Question Number: 14576

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 12/11/2006

RE: College

Steve A.Thomas of Mclean, Virginia U.S.A asks...

I have an inquiry about the "hand ball" rule.

The ball hits the side bar and comes back only to hit an offensive player's hand unintentionally, the only problem is that his hand is raised far from his body. This contact causes a goal. Should the goal be awarded?

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Steve ,

Truth is need to see it to have a yes or no opinion on that play but here is some advice!

It looks so bad when a goal results off a ball contacting the hand or arm that many referees will nullify the goal and make the call of "deliberately handles the ball "when it is NOT a foul at all simply a rebound off a body part! In fact just about all players including the attacker would accept such a decision with no more than a shrug of oh well.

The difficulty for a referee who understands the laws is if he KNOWS that act was not done deliberately the advantageousness of the deflection is simply part of ongoing play and no REASON exists to stop play or take away the goal except in the minds of those watching. The easy out is not to let a good goal stand because it looks bad and you will get little argument awarding the wrong decision! Imagine you make a wrong decision, take away a goal and even the team scoring the goal will belive it was correct!. Some will say that is what a smart referee who understands the game would do! Players accept the decision so get on with the match!
To quote a good friend utter bovine feces.

You look at what did the player do to the ball ! If it was all ball that did it to the player it is not easy but the correct decision award the goal.

You mention the arm is away from the body? In what way? Did he raise his arm to spike the ball as in volleyball? Was he paddling like he wanted to dribble? Was that arm part of balance, part of the extension of a run or outstretched flying as a bird? Did he make a motion to open his fist and palm the ball? Could you see his eyes track the ball and move the arm into its path?

He must be deliberately playing the ball for a referee to award he foul 1 If the player saw the rebound and jumped into the ball's line of flight to deflect it back in, meaning to use his chest but the ball goes of the offending arm it is a deliberate play on the ball DFK out no goal!
Key point in judgement we do not know intentions we are not mind readers we judge the deliberateness of the action in playing the ball. And keep in mind the skill level and the fact the arms only follow where the body goes!

IN a men's league div 2 match the striker was on a dead run arms pumping like pistons pursuing the ball into the opposition 's PA. The keeper comes out and smashes the ball DIRECTLY into the pumping fist and the ball rebounds into the goal like a bullet.

That was a hand ball ref , the keeper cries Foul.

I award the goal and explained,
"No foul, no deliberate handing was involved , in fact the striker was trying to turn his head away and did not even realize what had occurred. It was a ball striking the body and deflecting back over the goal line although if had hit his face and did the same the goal would still count only the keeper and his teammates would be comforted that it cost something! "

He got an advantage ref you can't score a goal for a handball on advantage!

I shake my head and explain,
"There is no use of advantage on a ball that falls advantageously off the hand if that contact was NOT deliberate it is simply a deflection with a luck element good goal restart kick off!
cheers

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Steve here is another thing that may happen. A defender standing on the goal line has the ball strike him in the midsection and as a reflex BOTH hands grasp the ball just like a goalkeeper would! As your whistle comes up [it really shouldn't] he panics and flings the ball into the goal. Everyone of the attacking side is screaming --"Handball, Handball" and there is a deathly silence from the defenders except the one; and he utters, a little louder than under his breath, the disgusting word beginning with the sixth letter of the alphabet...

What now referee??? Does the 11th power or duty of Law 5 enter into this decision [It Had Better]. Is what the defender said Public, Personal and Provocative [or can you verbally tear him a new one?]?

Isn't that kind of like what happened to you?

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Steve. the easy answer is since you know the ball played the hand and was unintentional, it's a goal. The only problem is that ADvice To Referees tells us the arms should be a in a normal playing position, for example, you can't stand in a wall with your hands held over your head. So what you really need to decide here is, was the fact that the arm was extended from the body mean the arm was in an "unnatural" place which would now allow you calling a handling violation? From what you described, this would be a goal.

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

In your question you used the word "unintentional". Because you used this word, the decision according to the laws of the game is to not call it. The laws state that referees only call it if player handles the ball deliberatly. If the ball deflected off the hand or arms on accident, referees are not to call it. It does not matter that the ball went in the goal here. The correct decision is to award the goal. I agree with my colleague that the safer decision is to call it, but that goes with my favorite saying...WHAT IS POPULAR IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT AND WHATS RIGHT IS NOT ALWAYS POPULAR. Here is the right decision is to not call it, but the popular decision would be to call it.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

My colleagues must be slipping, none of them have mentioned that we have neither "handballs" nor "rules".

The Laws of the Game tell us that it is a foul if a player "handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)".

There are two ways actions can be deliberate. If we were walking toward each other, we could collide if I deliberately got in your way. We might also bump if I deliberately DID NOT get OUT of your way, and you kept on your path. Since the ball has no volition to change its path, if I deliberately leave my arm in its path I have deliberately handled the ball.

If a player has no opportunity to avoid contact between the ball and her hand/arm, then no handling call should be made. It doesn't matter if the ball falls favorably to you, or as in your question, it enters the goal. If there was no deliberate handling, there was no deliberate handling.

However, referees more experienced and wiser than I have noted that at the very top levels of the game, very little happens by chance.

Answer provided by Referee Nathan Lacy

Another thought, when we speak of deliberately handling the ball we often think of the hand moving towards the ball so as to make contact. The idea of intentionally leaving the hand in the way, as mentioned by Ref Voshol is a bit more subtle but just as valid. However, just leaving the hand where it is because the ball is heading towards it also has the possiblity of a slight twist to the situation. Specifically, did the player intentionally place their hand in such a position as to increase the likelihood that the ball would contact the hand and yield a positive result for that player? Essentially what happens here is that the player does in fact intentionally handle the ball but disguises it very effectively. The consideration of the hand being in either a natural position or unnatural position is vital to this evaluation. A classic situation is where a defender is matching up with a striker with his arms down by his side but slightly spread away from his body. What the player is doing, essentially, is effectively widening the space they occupy and hence making themselves "bigger" and harder to play the ball around. If the ball is now kicked into this unnaturally placed, oh so slightly extended, and well disguised hand - is it intentionally handling? Decisions decisions.....my opinion is "yes." All the best,

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 14611

See Question: 15091