A&H

Interesting from IFAB (Handball interpretation)

Mr Dean

RefChat Addict
Here's the IFAB's interpretation of an unusual potential handball scenario. Thoughts?

Screenshot_20200127-025310.jpg
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
Makes sense to me. The ball at a defender's feet in his own penalty area is not a goal scoring opportunity hence the condition for it to be an offence is not satisfied.
 
According to the very clear wording in the LotG this is an offence.

If IFAB are going to publish contradictory guidance they should really clearly explain why!
 
According to the very clear wording in the LotG this is an offence.
How is that so?
Edit: I have looked at this change, for both criteria, to include the condition of 'immidiate' for both time and vicinity to goal. For me that was the intent of the law was as it was to satisfy expectation and not exception.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nij
How is that so?
Edit: I have looked at this change, for both criteria, to include the condition of 'immidiate' for both time and vicinity to goal. For me that was the intent of the law was as it was to satisfy expectation and not exception.

"gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal"

That is crystal clear to me. IFAB's reply in the OP is contradictory to this. I agree it is not the intent of Law 12 to punish this.

My point is, how are we supposed to know what IFAB "intend" if they do not explain when cases like this come up?
And for referees that haven't been stalking IFAB on Twitter or reading these inane conversations, how are they supposed to follow these "changes" and "intent"?
 
Clear as mud :) Thankfully this will probably never happen. It probably shows more of an insight into how far back on the pitch IFAB consider handball to be influencing the creation of goals.

The alternative restart though is a penalty in the kicker's penalty area which I don't think anyone involved in the game would desire...
 
"gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:
  • scores in the opponents’ goal"

That is crystal clear to me
I see how your are reading this. Let's say same as op question but the player dribbles 4 opponent and goes around the keeper and scores. That also, is an offence according to clear wording of the law. He gained posession of the ball after it touched his hand and then scored in the opponent's goal.

Agree with the rest of your post. IFAB has to be more clear on laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
My thoughts are firstly, that it's never going to happen. When have you ever seen a player (other than a goalkeeper) score in the opponent's goal from inside their own penalty area? OK, maybe someone will dig up a YouTube video of the only time in history that it's ever happened but in practical terms, none of us is ever going to encounter this.

Secondly, consider the scenario if you did decide to penalise it as a handling offence. You'd have to give a penalty for an accidental handball.

To quote from the laws document:
The Laws cannot deal with every possible situation, so where there is no direct provision in the Laws, The IFAB expects the referee to make a decision within the ‘spirit’ of the game – this often involves asking the question, “what would football want/expect?”

I think this may be what lies behind the IFAB's response. I don't believe football wants or expects that accidental handling should lead to a penalty kick.

Thirdly, as @one says, this is not the kind of scenario that was supposed to be the intent of this law.
 
It's never going to happen, no player can kick it that far unless doing a drop kick with force or a goal kick with a run up. And even then there'd have to be no keeper in the opposition goal.
 
My thoughts are firstly, that it's never going to happen. When have you ever seen a player (other than a goalkeeper) score in the opponent's goal from inside their own penalty area? OK, maybe someone will dig up a YouTube video of the only time in history that it's ever happened but in practical terms, none of us is ever going to encounter this.

Secondly, consider the scenario if you did decide to penalise it as a handling offence. You'd have to give a penalty for an accidental handball.

To quote from the laws document:


I think this may be what lies behind the IFAB's response. I don't believe football wants or expects that accidental handling should lead to a penalty kick.

Thirdly, as @one says, this is not the kind of scenario that was supposed to be the intent of this law.

Obviously this will never happen in 11aside football. But to play devils advocate, what about in small sides games? Ball hits a defenders hand unintentionally, who is just outside the penalty area. He then shoots and scores, which isn't uncommon in 5aside or futsal when the keeper has pushed up at the end of the game when his team are a goal behind.

Are we allowing the goal as per IFAB?
 
Obviously this will never happen in 11aside football. But to play devils advocate, what about in small sides games? Ball hits a defenders hand unintentionally, who is just outside the penalty area. He then shoots and scores, which isn't uncommon in 5aside or futsal when the keeper has pushed up at the end of the game when his team are a goal behind.

Are we allowing the goal as per IFAB?
Luckily futsal is still on what are essentially 2014 laws!
But yeah, when (if) they fix the futsal laws in line with the 2019 changes (big if) then they'll need to fix this.

IDFK for accidental HB leading to OGSO/goal could be a fix?
Would be entertaining in the OP!
 
Obviously this will never happen in 11aside football. But to play devils advocate, what about in small sides games? Ball hits a defenders hand unintentionally, who is just outside the penalty area. He then shoots and scores, which isn't uncommon in 5aside or futsal when the keeper has pushed up at the end of the game when his team are a goal behind.

Are we allowing the goal as per IFAB?
I'll go back to the intent of this law when it was created. It was about what football expects. This goal, by many, will be attributed to the opponents deciding to leave the goal unguarded and less so to a non-deliberate handball. Most neutral 'football expects" people would expect the goal to be given (I think).

Another fix is that a non-deliberate handball can only be punished if it is in the attacking penalty area (or attacking half for 5 aside / futsal / small sided games).
 
So now, we can really simply handling in Law 12 again:

Except for the goalkeeper within the goalkeeper's own penalty area, it is a handling offense when:
  • a player deliberately handles the ball, or
  • football expects handling to be called.

:rolleyes:
 
Surely the simplest way of altering the handball law would've been to only disallow a goal if it had been scored from the hand/arm. Get rid of the goalscoring oppurtunity bit. Much easier for everyone. So many goals have been ruled out because the ball struck a players hand completely accidentally, and nobody even noticed it until VAR got involved. Surely football doesn't want or expect that?
 
It's never going to happen, no player can kick it that far unless doing a drop kick with force or a goal kick with a run up. And even then there'd have to be no keeper in the opposition goal.

But let's not stop the refereeing community creating ever more unlikely scenarios and then debating them to within an inch of their life, seeking answers from the most ancient and mystical text known as "The LOTG"
😂
 
Back
Top