The 'handball' that wasn't.

[Flashheart]

What is the actual rule on this?

I was under the impression that if it was accidental (ball to hand) then it doesn't count. I think it would have been a harsh decision to give the penalty considering it was clearly unintentional. If the rules state it should have been a penalty however, then rules are rules.

And the ref denied it because he said his hands were down by his side, which some refute. By 'hand down by their side' just what is meant? It's unreasonable to expect players to keep their arms parallel with their bodies as they need their arms to balance and what not.

[Ƭ̵̬̊: The Artist Formerly Known as CWIG]

I don't know what the actual law is, but I hear a lot of pundits talk about if the hand was in an unnatural position....which his clearly wasn't.

It would have been harsh, as would have the other two that Clough reckons they should have had seeing as I actually don't even know what he could be referring to. Sour grapes.

[reeves4england]

It's an old article, not sure anything has changed though.. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4524354.stm

"In Fifa's Laws of the Game 2005, Law 12 says a free-kick or penalty will be awarded if a player "handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)".

Page 67 of the document gives "additional information for referees, assistant referees and fourth officials".

It adds: "Referees are reminded that deliberately handling the ball is normally punished only by a direct free-kick or penalty kick if the offence occurred inside the penalty area.

"A caution or dismissal is not normally required."

However, the document fails to describe what constitutes deliberate handball, which places the responsibility firmly on the referee and referees' assistants.

Former Premier League referee David Elleray said the referee's interpretation depends on whether the hand or arm is in an "unnatural" position at the point of contact.

David Elleray consults his assistant during a club
Referees often consult their assistants on decisions
"Referees look at two specifics - did the hand or arm go towards the ball or in a manner which would block the ball, or is the hand in a position where it would not normally be?" Elleray told BBC Sport.

"The challenging decisions are if the defending player spreads their arms to make themselves bigger.

"If the ball hits the arm then the referee must decide whether this action was to deliberately block the ball or whether the player has raised their arms to protect themselves - especially if the ball is hit at speed."

Based on the above, I'd say no penalty. But you see them given pretty much every week, and I was surprised this one wasn't.

[Flashheart]

There's no way it was deliberate, if anything he tried to move his hand out of the way. That just confirms my initial thought that Clough is being a whingey piss-bag (although they did have other decisions go against them)

[kerry red]

Got to say I thought it was a nailed-on penalty. He lent towards the ball with his left arm away from his body.

[Ginginho]

It obviously wasn't deliberate, however wouldn't have been surprised if it was given.
If it was the other way around i'd have been screaming for a penalty to be honest.

[stfc1975]

Got to say I thought it was a nailed-on penalty. He lent towards the ball with his left arm away from his body.

No way. He tried getting out of the way

[suttonred]

Nailed on pen the handball was. I also thought the second one was as well, but the Sheffield players launch in to the stratosphere probably convinced the ref otherwise.

[kerry red]

Cheaty Swindle fan!

[Ells]

It's an old article, not sure anything has changed though.. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4524354.stm

Based on the above, I'd say no penalty. But you see them given pretty much every week, and I was surprised this one wasn't.

Nope, nothing's changed. Laws of the game 2014/2015 says the same thing, deliberate.

Amazed anyone's even debating it really, seemed so obviously unintentional to me. But yeah, you do see them given so I guess that's where most of the confusion is.

[Arriba]

If it had been the other way around we'd be moaning about it.

[Batch]

yes we would arriba, they are so often given I was amazed he didn't give it. to the letter of the law it was the correct decision, but it's not consistent with most other refs

[Flashheart]

If it had been the other way around we'd be moaning about it.

Not me.


Sheff Utd were given a hard time by the ref, generally speaking his decisions went against them and could have cost them the game. In my opinion, however, the 'handball' was not one of them.

[adje]

handball HAS to be deliberate to be an offence but in truth rarely is

[Ƭ̵̬̊: The Artist Formerly Known as CWIG]

handball HAS to be deliberate to be an offence but in truth rarely is

The only time I see a case to make an exception on this, is if the player is on the line and it stops a goal going in.