Completely wrong in law and not in the spirit of the game. the law was changed literally to make this not an offence so how can you say it is in the spirit of the game?
Handball
- Thread starter Redref34
- Start date
Anubis
RefChat Addict
Sorry I know I sometimes slate guys harshly but in line with the last two contributions am compelled to say if you are doing as you say, you are absolutely not applying the lotg correctly, esp one which is clear
you do not get to fabricate your own opinion on this senario, regardless of how your players take the decision
when I, or the Cape Town version of me turns up next week and applies the law correctly and gets abused and chased round the park for doing so, thats on you
Well,you would be wrong to do this. It isn't in the handball law.
CapeTownRef
Member
I know that (accidental handball dropping at the feet of another attacker) has been specifically ruled as legal in the last change to the handball law. So if it doesn't drop to another attacker it is hand ball, but if it does it isn't. No logic there but the laws are the laws.
I agree that it doesn't make sense.
So you're saying you know the law (in a sense as what you wrote isn't what the law says), but you do the opposite anyway?
It's not about "dropping at the feet" ...It's if they score immediately after handling. If there is no goal scored immediately after an accidental HB, then there is no offence and play continues.
in other news... without much fuss, and don't think it's covered in law changes the diagram for where the arm starts for purposes of HB has been updated to more in line with what the text says.
A much neater way of dealing with the situation where the ball enters the goal directly from the hand of an attacker would be via Law 10 rather than Law 12. Law 10 already states that where a goalkeeper throws the ball directly into the attackers goal the restart is a goal kick. This could be extended to say that a goal kick is awarded whenever the ball enters the goal directly from the hand of the attacking team, or where it strikes the hand of an attacker and that player then puts the ball into the goal. The current arrangement make an accidental handball an offence but only in a particular case and that's a bit messy. There is already a long list of circumstances where a ball entering the goal results in a goal-kick rather than the award of a goal, and adding accidental handball would be straightforward.
Good spot - the old diagram was definitely more teeshirt than armpit
one
RefChat Addict
While better than what it used to be, the third diagram, for me, is nonsensical. The location on most of the arm (inner, front or back of the arm) where it is considered handball or no handball shifts towards the elbow as the arm moves from vertical to horizontal.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
I like this. Have you thought of sending it to the IFAB as a potential law amendment?
They say that they welcome any suggestions for laws changes (though quite how true that is, I'm not sure).
one
RefChat Addict
That would disallow a goal resulting from a drop kick from a keeper. I think what we have now is good, just needs settling time.
So does the current law!
"It is an offence if a player:
- scores in the opponents’ goal:
- directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
- immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental" (my italics)
And in both cases we have a delay of several seconds after the ball is kicked when no-one can tell if an offence has been committed. Much better I think to award no goal and restart with a goal kick. And for the lawmakers to clarify whether a goal can be scored from a drop kick!
Also, the current law is inconsistent on goalkeepers scoring directly from a throw-out. Law 10 says that where this happens the restart is a goal kick, whereas Law 12 says it is a handball offence. It needs clearing up.
And if it is a handball offence then what is the restart? IFK in the attacking goalkeeper penalty area? Really?! Again, much better to disallow any such "goal" and restart with a goal kick.
And if it is a handball offence then what is the restart? IFK in the attacking goalkeeper penalty area? Really?! Again, much better to disallow any such "goal" and restart with a goal kick.
one
RefChat Addict
Not sure if we all agree. At least I don't. I don't think this is what the law was trying to stop. In any case this does not constitute immediately to me.
Of course you can 'equate' this in your version by using the word 'immediately'.
Completely wrong in law and worse than that, stitches up the following week’s referee who applies the law correctly.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
Law 12 does say scoring a goal directly from the hand/arm is a handball offence even for a goalkeeper, but then again it also says that the goalkeeper is not penalised for a handball offence inside their own penalty area, meaning you can't give a direct free kick (or penalty) for it if the keeper throws it from their own penalty area into the opponent's goal.
So in the end, even if it is a little messy, I think it's fairly clear the only law we can use to determine the restart in such a scenario is Law 10.
I actually wrote to the IFAB in 2019 pointing out the possible confusion, and suggesting that perhaps they could come up with a better form of wording for Law 12.
Despite the fact that I got an answer from David Elleray saying they would clear this up in the next edition of the laws, they never did.