Goal coming off attackers hand.

[Martiju]

I've said it before....avoidable/unavoidable
No reference to intent and perfectly fits with the existing clarifications
Why does this Law need to be so difficult!?

I'm inclined to agree, but 'avoidable' also implies a level of intent. For instance, could they have moved their arm/hand out of the way and if so, why didn't they?

I quite like the 'getting an advantage' idea, that's probably more in keeping with other laws now too - and would save me having to shout 'accidental!' at 95% of the shouts for handball (not to say the 'aren't you going to book him ref?' for the 5% I give!).

 

[Kes]

I think the notion of "gaining an advantage" would be a pointless one not to mention confusing.
A player who finds himself in the way of a team mate who then shoots for goal, only for the ball to accidentally ricochet off his hand or arm and fly into the net for instance? That's a goal all day long currently but would be denied under an "advantage" type law (?)

 

[santa sangria]

I think the notion of "gaining an advantage" would be a pointless one not to mention confusing.
A player who finds himself in the way of a team mate who then shoots for goal, only for the ball to accidentally ricochet off his hand or arm and fly into the net for instance? That's a goal all day long currently but would be denied under an "advantage" type law (?)

But if the ball wasn't going in and deflects off a hand into goal? That's exactly why gaining an advantage would be useful. If it was going in anyway with no GK, it would probably be offside. If a shot hits your hand on the way into the the goal and there are other players between you and the goal... under the current laws it might not be handball... but the game is called football... I'd be quite happy if we were able to act based on "gaining an advantage"... it would also clear up those where the striker "accidentally" traps a long ball off the thigh via a bounce off the arm...

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

I don't mind a law change for 'accidental handling is a foul'....except it would be encouraging attackers to kick the ball at defenders arms, wouldn't it? That covers the scenarios where a player, say, tries to control a high ball with their thigh and it deflects onto their arm, whereas the current law isn't clear on that.
Though on the flip side, a defender slips over, is on the ground and the ball is kicked and hits their arm on the ground and stops....
Avoidable/unavoidable is fine, though 'careless' works. Though that still leaves the above situation wide open to interpretation.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Leave it alone, just give the obvious deliberate ones, the rest of the maybe ones give you enough leeway to decline....

 

[PinnerPaul]

Its a difficult sell. I once had an attacker take a near fresh air shot at the ball, he made a slight connection, the ball bounced up, hit his arm and fell back to him and he then promptly dispatched the ball in the net.

Much complaining, resulting in a red card and angry 15 year old being led away from me by his coach after the game.

As others have said, 'football expects' that if an attacker benefits from the ball hitting his hand/arm, then its handball - not what the laws say and that's our problem!

 

[PinnerPaul]

I don't mind a law change for 'accidental handling is a foul'....except it would be encouraging attackers to kick the ball at defenders arms, wouldn't it? That covers the scenarios where a player, say, tries to control a high ball with their thigh and it deflects onto their arm, whereas the current law isn't clear on that.
Though on the flip side, a defender slips over, is on the ground and the ball is kicked and hits their arm on the ground and stops....
Avoidable/unavoidable is fine, though 'careless' works. Though that still leaves the above situation wide open to interpretation.

Interestingly in hockey, if the ball hits the foot, its a free kick, deliberate or not. For the live international game I saw in the summer it seemed to me that it was up to the team without the ball to avoid the contact and yes I think hitting the ball at an opponent did seem to be a legitimate tactic.

 

[Kes]

But if the ball wasn't going in and deflects off a hand into goal? That's exactly why gaining an advantage would be useful. If it was going in anyway with no GK, it would probably be offside. If a shot hits your hand on the way into the the goal and there are other players between you and the goal... under the current laws it might not be handball... but the game is called football... I'd be quite happy if we were able to act based on "gaining an advantage"... it would also clear up those where the striker "accidentally" traps a long ball off the thigh via a bounce off the arm...

Interesting point I suppose.

The fact remains though, that we're debating something that is enshrined in the LOTG. That being that the LOTG say, it has to be "deliberate". That is the only ambiguity within it. It's the referee's individual interpretation and decision, just like it can be with OFFINABUS. Personally, I don't think this particular law could be any simpler (or "fairer").