Handball

[VolunteerGeneral]

I`ve seen this go both ways when there are times I was glad it wasn`t called and times I can`t believe it was not called. Could someone please explain to me what constitutes a handball? Do we have any refs on here that wouldn`t mind offering an opinion?

[DonCChatt]

I can't really answer your question, but it my understanding that there are new rules relative to handballs that make them somewhat less likely to be called.

[soccer891]

I can't really answer your question, but it my understanding that there are new rules relative to handballs that make them somewhat less likely to be called.

 

 

Take a look at this link -> http://www.refblog.com/non-blog/handling_paper.pdf

[repete]

Take a look at this link -> http://www.refblog.com/non-blog/handling_paper.pdf

 

USSF Advice to Referees is pretty authoritative and interpretative, and Law 12 is pretty universal, even for HS games. High level referees usually refer to it often. There is also a video "Myths of the Game" we use when training new referees that shows a few misconceptions regarding deliberate handling that really bakes the less informed coaches and parents noodles. First things first; it is not an infraction if it is incidental, doesn't matter if a player gains an advantage. Its is not an infraction if the ball played to the hand, doesnt matter if player gains an advantage. The only judgement used in applying the law, ask was it deliberate? Thats all. There are only two places in the LOTG where the word "deliberate" applies; deliberately wasting time (pass back) and deliberate handling. Both require fore thought and intent. Its probably an infraction, but I would categorize it as trifling if 1. The score is 8-0 and its in the box, and the losing team somehow handles it. I wouldnt call it, and sell it that way. (Why rub it in). 2. the player made no attempt to play the ball after it hit their arm. I wouldnt call it if a player had her back to the ball and it struck her in the arm, propelling it to their feet. How could a person deliberate on the ball with their back turned? I probably would call it if its so obvious that not calling it would put my credibility in the tank. Unless it was #1.

[kickgrass]

I've always heard it described as "If the ball hits the hand" it's not an infraction; "If the hand hits the ball" it is an infraction. Does that summation still not hold true.

 

I also had been told that girls were given more leeway when arms are across their chest as protection. While I understand that is not a written rule, is it something that tends to be allowed?

[cincyred]

When in the penalty box, If a ball hits a players hand/arm in an unexpected, non-deliberate manner and provides that player with a sensational scoring opportunity, I would come un-hinged if the ref did not blow the whistle because he/she did not consider it to be a deliberate action. Things should be called different in the penalty box.

[NeWbLuE]

cincyred,

 

you beat me to that point..most handballs inside the box need to be called...I am with you...case in point last minute or two left in the match...a frenzy of passes and strikes inside the 18 yard box, a strike that is heading into the upper 90 of the net and it hits an opposing players arm below the elbow, clearly and with so much force that it moves her arm back several feet and the ball goes away from the goal....a ball that was destined for the back of the net. That is a P K in my book no matter if it was deliberate or not...it made a HUGE difference in where the ball ended up and it was inside the box. It was a clear advantage for the other team and prevented a goal from being scored. It was not called. Play continued and end time whistle was blown a few seconds later. True story.

[gstorts]

cincyred,

 

you beat me to that point..most handballs inside the box need to be called...I am with you...case in point last minute or two left in the match...a frenzy of passes and strikes inside the 18 yard box, a strike that is heading into the upper 90 of the net and it hits an opposing players arm below the elbow, clearly and with so much force that it moves her arm back several feet and the ball goes away from the goal....a ball that was destined for the back of the net. That is a P K in my book no matter if it was deliberate or not...it made a HUGE difference in where the ball ended up and it was inside the box. It was a clear advantage for the other team and prevented a goal from being scored. It was not called. Play continued and end time whistle was blown a few seconds later. True story.

 

I would only ask how the ball hit a player's are below the elbow if the ball was headed to the upper 90 of the net. That would seem to imply the players arms are over his head - certainly not in a natural position.

[cincyred]

You have to call things different in the penalty box than anywhere else on the field. Soccer players know this!!!!!!!

 

Refs better know this too. The line for infractions is more narrow in this 18 yard box. Things that a defender can do outside of the box are more restricted in the box for fear of a PK. Forwards that dive are just as bad. As a ref, you certainly would call diving different in the penalty box than if it occurs anywhere else on the field. Again, players know where they can and can't expect trouble from a ref. The penalty area is the ref's area. He can decide a game based on how he calls fouls in this small area. Location matters.

[NeWbLuE]

I would only ask how the ball hit a player's are below the elbow if the ball was headed to the upper 90 of the net. That would seem to imply the players arms are over his head - certainly not in a natural position.

 

The ball was struck just outside the 6 yard box (center) from the ground headed up toward the right upper 90 . The handball girl was standing in front of the keeper who was still standing on the left post. Short shot that would have been a goal if the ball would not have been handled.

[repete]

When in the penalty box, If a ball hits a players hand/arm in an unexpected, non-deliberate manner and provides that player with a sensational scoring opportunity, I would come un-hinged if the ref did not blow the whistle because he/she did not consider it to be a deliberate action. Things should be called different in the penalty box.

 

While I understand your frustration, it is still not an infraction if it is not deliberate. Ever hear of Maradona? The FIFA refs had it right, but it did look bad. I totally disagree with your analysis that things should be called different in the box just because its the box. The foul is the foul. Now what you dont realize is that the bar for trifling can be up to the referee. Players that act differently in the box thinking the referee will give them a little leeway are setting themselves up for disaster. This isnt mindreading or rocket science. For me, a player has to make a play at the ball, propel it or swat it away for it to come up on my radar. That person is probably getting a red or yellow card too, depending on the circumstances, and whether the action was DOGSO. You get to understand what gets what after alot of games.

[cincyred]

I think a referee has to have an understanding of what goes on in the penalty box. To think that the game is played the same everywhere on the field is naive. For expample, the worst fouls in the world happen in the corners of the endline, towards the end of the game when one team is trying to kill the clock. These "fouls" are not called the same as other fouls. The referee must understand what each team is trying to do, given the variables of the score, the time remaining and all other circumstances. I don't think you can ignore these elements and make each call based simply on what occurs. Most things happen on the field for a reason. The reason may have been instigated by something that happened earlier. A reckless tackle without premonition is differed from a rough tackle with intention. I agree that an ingredient for a good referee is to have played and watched a lot of soccer. I have been fortunate to love this game for 38 years.