this decision was a match changing one. At the point of the handball, the score had been 1-1 and this had put blue up 2-1. The red player had gone in with her back mainly showing to the lino so I was satisfied that he didn't have the best angle, indeed I was stood squarely looking at the tackle and am satisfied that my angle was better than his.

However, ball to hand. Handball in this case or no?

 

[TheReferee123]

Sounds to me like you got this one right, I would have given it too. Also, one thing that really bugs me is when a qualified ref gives you grief instead of advice (was the red lino having a go or just saying he disagreed?) as since becoming qualified I simply can't have a go at a fellow ref, after knowing how it feels!

 

[TheReferee123]

Also, a big factor that you would have to judge before you give the foul is the length of time from when the ball bounced from her foot to her arm, if they had time to move their arm and didn't it's a handball.

 

[LukeD]

Based upon what you have described I'd of give the free kick for handball too. Its interesting that you mention her arms not being in a 'natural' position. This is also one of the deciding factors I use when determining if to penalise handball or not. I had one in my game today where the defender tried to head the ball from a cross but put her arm up behind her head in doing so - missed the header and struck the arm stopping the ball going to attacker stood directly behind her so I gave a penalty.

As a referee whilst I recognise that it must be 'deliberate' if a player puts their arm/hand in a unnatural position and the ball strikes it then they are gaining an advantage from it (keeping control/blocking the ball) and thus must be penalised accordingly.

It sounds like you got the decision right - ignore the other referee he should know better.

 

[SM]

Sounds like you got it correct to me. For the manager a stern say that again and you will be walking speech, for the assistant a quick button it.

Funnily enough this weekend I had a CAR tell me he was a qualified ref of 20 years (never actually refereed a game though I now understand). "I don't care if your Howard Webb, do as I instructed you or give the flag to someone else". Childish old git moaned the whole game through. Called me over at one point after trying to flag offside from a throw in. He then told me an opposing team player had his foot on the pitch at the throw in. I looked at his foot as he directed for a reconstruction and it was on the pitch, but also on the line! He told me he had never heard "part of both feet ON or behind the line". Qualified refs who criticise colleagues on the pitch are not worth bothering with. Breaks refereeing rule one.

 

[JimmyT]

As Monkey says, this is a complete no-no for me. Just remember the following when a club assistant tells you that he is "a qualified ref"

* 50% of the time, he is lying. He is not qualified, was never qualified and will prove beyond any doubt in the next few minutes that he is not qualified
* 20% of the time, he is a know-it-all wannabe, who has never had the gumption to actually get involved in football in an official capacity, but is desperate to appear to be knowledgeable, so as to massage his ego
* 10% of the time, he is a passionate club man who has run the line hundreds of times and thinks by telling an inexperienced ref that he is qualified (whether he is or not) that he may be able to influence the game is his club's favour by gaining the trust/respect of the man in the middle.
* 10% of the time, he may be qualified in his own mind, may even have been qualified previously, but is so out of date with the modern game, the laws of the game and the interpretation of LOTG, that he will be virtually useless to you.
* 10% of the time, he will still be lying.

When I run the line for my lad's team, or as a favour to a friend, I NEVER tell the referee I am qualified. Why would you? He instructs me what to do, I do it and nothing more, everyone's happy. Very often, post game, a young ref will say, "are you a ref?" or "thanks for your help, you were very good with the flag" and at this point I usually just confirm that I am and if a chat ensues about the game, how he's getting on, how my season is going etc etc, then great. Be very wary of pre-match boasts about being qualified.

 

[Mick.]

Without wishing to it may sound like I did this CAR a bit of a disservice. He didn't tell me that he was a ref, another ref who I know and was watching the game told me at half time. Mind you, as a few of you have said, when I have done someone a favour and run the line, I keep my mouth shut. When my boy's team coach moans about ref decisions, if I saw it and don't agree with the coach I tell him so (and my view on why), if I saw it and agree with the coach, I tell him I didn't see it. I certainly don't tell the ref that he got things wrong!

 

[MattyontheWhistle]

Nope, never criticise a ref when I'm on the line.......I may ask afterwards about a decision, in the privacy of the changing room.

As for the handball incident, it is difficult. I referee women's games regularly, and TBH, what is a natural position for men, is unnatural for women. Just think which parts of the anatomy each would try to protect?

I notice in the ladies games for example, that when trying to control with the chest, the hands often come up to shoulder height so as to 'open up' that area of the body with which they are controlling the ball. Men will keep their hands and arms down by the sides and 'close' the chest.

When judging handball, I ask myself

'Did the player make their silhouette larger with the arms in that position?' thereby gaining an unfair advantage by presenting a bigger obstruction.
'Did the player have time to move the arm out of the way?' Natural position or not, if the ball is going to hit the hand/arm, and you don't make any attempt to move it, then it's a deliberate act.

In your example, it sounds like the player tucked her arms in to keep them out of the way, and I would be surprised if she had enough time to react and get them out of the way.

However, you have correctly recognised that his is not a 'natural position' so for me it would all come down to the question of whether it was a deliberate act to leave the arms in the path of the ball, or not.