The Handball Rule

[sullydnl]

There's been a bit of controversy around the handball rule in recent times.

Throughout the World Cup and current CL campaign we've seen a certain type of handball (typified by the penalties awarded to City & ourselves recently) consistently awarded by VAR, as per the rules. However, there seem to be many (including a large number of ex-pros) who believe the rule is wrong and that handballs like that should not be given. At the same time you see handballs like Busquets' yesterday not given, even though the only difference seemed to be that VAR was allowed to intervene in one case but not the other. Yet Luke Shaw randomly got punished without VAR for what seemed like a relatively innocuous handball.

Meanwhile, FIFA have announced further upcoming changes to the handball rule that will see accidental handballs punished in cases where it either creates an advantage for the attacker or leads to a goal.

So, are you happy with the handball rules? If not, what should they be? And ultimately would it not be easier just to turn handball into a black & white decision like offside by making all handballs a foul, even unintentional ones?

 

[ctp]

Removing ambiguity is the way to go. Call all handballs as fouls, but award only indirect freekicks unless it's blocking a shot on goal. Keep awarding pens/direct freekicks for those.

 

[11101]

I'd like to see accidental handball only given when the hand is raised above shoulder height or the arm is outstretched.

 

[duffer]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

 

[Sigma]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

Referees never adhere to it, especially outside the box.

 

[Snow]

I'm happy with the new rule yes. The current one of currently bogus as we could see from these past CL games. In our game alone there were discrepancies.

 

[KirkDuyt]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

Think the problem is that the term deliberate is rather open for different interpretations.

 

[duffer]

Think the problem is that the term deliberate is rather open for different interpretations.

That's not a bad thing. No two situations are identical.

Consistency is good but I'd prefer a bit of common sense.

 

[MikeKing]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

It is too easy to deliberately put your arms in such a way it disguises the intent while it still serves the purpose of potentially stopping the ball illegitimately.

 

[KirkDuyt]

That's not a bad thing. No two situations are identical.

Consistency is good but I'd prefer a bit of common sense.

Fair enough, but a stadium full of shouting people, football being a multi billion pound industry and the fact thousands will wish death upon you and your family for getting it wrong tend to somewhat impede common sense. Either that or all global FA's are just fecking with us by purposely hiring shite refs without common sense.

I don't think all hand balls should be a pen though, so I don't see a better alternative than the current rule honestly. Wouldn't want it to become like field hockey where players just try to put the ball on someone's foot.

 

[duffer]

It is too easy to deliberately put your arms in such a way it disguises the intent while it still serves the purpose of potentially stopping the ball illegitimately.

Nah, it's usually obvious. Give a handball for those.

 

[Gio]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

Nothing. There’s a perception there is a major problem because managers have used a penalty claim as a means of excusing failings elsewhere. The majority of times they’ve complained about a lack of consistency they really mean a lack of decisions going their way. It’s silly to indulge that by creating a new rule which players now almost universally don’t like or understand.

 

[Snow]

Nothing. There’s a perception there is a major problem because managers have used a penalty claim as a means of excusing failings elsewhere. The majority of times they’ve complained about a lack of consistency they really mean a lack of decisions going their way. It’s silly to indulge that by creating a new rule which players now almost universally don’t like or understand.

You're just wrong here. There are plenty of things wrong with the old rule. Busquets is on a yellow, puts his arm up and saves a cross. Referee lets it go despite it being obvious that he would have had to card him. Later in the game Shaw gets a handball call whilst he's standing still with hands down his sides.

We get a penalty against PSG after it being reviewed a bunch. Porto don't get a penalty against Liverpool, no review.

Why all these disrepancies? Because the refs don't have the same interpretation of the rules. The new rules are much clearer and with VAR these instances wouldn't have been up for debate.

 

[MikeKing]

So, are you happy with the handball rules? If not, what should they be? And ultimately would it not be easier just to turn handball into a black & white decision like offside by making all handballs a foul, even unintentional ones?

Yes. Nobody would intentionally use their hand anymore basically if this were to become the rule with VAR in there as well to review decisions. The only cause for concern is the clear unintentional handballs inside of the penalty area, as those would be incredibly random gifts given to a lucky team. You could even have technical players like Suarez doing a little trick and chip the ball into the arm and hands of the opponents making it a stonewall penalty. I would hate to see that become a thing, unless of course United become very good at it, though that is never the case same as with diving.

 

[VeevaVee]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

Because a defender can run up or jump to block a ball with their arms all over the show and use 'getting into position' as an excuse if it hits their arm, when in reality if getting in to that position requires your arms to do that, maybe you weren't meant to get into it. It's unfair if they're essentially allowed to use their arms to block the ball so long as they don't move it towards it 'deliberately'.

We should side with the attacking play instead of protecting the defenders in my opinion, who could protect themselves by keeping their arms down.
Fouls are being given more now for having an arm out but plenty are complaining about them on here.

 

[scholesyboy18]

I'd like to see accidental handball only given when the hand is raised above shoulder height or the arm is outstretched.

This is the root cause of the issue in the first place. Keyword being accidental. There is no way referee can determine it was accidental or not.

Change the rule to all hand balls will be penalty unless the hand is touching the body. So this way there is no controversy, defenders have to be smart to avoid hands and the rule is same for all teams.

 

[scholesyboy18]

I'd like to see accidental handball only given when the hand is raised above shoulder height or the arm is outstretched.

This is the root cause of the issue in the first place. Keyword being accidental. There is no way referee can determine it was accidental or not.

Change the rule to all hand balls will be penalty unless the hand is touching the body. So this way there is no controversy, defenders have to be smart to avoid hands and the rule is same for all teams.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

I'd like to see accidental handball only given when the hand is raised above shoulder height or the arm is outstretched.

99.99999999% of handballs are accidental

 

[SadlerMUFC]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

because nobody handles it deliberately (very rare that a handball is on purpose). The rule had to be changed. It's right now the way it should have always been. If your arm is away from your body and the ball strikes it, it's a handball.

 

[duffer]

Because a defender can run up or jump to block a ball with their arms all over the show and use 'getting into position' as an excuse if it hits their arm, when in reality if getting in to that position requires your arms to do that, maybe you weren't meant to get into it. It's unfair if they're essentially allowed to use their arms to block the ball so long as they don't move it towards it 'deliberately'.

We should side with the attacking play instead of protecting the defenders in my opinion, who could protect themselves by keeping their arms down.
Fouls are being given more now for having an arm out but plenty are complaining about them on here.

They can use it as an excuse all they want, putting you arm in a position so its more likely to block the ball is deliberate and a foul. Book them for moaning. If the refs used the current rules on dissent correctly then players would not whine nearly as much.

 

[duffer]

because nobody handles it deliberately (very rare that a handball is on purpose). The rule had to be changed. It's right now the way it should have always been. If your arm is away from your body and the ball strikes it, it's a handball.

Lots of players handle it deliberately. There's more accidental Hand balls for sure but that 99.9% figure you mention is way off.

 

[montpelier]

What was wrong with the way they have been treating hand balls throughout the past 30 odd years? Handle it deliberately = a foul. Ball hits you hand by accident = no foul.

The conversation you've started here is probably right. They're just trying to formalize it I think.

Wrongly, maybe.

I don't think it's too hard to distinguish what's 'fair' & what isn't but then you've got (quite a lot of) people here saying the Utd v PSG pen was 'stonewall' & so on.

 

[duffer]

I don't think it's too hard to distinguish what's 'fair' & what isn't but then you've got (quite a lot of) people here saying the Utd v PSG pen was 'stonewall' & so on.

Yeah but come on. We all know that's just fans being ridiculous. If it was Liverpool who got that decision then those same posters would be calling it the worst call ever.

 

[Reddy Rederson]

I’d just like to see some consistency from refs. Ball gets booted point blank into shaws hand that is resting in its natural position at his side, it’s a free kick. Yet much earlier in the game busquets raises his arm to the ball in an unnatural position, and it gets waved away to play on. It’s not going to matter what the rules are when refs are that inconsistent during 90 minutes.

 

[montpelier]

I’d just like to see some consistency from refs. Ball gets booted point blank into shaws hand that is resting in its natural position at his side, it’s a free kick. Yet much earlier in the game busquets raises his arm to the ball in an unnatural position, and it gets waved away to play on. It’s not going to matter what the rules are when refs are that inconsistent during 90 minutes.

That's quite a good point innit - doesn't really matter what the rules are, if they are this inconsistent. Here we go with VAR for all handballs then.

 

[ivaldo]

They can use it as an excuse all they want, putting you arm in a position so its more likely to block the ball is deliberate and a foul. Book them for moaning. If the refs used the current rules on dissent correctly then players would not whine nearly as much.

That is the current rule and it's causing controversy around almost every handball decision.

 

[11101]

This is the root cause of the issue in the first place. Keyword being accidental. There is no way referee can determine it was accidental or not.

Change the rule to all hand balls will be penalty unless the hand is touching the body. So this way there is no controversy, defenders have to be smart to avoid hands and the rule is same for all teams.

Well yeah, handball is almost always accidental, so those rules i suggest would apply virtually every time. The only circumstances I can think of where it's not are when players try to chest the ball and it hits their upper arm, or they play goalkeeper, which is a straight red anyway.

I think it should always be given when the arm is in an unnatural position, but that can't mean any time your hand isn't pinned to your side. The rule I suggested is kind of a middle ground.

 

[montpelier]

Yeah but come on. We all know that's just fans being ridiculous. If it was Liverpool who got that decision then those same posters would be calling it the worst call ever.

I don't know - or is it the 'controversy' @ivaldo just referred to.

And whatever the rule is anyway, as was just said.

Bringing us back to asking why is it so hard to work out?

The Utd one only has any claim at all because they're messing with the rule interpretation. And slo-mo VAR was able to pile in behind that.

 

[Havak]

Everything is about consistency and it seems to be the biggest thing football lacks, especially in officiating.

To their credit, they have stuck to their guns with recent handballs in the box resulting in penalties (and use of VAR to help) even if a lot of people disagree with the way the rule is written in the first place. However, these same kinds of handballs outside of the area are inconsistent . I understand it's more difficult to police as VAR can be used for one and not the other, but they need to find a way to improve on this front for sure.

I think the bottom line is that the boards want the referee on the field to be the main man, but I think it's too difficult to see everything. Why can't a second referee be watching the game on a monitor and say simple things like "that was handball" to the referee via earpiece and the right decision can be made in-play in a matter of seconds? It only helps the referee get things right and it will be swift. I get the referee wanting to see more and have a longer discussion if it's going to be awarding a penalty or a red card, but quick decisions like missed handballs and fouls being worthy of cards can have a second officials input within seconds of the event occurring. It's madness to me.

 

[montpelier]

Everything is about consistency and it seems to be the biggest thing football lacks, especially in officiating.

To their credit, they have stuck to their guns with recent handballs in the box resulting in penalties (and use of VAR to help) even if a lot of people disagree with the way the rule is written in the first place. However, these same kinds of handballs outside of the area are inconsistent . I understand it's more difficult to police as VAR can be used for one and not the other, but they need to find a way to improve on this front for sure.

I think the bottom line is that the boards want the referee on the field to be the main man, but I think it's too difficult to see everything. Why can't a second referee be watching the game on a monitor and say simple things like "that was handball" to the referee via earpiece and the right decision can be made in-play in a matter of seconds? It only helps the referee get things right and it will be swift. I get the referee wanting to see more and have a longer discussion if it's going to be awarding a penalty or a red card, but quick decisions like missed handballs and fouls being worthy of cards can have a second officials input within seconds of the event occurring. It's madness to me.

They're afraid to alter the natural order of things logically but decisively. So much faffing about has to occur as a consequence.

It's a journey I suppose. Decisions by Committee or whatever.

 

[VeevaVee]

They can use it as an excuse all they want, putting you arm in a position so its more likely to block the ball is deliberate and a foul. Book them for moaning. If the refs used the current rules on dissent correctly then players would not whine nearly as much.

But the PSG one has already been mentioned. Big grey area which is the issue. Imo that’s a stonewall. The defender has used his arms to help position himself better to block the ball. When the ball is blocked by the arm it’s clear they’ve gained an unfair advantage if that’s not a pen.

 

[Needham]

99.99999999% of handballs are accidental

99.99999999% of people who use 99.99999999% as a percentage are just making it up.

 

[montpelier]

@VeevaVee

But the PSG one has already been mentioned. Big grey area which is the issue. Imo that’s a stonewall. The defender has used his arms to help position himself better to block the ball. When the ball is blocked by the arm it’s clear they’ve gained an unfair advantage if that’s not a pen.

See, . OK.

1 - The defender has used his arms to help position himself better to block the ball - HIGHLY DEBATABLE

2 - gained an unfair advantage if that’s not a pen - BALL IS HEADING INTO THE STAND

so seriously, why are you saying it's stonewall a penalty or even worse, that it ought to be a penalty with no doubt (is it just the rules, or do you 'believe' this & that it should be

In fairness the rules are talking about ''bigger silhouette'' - possible if you want to take that view

and heading toward the goal - I suppose it is, .

But for common sense, I just think it's silly to say it's a 'stonewaller' honestly.

And we would laugh at Liverpool getting it, do you not think?

 

[Gopher Brown]

I’m thinking the real reason this handball rule is being taken in a weird direction is to discourage players blocking shots in any way. Fewer blocks = more goals? Kind of backwards considering how strict the offside rules have become.

 

[VeevaVee]

@VeevaVee



See, . OK.

1 - The defender has used his arms to help position himself better to block the ball - HIGHLY DEBATABLE

2 - gained an unfair advantage if that’s not a pen - BALL IS HEADING INTO THE STAND

so seriously, why are you saying it's stonewall a penalty or even worse, that it ought to be a penalty with no doubt (is it just the rules, or do you 'believe' this & that it should be

In fairness the rules are talking about ''bigger silhouette'' - possible if you want to take that view

and heading toward the goal - I suppose it is, .

But for common sense, I just think it's silly to say it's a 'stonewaller' honestly.

And we would laugh at Liverpool getting it, do you not think?

I wouldn't laugh at them getting it. The defender jumped using his arms as leverage and the ball struck the arm. The defender didn't have to jump but chose to do so to gain an advantage by stopping a shot. The ball striking the arm stops it going in its intended direction. That's on the defender. The rules are open to interpretation, which is the issue, but I believe it should be and is a foul.
Anything else and it's basically saying you can handball it so long as you don't know 100% the ball is going to hit it. That's not right imo.

 

[montpelier]

it's basically saying you can handball it so long as you don't know 100% the ball is going to hit it. That's not right imo.

Yeah, I can see that, for 'previously.' I think that's quite interesting.

 

[Gio]

You're just wrong here. There are plenty of things wrong with the old rule. Busquets is on a yellow, puts his arm up and saves a cross. Referee lets it go despite it being obvious that he would have had to card him. Later in the game Shaw gets a handball call whilst he's standing still with hands down his sides.

We get a penalty against PSG after it being reviewed a bunch. Porto don't get a penalty against Liverpool, no review.

Why all these disrepancies? Because the refs don't have the same interpretation of the rules. The new rules are much clearer and with VAR these instances wouldn't have been up for debate.

There has been infinitely more debate over the handball decisions made as a result of VAR compared to those before it was introduced. Even under the current guidance, refs still ultimately have to make a judgement call on when the arm is out of the body.

Refs were already clamping down on the John Terry superman pose. There’s a happy medium in all this which punishes defenders who are at it but equally doesn’t expect them to chop their arms off when defending at close range. Problem is the pendulum has swung too far in the attacker’s favour.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

Lots of players handle it deliberately. There's more accidental Hand balls for sure but that 99.9% figure you mention is way off.

99.9% is obviously an exageration, but it's not far off. I've played this game for over 40 years and I can only remember one time that I intentionally handled the ball. Players don't handle it on purpose...

 

[duffer]

99.9% is obviously an exageration, but it's not far off. I've played this game for over 40 years and I can only remember one time that I intentionally handled the ball. Players don't handle it on purpose...

That's you. You've also not played at the highest professional level where winning and losing is everything.

I've played for about 30 years (man and boy) and have seen a shit load of deliberate hand balls including a few of my own. Maybe more cheating bastards in my local leagues!

 

[RochaRoja]

The new interpretation is fine despite the whinging "in my day" old farts of the pundit circuit.