Hand ball

[Paul Waine]

This could create a great new game of blasting the ball at defenders at point blank range in the penalty area to try and clip a hand or arm whilst defenders try and run around with their hands behind their backs.

There could also be another great new game, players trying to trip opposing players. If the player's foot contacts the opposing player and that player stumbles or falls to the ground a free kick is awarded, but, if the player making the tackle misses, perhaps the opposing player skips over the other player's foot, then no foul is awarded.

Why would a foul not be given if the player making the tackle doesn't make contact with opposing player, but a foul is given when illegal contact is made? No one argues that the foul shouldn't be given because of the distance between the two players. So, same deal with the ball striking the hand/arm. If the ball hits it's hand ball. Keep the rules simple and objective.

[dsr]

There could also be another great new game, players trying to trip opposing players. If the player's foot contacts the opposing player and that player stumbles or falls to the ground a free kick is awarded, but, if the player making the tackle misses, perhaps the opposing player skips over the other player's foot, then no foul is awarded.

Why would a foul not be given if the player making the tackle doesn't make contact with opposing player, but a foul is given when illegal contact is made? No one argues that the foul shouldn't be given because of the distance between the two players. So, same deal with the ball striking the hand/arm. If the ball hits it's hand ball. Keep the rules simple and objective.

A useful tactic would be to dummy a shot, and if the defender has made a slide to try and block it, just roll the ball at him and collect the penalty. There's no way a defender lying on the ground could expect to avoid the handball.

It would also mean that "protecting oneself" when standing in the wall at a free kick, would become impossible. Ouch.

[aggi]

There could also be another great new game, players trying to trip opposing players. If the player's foot contacts the opposing player and that player stumbles or falls to the ground a free kick is awarded, but, if the player making the tackle misses, perhaps the opposing player skips over the other player's foot, then no foul is awarded.

Why would a foul not be given if the player making the tackle doesn't make contact with opposing player, but a foul is given when illegal contact is made? No one argues that the foul shouldn't be given because of the distance between the two players. So, same deal with the ball striking the hand/arm. If the ball hits it's hand ball. Keep the rules simple and objective.

So, going by your suggestion that any contact at all between hand and ball is hand ball, are we saying that any contact between two opposition players must be a foul? No discretion over what caused the contact, whether it is intentional, whether it impeded the player in any way?

[KRBFC]

All depends on the club

Some of the most controversial handballs have been against the bigger clubs. Luton just got the worst one go in their favour.

[boyyanno]

I'd just do away with the intentional bit and better define the laws on which it can actually accurately be measured. I wouldn't even go for the "natural position" stuff either.

If it hits your arm or hand below the shoulder/top of the arm and your arms are more than x distance from your body then it's handball. If you wanted to be more scrupulous you could add in distance the ball travels if you really want, for example more than 5 yards distance.

I just think I'd much rather have a metric that we can all agree on and measure rather than somthing that's going to be subjective every week.

[Paul Waine]

So, going by your suggestion that any contact at all between hand and ball is hand ball, are we saying that any contact between two opposition players must be a foul? No discretion over what caused the contact, whether it is intentional, whether it impeded the player in any way?

No, just when the foul is a foul. If a player trips another player we don't hear a discussion about whether it was an intentional trip, do we. It's just those are the facts. Yes, we sometime see the decision given the other way, but there's no big debate about the intention of either player in making the decision, or, as was my point, we don't hear a discussion about whether how close one player was to the other player and don't award the free kick because the other player did or didn't have an opportunity to avoid the contact or the intention is the player's mind when contact occurred. We can't judge intentions, so just award the handball or the foul based on what referee saw plus the VAR camera confirming (or otherwise) that the ball came into contact with the hand. Again, no "left off" because the player was close or the ball deflected, especially if the deflection is off another part of the defender's body. Facts and simple decisions only.