Wolves v Citee

[JamesL]

It changes the outcome of the game.

But in the context of handball law how can it be handball on account of a goal being scored?

The answer is it can't. If the ball accidentally hits the attackers hand and lands at his/her feet and she scores the referee has no basis to disallow the goal.

The only time you can penalise handball is in situations where there is a deliberate act of the hand making contact with the ball.

What happens after an accidental handball should have no influence on whether you penalise it or not.

 

[Big Cat]

But in the context of handball law how can it be handball on account of a goal being scored?

The answer is it can't. If the ball accidentally hits the attackers hand and lands at his/her feet and she scores the referee has no basis to disallow the goal.

The only time you can penalise handball is in situations where there is a deliberate act of the hand making contact with the ball.

What happens after an accidental handball should have no influence on whether you penalise it or not.

You are giving this HB tho....right?
I know the goal is irrelevant

 

[ARF]

Not to mention the outstretched superman arm

Or a player having to dive to try and get his head on it, and putting his arm out to break his fall?

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

It changes the outcome of the game.

So? The outcome is 100% irrelevant.

An accidental handling doesn't become deliberate just because it had a positive outcome for the team. What the outcome is, is not relevant in determining if it was a foul. Was the handling deliberate or not? That's the question. Not 'it's not deliberate, but it was a goal, so it's a foul'.

As a referee, you need to have the courage to not award a foul if a completely accidental handling either directly or indirectly leads to a goal being scored - or stopped.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Or a player having to dive to try and get his head on it, and putting his arm out to break his fall?

When a player is going for the ball, completely misjudges it through only his own fault an handles it as a result, that still needs to be deliberate handling.

 

[JamesL]

You are giving this HB tho....right?
I know the goal is irrelevant

No, I dont think so. What's he meant to do, faceplant the floor?

 

[JamesL]

When a player is going for the ball, completely misjudges it through only his own fault an handles it as a result, that still needs to be deliberate handling.

In most cases I accept this point of view. But not in this scenario, as above, what is he supposed to do - just face plant the floor to avoid handling?

Not for me.

There is a potential spirit of the game and what football expects issue here. But currently thats not applicable as the handball is covered by law, so a law change is required to correct it.

But for now, that's a goal.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

I'm not saying his arm shouldn't have been there - but I'm saying the responsibility is still 100% on him. And given the guidance that's coming out from FIFA these days, 'deliberate' seems to be more about his overall action towards the ball. It seems to becoming 'handles while making a deliberate action to the ball'. A lot of 'deliberate' handling is simply misjudging the ball, but penalised correctly as deliberate handling. If you make a diving header, miss the ball and handle it instead, you should expect to get penalised.

 

[Big Cat]

In most cases I accept this point of view. But not in this scenario, as above, what is he supposed to do - just face plant the floor to avoid handling?

Not for me.

There is a potential spirit of the game and what football expects issue here. But currently thats not applicable as the handball is covered by law, so a law change is required to correct it.

But for now, that's a goal.

I'm genuinely surprised by your take on this. Defenders are routinely penalized for HB when going to ground, making themselves bigger in an attempt to block, so surely an attacker should be afforded the same punishment when diving to head towards goal with arm outstretched
Proximity, Pass
Hand towards ball Pass
Might land on face, I don't care. Stay on feet if player doesn't want to land on soft turf

 

[JamesL]

I'm genuinely surprised by your take on this. Defenders are routinely penalized for HB when going to ground, making themselves bigger in an attempt to block, so surely an attacker should be afforded the same punishment when diving to head towards goal with arm outstretched
Proximity, Pass
Hand towards ball Pass
Might land on face, I don't care. Stay on feet if player doesn't want to land on soft turf

Thats a different kettle of fish really, defenders, making a deliberate act to make contact with ball using hand, and hardly comparable here.
This is incidental contact. The striker has dived in for a header, which he is entitled to do, which he may or not have made contact with the head, the ball then strikes his arm, something he is totally unaware of and is only incidnetal of natural movement that any normal human makes as they fall towards the floor.
If this was the other way, and it was a defender clearing, e.g. for a corner, I am not giving a penalty either for the same reason.

 

[Big Cat]

Thats a different kettle of fish really, defenders, making a deliberate act to make contact with ball using hand, and hardly comparable here.
This is incidental contact. The striker has dived in for a header, which he is entitled to do, which he may or not have made contact with the head, the ball then strikes his arm, something he is totally unaware of and is only incidnetal of natural movement that any normal human makes as they fall towards the floor.
If this was the other way, and it was a defender clearing, e.g. for a corner, I am not giving a penalty either for the same reason.

Any City allegiance? Honestly? I'm struggling with your reasoning as i'm adamant with this one. As we know, deliberate is not literal but based on the criteria in the book. I'm certain UEFA and FIFA want this given. VAR is disallowing this goal all day even without the possible offside

 

[bester]

Are you cautioning as well?

Easy to make a law change saying if it goes in off your arm accidentally then the goal will be chalked off.

 

[Big Cat]

Are you cautioning as well?

Easy to make a law change saying if it goes in off your arm accidentally then the goal will be chalked off.

Yes

 

[Mintyref]

What utter nonsense is posted about handball on here, not deliberate even within the so called guidance issued by the powers that be......if they are so intent on realigning our interpretation of handball the solution is simple, change the f%$÷×ng law!

 

[JamesL]

Any City allegiance? Honestly? I'm struggling with your reasoning as i'm adamant with this one. As we know, deliberate is not literal but based on the criteria in the book. I'm certain UEFA and FIFA want this given. VAR is disallowing this goal all day even without the possible offside

Seeing as the goal is against city not sure how any allegiance to them would affect my opinion here .

FyI I am a neutral spectator.

The laws say:
Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the
ball with the hand or arm.

Yes the laws says you should consider a b and c, but they are considerations and the main question is it a deliberate act of making contact with the hand or arm.

But for arguments sake lets look at each of the considerations....

• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) - no movement of the hand or arm..yes the body is moving towards the ball but there is no conscious movement of the hand or arm, the arm remains in a natural position.
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) - seeing as the attacker is attempting to header and he is so close I am going to argue that this is actually an unexpected ball. He thinks he is going to head it, if he had any hair he probably might have it was that close and therefore from the point he misses the header he has no opportunity to move his arm out of the way. That being said it could also be argued that this consideration is irrelevant as this is about distance between the opponent and ball. His opponent is n/a in this scenario.
• the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence.. probably not applicable here as we arent talking about unnatural positions.

Again as we always conclude the law is poorly written and lacks the neccessary guidance to get a uniform decision amongst referees.

Can I ask, why is it thay u think this is a deliberate act of making contact with the ball using the hand?

 

[RobOda]

It might not be fitting the definition of handball, but I think you'd give that as a handball in the spirit of the game. What football expects etc, is not to score via a handball unintentional or otherwise.

 

[JamesL]

It might not be fitting the definition of handball, but I think you'd give that as a handball in the spirit of the game. What football expects etc, is not to score via a handball unintentional or otherwise.

You can't use spirit of the game for something that is already in law.

Spirit of the game is intended for situations where there is no direct provision in law, and then as the referee you make a decision based on what football expects....

You can't re write a law to suit a particular scenario because we, or players, or fans think its unfair. This scenario can only be changed by a change in law

 

[Big Cat]

Seeing as the goal is against city not sure how any allegiance to them would affect my opinion here .

FyI I am a neutral spectator.

The laws say:
Handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the
ball with the hand or arm.

Yes the laws says you should consider a b and c, but they are considerations and the main question is it a deliberate act of making contact with the hand or arm.

But for arguments sake lets look at each of the considerations....

• the movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand) - no movement of the hand or arm..yes the body is moving towards the ball but there is no conscious movement of the hand or arm, the arm remains in a natural position.
• the distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball) - seeing as the attacker is attempting to header and he is so close I am going to argue that this is actually an unexpected ball. He thinks he is going to head it, if he had any hair he probably might have it was that close and therefore from the point he misses the header he has no opportunity to move his arm out of the way. That being said it could also be argued that this consideration is irrelevant as this is about distance between the opponent and ball. His opponent is n/a in this scenario.
• the position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an offence.. probably not applicable here as we arent talking about unnatural positions.

Again as we always conclude the law is poorly written and lacks the neccessary guidance to get a uniform decision amongst referees.

Can I ask, why is it thay u think this is a deliberate act of making contact with the ball using the hand?

It the literal sense of the word, this HB was not deliberate as I'm confident the player did not intend it to happen. However, IFAB's interpretation of deliberate is only loosely based on what the player is thinking as the Law does not expect us to read minds. The term deliberate is therefore clarified with two clauses in the book (we disagree on both of these, because i think they both justify HB and you don't). I've learnt from the likes of @cwyeary et al that FIFA want these types of incidents given as HB. We've seen Champions League referees and latterly World Cup officials giving very soft HBs at every opportunity. The defender sliding in with a block being a perfect example of this. For me, an attacker desperately diving in an uncontrolled manner in an attempt to score is equivalent to the defender going to ground
James, don't get me wrong, I have a good deal of respect for your posts and even if we don't end up in agreement, I'll still be influenced by your opinion

 

[RobOda]

ou can't use spirit of the game for something that is already in law.

I disagree there;

* Referees should apply the Laws within the 'spirit' of the game to help produce fair and safe matches. (From the 'notes on applying the laws' introduction.)

That to me, gives some wiggle room on certain things, such as the above scenario for handball.

I am open to persuasion otherwise though.

 

[JamesL]

I disagree there;

* Referees should apply the Laws within the 'spirit' of the game to help produce fair and safe matches. (From the 'notes on applying the laws' introduction.)

That to me, gives some wiggle room on certain things, such as the above scenario for handball.

I am open to persuasion otherwise though.

Hmm yes I seem to have overlooked that bit.

Although it could be argued is it fair for a team to be denied a legitimate goal when they have not committed an offence.