Question Number: 30898

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/14/2016

RE: Youth to adult, comp and rec.

Barry Stewart of Chilliwack, BC Canada asks...

This question is a follow up to question 30891

I feel I must persist on my handball question, as the answers weren't all in sync (not that they always can be, as the referee has some leeway in interpretation.) I simply want to get the grey-area calls/non-calls as sharp as I can and I believe others will be helped by discussing this.

I wasn't as clear as I should have been in my earlier post. I hope I can be here.

Joe McHugh says, 'Any times a player deliberately uses his arms in open play to protect himself that IMO is deliberate handling. If the player does not want to get hit by the ball then he should not put himself in that position.'

Richard Dawson's answer included; 'I have great leeway to allowing the ball to be thought of as hitting a player. However, when a player DELIBERATELY moves in to play the ball I take a dim view of the arms AWAY from the body > If in front of face or groin I can see much less reason to see it as a deliberate handling but the arms, they are attached to the body and if they are away from the body they make the body bigger.'

Peter Grove says, 'To me, it doesn't matter whether that happened before or after the ball was kicked, it's a deliberate movement of the hand towards the ball and therefore a handling offence.'

I'll pick up on the 'movement toward the ball.' Isn't this where your hand moves CLOSER to the ball? Example: Rather than quickly covering my face, I hold out my hands, straight-armed, to block the ball from hitting my face.

I could also see movement toward the ball as moving my hand toward the perceived flight path of the ball. But moving my hand to cover a body part, before the kick has happened, is not moving it toward the ball. Comments?

That's where my 'timing' question comes in. If I've stepped up to block a kick (say, within five paces), I don't want to have a dangling arm, if possible. I probably also don't want to get hit in sensitive parts.

Just before or in the instant of the kick, I tuck my arm to cover my privates, or perhaps my sternum, or face. (I don't know where the ball is going at this point.)

Remember, if my hand/arm weren't there, the ball is still not getting through the rest of me. The kicker could choose to change the kick or fake and go around.

I am clearly not trying to make myself bigger -- and when a strong kick happens in such close quarters, I'll have no time to move my hand out of the way, as I'd be expected to if the distance and/or speed were more relaxed.

It sounds like my scenario will often be 'ball to hand' from Richard and deliberate handling from Joe and perhaps Peter.

Are we really expecting defenders to run around with their hands behind their backs? If so, I can't think of another sport where the defender would be put at such a disadvantage.

Perhaps video examples would help?

Thanks again.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKRvq6XAj_k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNU9-bnY4-4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOF9p1st83A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNU9-bnY4-4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1l-YvBoUe4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PENQDQ52SOY&t=2m40s
Hi Barry
Sample of deliberate handling scenarios.
Now we all know that handling is probably now the most difficult call to make and it is open to interpretation and to use those famous words *In the opinion of teh referee*. IFAB has promised some guidance on handling which hopefully will assist going forward.
Now I am not a supporter of arms behind the back yet I still expect players to have their arms in a reasonably natural position. Lifting the arms up into the body to assist in a charge down is in my opinion using the arms to assist in playing the ball. If the player does not want to get hit then he should not put himself into that position. Similarly the player that allows the ball to hit him making no effort to avoid it when he can do so is also using the arm to assist in play. I know there will be plenty of times that the player has no time to react when the ball is driven at his arm from short distance. That is not handling.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Barry,

one problem with videos there is no ADVICE attached via the IFAB or FIFA as to the correctness of the call. Given that the foul of, handles the ball deliberately, has the word 'deliberately' in it, one can expect when describing this foul , there is a measure of accountable premeditated action. There is also, as in offside, a measure of INSTINCTIVE reaction where circumstances are created that cast doubt on whether a deflection, ball hits player, or a deliberate action, player hits ball, was RESPONSIBLE! Given this becomes an OPINION, it will lead to that greying of what is or what is not in the minds of those in charge based on their observational viewpoint.
I tend NOT To make handling calls unless I am CONVINCED it was deliberate, if there is doubt, I make NO call. I do the same on offside, when there is DOUBT I make NO call.

If we want say to break down how one might interpret a handling foul the ladies arms over the chest are a good example. Although one must reflect the age appropriateness of those playing. A young girl of 12 in a rec game gets more leeway than a woman at 25 in a college matchup.

No one disputes that if a woman is in a defensive wall and crosses the arms over the chest (as a man might his privates )she has every right and there will be no thought of a foul if the ball is driven into those arms, Yet if those woman were say to link arms and cover their breasts ( or men over their privates) this is a deliberate handling and will be a foul if the ball is driven into those arms as it was the result of a deliberate action to make the body slightly larger given the elbows interlock to spread the wall wider. It would be the same principle if they had stretched their arms over their head prior to the ball being struck. What possible purpose could those arms be there for?? There is no POSSIBLE foul if those arms are simply across the chest or privates for protection and are not spread to point elbows wider than the body when standing in the wall. Unless they choose to push the arms/hands away from the body to control or ward off the ball once the ball is struck. This is where a warding movement versus an instinctive flinch will bring some thought as to was it deliberate or a neutral protective reaction? For an example a funny bounce of a ball sends it careening towards a running woman player who instinctively flinches and sort of crosses her arms over her face and chest and the ball hits those arms, as long as the bal lis not warded or knocked away in a pushing action there should be no call. Yet if that same player ran towards the ball and camped out under an arcing ball or runs into that arcing ball waiting for the ball to hit those crossed arms, even not moving them, when the ball impacts she has created a hard rebound surface to deliberately cushion or play the ball THAT is a deliberate handling action, that is a dfk foul.

A deliberate action is a premeditated action easily identifiable by most officials. We have no reason to believe we can read the INTENT of a player, given we are not mind readers YET we are able to form subjective opinions on matters that simply are not as verifiable as many other fouls or infractions

I recall a long high ball that a lone defender stood in front of his goal slightly inside the PA. The ball hit the ground bounced up onto his chest hit him in the face and rolled off down the right arm. The nearest opponent was miles away, yet the SCREAMS of a foul for handling echoed across the pitch because the ball wound up rolling down his arm. It WAS an easy no call for me because it was OBVIOUS there was no deliberate intent to have that occur YET as we do not judge intent, so was it a deliberate action to play the ball where the arms were being unfairly used? I judged then as I would now, there was no obvious deliberate action to roll that ball along his arm. He did not SWAT at the ball, he was as surprised as anyone as the ball was rolling along his arm after it deflected off his face and his arms by his side were in no way there to guide the ball .

This is my opinion only but given this particular foul is not against the opponent we are basically awarding ball possession based on what the ball does or does not do to affect the player being charged with the offence. I also hold the opinion, that we award far too many IFFY fouls for this offence because it is an easy, acceptable sell. You should have no problem yelling NOTHING THERE! ACCIDENTAL! when a ball hits a players hands or arms. It shows you DID see it and CHOSE NOT to call it! Remember those gray areas are YOUR OWN parts of the puzzle, your match, your decision your reputation is based a great deal on them
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Barry,

As others have mentioned, judging handling offences is one of the trickier aspects of the referee's job in applying the laws of the game. The IFAB is well aware of this and has committed to finding a way to clarify handling offences as part of its next set of possible changes to the laws of the game.

So while I appreciate and can sympathise with your quest for more clarity in this area, it is clear from the IFAB's own statements that it is aware that the current laws simply do not provide that clarity.

As it stands, there is a fairly large amount of room for interpretation. All decisions are always ''in the opinion of the referee'' and in this particular area of the law, that is probably even more true.

So unfortunately, until or unless the IFAB succeeds in its quest for the Holy Grail of clearly defining what is and is not a deliberate handling offence (and I have to say, I have my doubts as to whether they can truly accomplish this) we are left with a lot of subjective opinions and grey areas.

For what it's worth - and again, this is just my personal set of guidelines so no more valid than anyone else's, here is how I like to look at deciding if a deliberate handball has occurred:

''For handling to be considered an offence, the player must deliberately do one of the following:

- initiate the contact - basically, move the hand or arm towards (or into the path of) the ball.
- prolong an initially accidental contact, in order to control or direct the ball.
- avoid moving the hand or arm away from an approaching ball when there was sufficient time/opportunity to do so. ''

Lastly - and again this is my opinion but one that I believe is shared by many referees, the majority of times that there is contact between ball and hand, no offence has occurred. There is an expression that I quite like, which goes along the lines of, ''If you never called a single handball, you'd probably be right about 90% of the time.''