Total Pageviews

'Deliberate' Handball

Here’s a tricky on. Firstly, let me specify that when I use the term ‘arm’ in this page, I include in the definition of ‘arm’ the player’s hand.
 If a player handles the ball accidently this is not an infringement. It clearly states in law 12 that a handball must be deliberate. However, the common interpretation is that if a player has his arm in an unnatural position and the ball strikes it, this is considered deliberate. Or if his arm is in any position but the player has time to get it out of the way of the course of the ball and does not, then this is also considered deliberate. This is not a well understood rule. The only time a handball is not an infringement is if he is too close to the ball to move his arm (factoring in the speed that the ball is travelling at) and his arm is resting normally by his side. Of course, when a man jumps or goes to ground he nearly always moves his arms from his side and it is possible that his arm could be in a natural position but not by his side. The convention is that, having decided to jump or go to ground, he has decided to move his arm away from his side and has thus left himself culpable to a deliberate handball. It can be a source of dispute at times but nevertheless, it is pretty well interpreted by most referees most of the time and necessarily involves discretion.
The interesting point is once more, to do with issuing cards for handballs. This is where it gets tricky. In order to distinguish between the possibilities, it is useful to make the following distinction. In one scenario a player may move his arm from his side, risking the ball hitting it and if it does, this is handball and an infringement. In another scenario a player may deliberately strike the ball with his arm. This is a handball and an infringement AND a cautionable offense. This constitutes a caution for ‘unsporting behaviour’.  So, to clarify, there are actually three types of handball:
1)      an unavoidable accident
2)      an arm moved from the player’s side, risking being struck by the ball
3)      a deliberate striking of the ball with the arm
The appropriate courses of action by the referee are respectively:
1)      no action
2)      a free-kick or penalty
3)      a free-kick or penalty AND a caution
However, there is one exception; when a player commits the third type of handball to prevent a goal-scoring opportunity he is sent off for the prevention, not for the deliberate handball. I actually believe this rule to be incorrect (as discussed on a separate page of this blog). A parallel can be drawn with attempting to score a goal with this third type of handball. It is obvious that the result of cheating in this manner is equal to preventing a goal with a handball. The team for whom the offending player plays stands to be one goal better off as a result of this infringement. So, it stands to reason that the punishment should be the same. But it is not. The rules explicitly state that attempting to score a goal by handling the ball is a cautionable offense and not an offense for which a player should be sent off. Surely, if preventing a goal with a handball is a red-card, then attempting to score in this way should be too. However, preventing a goal with a handball is only punishable with a sending off if successful. If a player attempts to score with a handball, he cannot both be successful in doing so, but also be punished by the referee for the infringement because for the referee to punish the player he would necessarily have to disallow the goal scored. Still with me?
The only sensible reconciliation of all these paradoxical scenarios is to change the rule about preventing the goal scoring opportunity. As discussed on another page, this should be a penalty goal (automatic goal). Then, the handball rule could be implemented as above without exception.
The most famous example of this, the ‘hand of god’ Maradona goal is widely considered one of the worst incidents of cheating in the history of the game. It is somewhat ironic that the worst incident of cheating ever seen should only have been punished by a yellow card and a free kick.