Handball in "self defense"

[TSHudson]

Just a general query as to people's approach to when players put their hands up to protect their face from the ball and it hits their hands. I've always had the thought that a) it says nothing in the laws that it is OK to use your hands to protect your face b) it's quicker to get your head out of the way than move your hands up to your face and c) it doesn't hurt that much if a ball does hit you and so I've always given handball in those instances.
However there's a clip on twitter from BT sport, with an expert (I'm sure it's an ex PL referee but can't picture who) talking to Peter Crouch and Robbie Savage and he says in the instances of self defense in protecting the face, you would NOT give it as handball. Clip here

The new LOTG clearly state it is usually handball if the hand / arm is above the shoulder level, which the face is. But then gives no explanation as to when it wouldn't be.

How do people normally deal with "self defense" handball?

 

[es1]

IMO it all depends on reaction time

if they're stood in a defensive wall protecting their face then majority of the time i'll be playing on

if it's a shot from 20 odd yards, the majority of the time i'd be penalising it.

you still need to apply the natural position / silhouette, assist / goal scoring aspect of the laws obviously.

 

[one]

Dodging the ball is just as much (if not more) of a natural reaction than putting you hand up. You would only put your hand up in a 'natural reaction' if your instinct is not to move your body/head out of the way.

 

[TSHudson]

IMO it all depends on reaction time

you still need to apply the natural position / silhouette, assist / goal scoring aspect of the laws obviously.

haha, nothing like keeping it simple right?! So many things to consider it's ridiculous. Frankly I'd welcome a simple handball law, hits your hand, it's handball, period. No whatifs or buts. Same for offside!

 

[es1]

haha, nothing like keeping it simple right?! So many things to consider it's ridiculous. Frankly I'd welcome a simple handball law, hits your hand, it's handball, period. No whatifs or buts. Same for offside!

perhaps...but there's equally many problems with that approach!

 

[Peter Grove]

I don't think you can make a general rule. I'd say it's a referee's judgement call each time, based on the individual circumstances of the specific incident, as to whether you consider it handling or not. If you truly believe the player has acted purely instinctively and involuntarily, that's one thing. If you feel the player had plenty of time to get out of the way then you would probably judge it differently.

One factor to consider is age/skill level. I used to referee a lot of youth games and in general, the younger the player, the less the chances that they've developed the necessary reactions and physical capability of getting out of the way. Distance, speed of ball, unexpected nature of the incident (was the ball deflected from close range etc) are also things to bear in mind.

With skilled and experienced adult players, you'd usually expect them to be more capable of avoiding the ball, in most (though not all) cases.

 

[socal lurker]

I don't think you can make a general rule. I'd say it's a referee's judgement call each time, based on the individual circumstances of the specific incident, as to whether you consider it handling or not. If you truly believe the player has acted purely instinctively and involuntarily, that's one thing. If you feel the player had plenty of time to get out of the way then you would probably judge it differently.

One factor to consider is age/skill level. I used to referee a lot of youth games and in general, the younger the player, the less the chances that they've developed the necessary reactions and physical capability of getting out of the way. Distance, speed of ball, unexpected nature of the incident (was the ball deflected from close range etc) are also things to bear in mind.

With skilled and experienced adult players, you'd usually expect them to be more capable if avoiding the ball, in most (though not all) cases.

^^ What he said. Distance, speed, time, age, skill level are all key. But I really do think the best key word is "instinctive." When a 10-year-old sees a ball suddenly come fast and hard at his face, the instinct is clearly to protect the face. There is no thought (i.e. no deliberate act), there is simply an instinctive action. With a professional player, the instincts are going to be very different, as they have been honed to the game by many years of practice. Absent unusual circumstances (perhaps having been knocked down and in the process of getting up when a ball comes hard from close in), the professional simply isn't going to throw his arms up the way that 10-year-old did. And then we have a spectrum from that 10-year-old through the professional. There are a lot of clues we can use. After contact is is the player still cowering/shocked, or does he instantly take advantage of the ball? Are the arms moving in a spastic way or in a controlled way? Where were the eyes when the ball was kicked? Was the player charging at the ball when it was kicked or oblivious? (IMHO if a player is moving toward the ball in an attempt to block it, any "protection" becomes deliberate as it is part of the attempt to block the ball.)

 

[one]

If you truly believe the player has acted purely instinctively and involuntarily, that's one thing. If you feel the player had plenty of time to get out of the way then you would probably judge it differently.

Distance, speed, time, age, skill level are all key. But I really do think the best key word is "instinctive." When a 10-year-old sees a ball suddenly come fast and hard at his face, the instinct is clearly to protect the face.

I can't say I disagree but it is not as simple as a single instinct. There is a lot more to it.

While putting your hand up can be an instinctive move, it is also a defender's instinct to to stop/block the ball going into goal. When a ball is coming at you face, it is also an instinct to move your head away from its path. There are a number of simultaneous instincts happening here and you need to consider all.

As an example, a player is standing on the line. An opponent kicks the ball at his face from 10 yards. What is his instinct move? Well that depends on his skill level but more so on where that line is. Say for an experienced defender on the goal line between the post, goal protection instinct kicks in first. He would not move his head due to that instinct, then face protection instinct kicks in and he puts is hand up to protect his fact. But the same player, when standing on the touch line would move his heard out of the way because different instinct take different priorities.

 

[Ganajin]

IMO it all depends on reaction time

if they're stood in a defensive wall protecting their face then majority of the time i'll be playing on

if it's a shot from 20 odd yards, the majority of the time i'd be penalising it.

you still need to apply the natural position / silhouette, assist / goal scoring aspect of the laws obviously.

While I fully agree with your approach here (I would also use how far the ball is coming from as an important criterion), just wanted to point out that if you deem the offence to be the deliberate moving of hand to ball, then all the stuff about about natural postion etc does NOT apply. Moving hand to ball is treated as a separate point in the Laws and has no other considerations attached. All the hand position, making body bigger stuff is applied if the ball just hits the hand without deliberate movement.

Frankly I'd welcome a simple handball law, hits your hand, it's handball, period. No whatifs or buts. Same for offside!

There was an experiment back in the 1960's where this was tried in a minor cup competition. All that happened was a huge amount of balls blasted into the penalty area hoping for a chance deflection onto someone's arm. It was quickly dropped as an idea.

 

[BCMilan]

haha, nothing like keeping it simple right?! So many things to consider it's ridiculous. Frankly I'd welcome a simple handball law, hits your hand, it's handball, period. No whatifs or buts. Same for offside!

I get where you're coming from with the handball, but I feel players will be clipping balls at players arms anywhere near the penalty area.

If does become a difficult issue if I ref kids games. The natural reaction of the little U7's / U8's is to protect their face, whereas as they get older they tend to just take the pain rather than give away a handball. Tough call, those.

 

[paulatbosco]

Just a general query as to people's approach to when players put their hands up to protect their face from the ball and it hits their hands. I've always had the thought that a) it says nothing in the laws that it is OK to use your hands to protect your face b) it's quicker to get your head out of the way than move your hands up to your face and c) it doesn't hurt that much if a ball does hit you and so I've always given handball in those instances.
However there's a clip on twitter from BT sport, with an expert (I'm sure it's an ex PL referee but can't picture who) talking to Peter Crouch and Robbie Savage and he says in the instances of self defense in protecting the face, you would NOT give it as handball. Clip here

The new LOTG clearly state it is usually handball if the hand / arm is above the shoulder level, which the face is. But then gives no explanation as to when it wouldn't be.

How do people normally deal with "self defense" handball?

I was playing in 2020, just before lockdown. A striker took a shot from the edge of the 6 yard box. I was a defender on the line and the ball was coming straight at my face. I chose not to put my hands up. I was at a point in my footballing career where I thought a football couldn't hurt me if it hit my face/ head. The ball hit me underneath the chin and caused whiplash. I collapsed and lost feeling to my whole body for about 2-3 minutes. This is called spinal shock. Unfortunately, I also broke my neck. It wasn't a "serious" break, but it has caused severe stenosis in my spine and I am scheduled to have an operation to fuse part of my cervical spine. In the meantime, I have moderate nerve pain in both my hands. Fortunately, no other symptoms.

Now, when in the role of a ref, when it comes to self defence, I try and work out if that player had not defended themselves, could they have been injured, perhaps seriously. IMO, this is within the scope of the LOTG and it is not erroneous to apply such a method bearing in mind that arms used to protect must be within the natural sillouette of the body.

As said in other comments, distance, time and skill level do matter. Eg in my example, had the shot been from further out, I could have had time to adjust my position to make a "clean" header.

Bearing in mind the pain involved in a potential injury, I would advise any up and coming ref to take a similar stance. However, "in spite of doctors orders", I still play, and yes once I was penalised for handball for protecting my face. It is what it is.