New law suggestion: You cannot score with your hand

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
So there was a lot of chatter after that disallowed goal, much of it pretty ill-informed.

Although 99% of people would probably agree that in terms of fair-play, common sense etc, the right call was made, most people could see that by the letter of the law the goal should have stood.

So should there be a change in the law?

My initial suggestion is a simple addition that a goal cannot be scored with the hand.

You could argue that an accidental handball assist, or by a defender on the line to stop a goal has just as much affect. But a) such incidents just don't stick in the throat quite as much as an actual goal and b) I can't think of a practical rule to start covering those.

Good idea? Got a better one?
 

Amar__

Geriatric lover
Joined
Sep 2, 2010
Messages
20,957
Location
Sarajevo
Supports
MK Dons
... but you can still score with your cock.

They should add that too, just for fun.
 

Ibi Dreams

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
5,139
They should also make it a rule that if a team does score against you with a hand, you get $5m in compensation
 

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
21,253
Location
Sydney
I think the rule is fine as it is.
 

DFreshKing

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
3,366
Location
Greater Manchester
Gaining any unfair advantage by the hand/arm should be included - deliberate is far to vague and almost impossible to prove either way.

The idea that it was definitely not deliberate shows a lack of understanding about the reflexes and reactions of elite players and also prior positioning could constitute a deliberate act.

It is possible to know on contact that your head has not done the job, the hand is placed to help it out.

We just cannot know for sure either way.
 

Rado_N

Yaaas Broncos!
Joined
Apr 6, 2009
Messages
106,522
Location
Manchester
Gaining any unfair advantage by the hand/arm should be included - deliberate is far to vague and almost impossible to prove either way.

The idea that it was definitely not deliberate shows a lack of understanding about the reflexes and reactions of elite players and also prior positioning could constitute a deliberate act.

It is possible to know on contact that your head has not done the job, the hand is placed to help it out.

We just cannot know for sure either way.
Change the word 'deliberate' to 'avoidable' and add the bit from the OP about scoring.

Job done.
 

Ixion

Full Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2003
Messages
15,275
Maybe not with the hand when it's up around head height, deliberate or not.

Goals like that are so few and far between the ref should just use some common sense when they happen and judge it accordingly.
 

Danny1982

Sectarian Hipster
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
15,091
Location
Old Trafford
The rule is fine and the call was 100% correct. If you score with your hand, accidental or not, it should be disallowed (if the ref spots it).
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
Gaining any unfair advantage by the hand/arm should be included - deliberate is far to vague and almost impossible to prove either way.
The answer could be that simple actually.

That way they could even put so many commentators and dumb fans out of their misery and actually make deliberate hand-ball a yellow card offence!

Though actually...

What if you stop block a cross or goal with your arm in your own area in a scenario in which you could absolutely not get your arm out the way?

Maybe make it an indirect free-kick if accidental?
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
The rule is fine and the call was 100% correct. If you score with your hand, accidental or not, it should be disallowed (if the ref spots it).
Really? Which rule number is it? I've not actually gone back and checked this evening, I'm just working from memory.

By the way, I love the "if the ref spots it". I think that's kind of implicit in all the rules, no?:smirk:
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
If you score with your hand you have to play the rest of the game without a hand. A surgeon will be pitch side to keep it on ice and he can reattach it at the final whistle.
Well, the next president of FIFA could well be a Saudi, so don't rule anything out.
 

Danny1982

Sectarian Hipster
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
15,091
Location
Old Trafford
Really? Which rule number is it? I've not actually gone back and checked this evening, I'm just working from memory.
I don't know which either, but that's how it's called in the game. If the ref sees it (and he's sure of it) he disallows the goal, even if it was a rebound from a defender clearance from a short distance. Problem though most of the time the ref can't be sure if it hit the hand or not.
 

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
21,253
Location
Sydney
So would you be happy to see that goal stand this evening? Doesn't seem right to me.
Yeah completely fine with it. If it's not intentional it shouldn't be a free-kick, whatever happens after isn't relevant.
 

DFreshKing

Full Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
3,366
Location
Greater Manchester
The answer could be that simple actually.

That way they could even put so many commentators and dumb fans out of their misery and actually make deliberate hand-ball a yellow card offence!

Though actually...

What if you stop block a cross or goal with your arm in your own area in a scenario in which you could absolutely not get your arm out the way?

Maybe make it an indirect free-kick if accidental?
Yeah there is always going to be an exception - I do feel it is fairer though that stopping a goal with the arm is punished, even if you could not get out of the way.

I hate those situations, the attacker gets punished for the defenders lack of intent even though the result is the same.

I would much rather the defender get punished for using a illegal arm.
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
I don't know which either, but that's how it's called in the game. If the ref sees it (and he's sure of it) he disallows the goal, even if it was a rebound from a defender clearance from a short distance. Problem though most of the time the ref can't be sure if it hit the hand or not.
OK, but I'm talking about the actual rules here. because in an ideal world the ref can just stick to the rules, rather than make it up because the rules are dodgy.
 

rpitchfo

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
1,967
Yeah, but you'd get a shite load of innocuous penalties though
It wouldn't be innocuous if the rule was any handball is a foul. No deliberate nonsense, no accidents, just a technical definition.
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
Yeah, but you'd get a shite load of innocuous penalties though
I reckon indirect free-kick could be the answer.

Would also mean that for a borderline case in a non-dangerous part of the penalty area, the ref's decision is easier. A penalty is too harsh in my book even if it is deliberate, so hopefully only the most obvious cynical ones would still be penalties.
While on the other hand, refs wouldn't have to play-on when they think it may have been deliberate but aren't sure and so don't want to give a penalty, which clearly happens loads at the moment.
 

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
21,253
Location
Sydney
It wouldn't be innocuous if the rule was any handball is a foul. No deliberate nonsense, no accidents, just a technical definition.
The definition of the rule wouldn't change whether it was innocuous or not.
 

rpitchfo

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
1,967
The definition of the rule wouldn't change whether it was innocuous or not.
What I'm trying to say is that its irrelevant. Its a technical foul and not open to interpretation.

I like the idea of an indirect free kick.
 

100

binary bot
Joined
Jul 14, 2010
Messages
10,371
Location
HELLO
If you're the player making contact with the ball and you then handball it, it should be ruled a deliberate action. You effectively have control of your arms and the flight of the ball. If you somehow manage to deflect the ball on to your hands then that is on you - the player. I understand the issue when the ball is moving from one player to another, but when it's not then it's rather straightforward.
 

justboy68

Full Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2013
Messages
6,454
Location
China
They said on ITV that the rule about intentional hand ball only talks about the defender and not a situation with an attacker. So if that's true (which is a big if considering ITV) then even by the law of the game it was okay for the ref to disallow it. Haven't bothered to check myself though.
 

Sad Chris

New Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2014
Messages
1,641
It might sound extreme, but most good ideas start this way:
We amputate both arms of every player except the keeper. It's a win-win-win-situation.
Fellaini wouldn't get booked anymore, Suarez couldn't bite anybody anymore and Evra wouldn't need to shake his hand.
I'd go a step further and amputate Brentan's to prevent his ridiculous Mars-bar-salute.
And to top it off, all FIFA officials lose their hands too. Less hands - less cash exchange!

You're welcome!
 

Pexbo

Online influencer who has never watched Star Wars
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
61,159
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
@Sassy Colin 's list of conquests just halved now he's found out it doesn't count if you score with your hand.
 

Lay

Correctly predicted Italy to win Euro 2020
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
14,450
Location
England
Totally not relevant but I just thought about Scholes scoring with his hand against Zenit and O'Shea's reaction. :lol:
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
They said on ITV that the rule about intentional hand ball only talks about the defender and not a situation with an attacker. So if that's true (which is a big if considering ITV) then even by the law of the game it was okay for the ref to disallow it. Haven't bothered to check myself though.
Didn't see the ITV coverage, but sounds like bullshit to me. Also, there are three particular letters in the name ITV which say bullshit to me.
 

Sir A1ex

Full Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Messages
27,949
Location
Where the goals come from.
If you're the player making contact with the ball and you then handball it, it should be ruled a deliberate action. You effectively have control of your arms and the flight of the ball. If you somehow manage to deflect the ball on to your hands then that is on you - the player. I understand the issue when the ball is moving from one player to another, but when it's not then it's rather straightforward.
There's a difference between something being your fault and it being deliberate. Otherwise no striker would ever shoot wide, and no defender ever score an own goal.
 

Snow

Somewhere down the lane, a licky boom boom down
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
32,094
Location
Lousy Smarch weather
Gaining any unfair advantage by the hand/arm should be included - deliberate is far to vague and almost impossible to prove either way.

The idea that it was definitely not deliberate shows a lack of understanding about the reflexes and reactions of elite players and also prior positioning could constitute a deliberate act.

It is possible to know on contact that your head has not done the job, the hand is placed to help it out.

We just cannot know for sure either way.
Deliberate is explained in the rule book. Definitions of words legally are not the same as the common meaning is.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
27,030
There is no scenario in football that allows you to score with your hand.
Isn't deliberate hand ball in relation to penalties? Non deliberate handballs are regularly given outside the defenders box.
Neymar was outside his own box. If that makes sense