The Handball Rule

RK

Full Member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
16,102
Location
Attacking Midfield
An attacker is the guy attacking. The defender is the guy defending :lol::lol::lol:
What should be awarded in the following scenarios? Assume all of the handballs are not deliberate or "taking a risk" (i.e. in isolation they wouldn't be penalised):
  1. The ball hits an attackers hand inside the box and they gain control of the ball. The attacker is then fouled inside the box.
  2. The ball hits an attackers hand outside the box and they gain control of the ball. The attacker is then fouled outside the box.
  3. A contested 50-50 on the halfway line hits one player on the hand and they gain control of the ball. Their team remains in control of the ball and 20 passes later, they score.
  4. An attacker has a shot in the box. It hits the defender's arm which was in a natural position and deemed not a foul. The defender immediately clears the ball downfield to an unmarked attacker on his team, who scores.
  5. A goalkeeper deliberately throws the ball onto the arm of an attacker to (presumably) gain a free kick and waste time.
Also check my previous post about Jesus if you have time, what should he do in that scenario?
 
Last edited:

SadlerMUFC

Thinks for himself
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
5,746
Location
Niagara Falls, Canada
What should be awarded in the following scenarios? Assume all of the handballs are not deliberate or "taking a risk" (i.e. in isolation they wouldn't be penalised):
  1. The ball hits an attackers hand inside the box and they gain control of the ball. The attacker is then fouled inside the box.
  2. The ball hits an attackers hand outside the box and they gain control of the ball. The attacker is then fouled outside the box.
  3. A contested 50-50 on the halfway line hits one player on the hand and they gain control of the ball. Their team remains in control of the ball and 20 passes later, they score.
  4. An attacker has a shot in the box. It hits the defender's arm which was in a natural position and deemed not a foul. The defender immediately clears the ball downfield to an unmarked attacker on his team, who scores.
  5. A goalkeeper deliberately throws the ball onto the arm of an attacker to (presumably) gain a free kick and waste time.
Also check my previous post about Jesus if you have time, what should he do in that scenario?
1. Handball happens first so that's the foul you give

2. The ball hits the attackers hand outside the box. Handball

3. Handball. Gained possession of the ball as an attacker

4. Goal. Arm in a natural position isn't a foul for a defender

5. Now you're getting desparate :lol::lol::lol:
 

RK

Full Member
Joined
May 23, 2008
Messages
16,102
Location
Attacking Midfield
1. Handball happens first so that's the foul you give

2. The ball hits the attackers hand outside the box. Handball

3. Handball. Gained possession of the ball as an attacker

4. Goal. Arm in a natural position isn't a foul for a defender

5. Now you're getting desparate :lol::lol::lol:
Those are all logical answers, but I can still break that logic and show how the new rule is subjective by mixing 3 and 4:

3b. On the halfway line, an attacker attempts to play a pass but it hits a defender on the arm, who gains possession. They immediately send the ball downfield to an unmarked attacker on their team, who scores.

You've established that if this happens in the defending team's box, it's not a foul. How far up the pitch does this change? I think the answer to a scenario like 3b is ambiguous and subject to opinion depending where on the pitch it occurred and how fast a goal was scored after the handball.
 
Last edited:

Gio

★★★★★★★★
Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
20,297
Location
Bonnie Scotland
Supports
Rangers
They should amend the rule to allow some form of pragmatism to be applied. E.g. If its ball to hand and no one gets an advantage from it.
Yup, it's not difficult to resolve. Revert to the longstanding interpretation where referees used their common sense to decide how much of an advantage was gained and how much intent was there. That's the spirit of the law that everyone who plays and follows the game is familiar with.

Consistency is welcome but not IMO at the cost of changing the spirit of the laws in the first place.
 

Mb194dc

Full Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2015
Messages
4,595
Supports
Chelsea
What was the ref decision on this? No way this can be called.
Indeed, hand is in a natural position. He can't see where the ball is, totally accidental.

I don't think they needed to change the law. Handball should only be an offence if it's deliberate.

Give the referees some guidelines on what constitutes "deliberate", to stop players "accidentally" deliberately stopping the ball with their hands by making themselves bigger. Will be the odd grey area, but hey it's not digital there are shades of decisions. Football always like that for handball and wasn't a problem that needed to be fixed.

Nice and simple.
 

giorno

boob novice
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Messages
26,144
Supports
Real Madrid
It'd be so very simple to get this rule sorted imho

For attacking team:
-arm against the body(does not increase volume)= not a foul*
-arm not against the body(increases volume)= foul if team gains an advantage from it. Not foul if not
*unless a goal is scored through the handball, or it directly leads to a goal(for example Llorente's goal against Spurs, but also a situation like Gabriel Jesus' goal where the handball creates the opportunity), in which case it's a foul

For defending team:
Outside the box:
-arm against the body, does not increase volume=not a foul
-arm not against the body, increases volume=foul if advantage is gained, not foul otherwise

Inside the box:
-arm against the body=not a foul
-arm not against the body=if arm is in natural position or close to body, not foul unless it denies clear goal or goalscoring opportunity
-very close distance=same as arm not against body
-arm in unnatural position=foul

Exceptions:
-intentional handball=always a foul
-rebounds=never a foul if balls hits hand off another body part *unless arm was in unnatural position to begin with
 

hellohello

Full Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
1,819
Supports
Tottenham
Indeed, hand is in a natural position. He can't see where the ball is, totally accidental.

I don't think they needed to change the law. Handball should only be an offence if it's deliberate.

Give the referees some guidelines on what constitutes "deliberate", to stop players "accidentally" deliberately stopping the ball with their hands by making themselves bigger. Will be the odd grey area, but hey it's not digital there are shades of decisions. Football always like that for handball and wasn't a problem that needed to be fixed.

Nice and simple.
I agree with you. But I don't think the referees need any guidelines, it's the absolute guidelines from top down to the referees that are creating this problem in the first place. They are not allowing referees ref the game how they think is best in the name of 'consistency', and with VAR they are forced to make decisions I think they don't ultimately agree with. Now the rule is consistently crap instead of allowing the ref to ref the game. There have been so many strange handball decisions over the last two years now.
 

SadlerMUFC

Thinks for himself
Joined
Dec 7, 2017
Messages
5,746
Location
Niagara Falls, Canada
Those are all logical answers, but I can still break that logic and show how the new rule is subjective by mixing 3 and 4:

3b. On the halfway line, an attacker attempts to play a pass but it hits a defender on the arm, who gains possession. They immediately send the ball downfield to an unmarked attacker on their team, who scores.

You've established that if this happens in the defending team's box, it's not a foul. How far up the pitch does this change? I think the answer to a scenario like 3b is ambiguous and subject to opinion depending where on the pitch it occurred and how fast a goal was scored after the handball.
Depends on the play. If they gained control using the hand and immediately went into attack, then it's a handball. Every situation will be different, but this definitely makes things more black and white than the old law. Did you watch the video I posted? The refs had no idea what was a handball before and what wasn't, and that video proves it. The instructors explaination made a ton of sense...