If not for the handball I don't think it would have been a goal. Therefore I'd have awarded the free kick
Callum,
It doesn't matter what the outcome is - all that matters is whether it's deliberate. The LOTG says 'deliberately handles the ball', not 'deliberately handles the ball, or benefits from an accidental handling of the ball'. Whether or not the foul has occurred isn't changed upon seeing the outcome. Therefore, accidental handling, no matter what, is not a foul.
A lot of referees will penalise accidental handling if it benefits that player - and too many high level referees as well (heck, I know of one top-level referee down under that thinks a player handling the ball just because he falls with his arm outstretched is a foul!!!).
I'm going to describe 2 scenarios I've ha:
1) Crowded penalty area, attacker has his arms down by his side. Ball is bouncing around, he loses sight, ball comes from behind, hits his arm, drops to his feet. He turns, sees the ball at his feet, kicks the ball and scores.
- Natural position, and no opportunity to react. Therefore, it was clearly accidental.
-He gained the biggest possible benefit from the accidental handling. But, doesn't matter. It was accidental - what happens after that moment of contact with the arm is irrelevant.
-Therefore, I allowed the goal. But I have no doubt a lot of referees would have disallowed if, following your line of reasoning. My decision was correct.
2) Completely open goal, keeper nowhere near. Ball bouncing somewhat slowly into the goal. Defender is sprinting across to the left, almost right on the line. He is just about to reach a position to be able to clear the ball, when the ball hits a divot and suddenly and significantly changes direction. The ball was probably about a yard away from the player at the time, and it bounced significantly to the right. As the defender was sprinting, one arm was behind his body, and the ball struck this arm and stopped dead.
-The player was sprinting across, so it's natural for the arm to be behind his body in a running motion. The ball suddenly changed direction and did it so close to the player that he had no opportunity to react. The player didn't move the arm to the ball or hold his arm at all. Therefore, it was completely accidental and unavoidable
-He gained the biggest possible benefit from the accidental handling. But, doesn't matter. It was accidental - what happens after that moment of contact with the arm is irrelevant.
-However, I awarded a penalty kick without sending off the player. I reasoned that given the nature of the benefit it was only fair to award the PK, but I couldn't send the player off for what was clearly accidental.
-In doing so, I managed to get the same decision wrong twice. Accidental is accidental - the penalty kick was incorrect. The fact that a goal was denied was just luck. But, having awarded the PK, I needed to send him off
-I reasoned that it was unfair to have the goal denied by accidental handling, but this is incorrect. Accidental handling is an unavoidable part of the game. Fairness isn't an issue.
But I have no doubt many referees would have awarded the PK and the RC.