Handling the ball in an attempt to score a goal

[JamesL]

From a match situation I was involved in (as an AR) recently:

To stop play, and award a caution, for "handles the ball in an attempt to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is successful)" does a handball offence have to occur?

Can you stop play if a player attempts to handle the ball to score a goal but doesn't actually handle it?

In my opinion the wording here is ordered in a way that says you have to actually handle the ball, but could you say that even attempting to do it is unsporting, caution and then IDFK restart?

 

[Kes]

From a match situation I was involved in (as an AR) recently:

To stop play, and award a caution, for "handles the ball in an attempt to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is successful)" does a handball offence have to occur?

Can you stop play a player attempts to handle the ball to score a goal but doesn't actually handle it?

In my opinion the wording here is ordered in a way that says you have to actually handle the ball, but could you say that even attempting to do it is unsporting, caution and then IDFK restart?

Good one.

I'd guess not. In much the same way that deliberately hovering in an offside position isn't a crime until you become active. (A bad example I know).
I think the actual hand contact would have to take place before I blew.

 

[RustyRef]

The offence you are giving the free kick for is handling the ball, I don't see how there can be an offence without the ball hitting the hand or arm. If you break the wording down I see the bit in brackets as only applying to whether the attempt to score a goal was successful or not, not the handling itself.

 

[socal lurker]

I think it’s pretty clear that attempting to handle simply isn’t an offense.

 

[santa sangria]

...in theory you could invent USB for "shows a lack of respect for the game". If you have a crazy game, this could help prevent a mass con. Otherwise, I'd be laughing it off

 

[one]

I think this is one of the wordings that is worded the way it was intended. The wording of the entirety of the offence starts with "handles the ball" if that hasn't occurred then there is no point in applying the remainder of the criteria.

In an analogy the offence for DOGSO starts with "denying a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity", if that hasn't occurred then the remainder of the criteria is pointless for a DOGSO offence.

 

[socal lurker]

I think this is one of the wordings that is worded the way it was intended.

indeed. Every once in a while, IFAB actually says what it means!

 

[JamesL]

Thanks all, confirmed my understanding, the incident just set me wondering, what if...