Question Number: 34227

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 5/21/2021

RE: Professional

Luke of Livermore, CA US asks...

Taken from an on-line quiz I just took (hence the odd numbering system, do you think the following video clips are handballs? Why or why not? Does the level of play make a difference in your determination?

No. 2: https://vimeo.com/544300144/d69c9db459

No. 6: https://vimeo.com/544300846/1c952146af

No. 7: https://vimeo.com/544300950/0812efb140

No. 9: https://vimeo.com/544301283/144c482db5

No. 12: https://vimeo.com/544301501/eb802ca698

No. 14: https://vimeo.com/544301642/7e02d6eaa5

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Luke,

Thanks for the question. This is a good series of examples to explore different aspects and intricacies of the law. My personal opinions are:

2) Handball for me. I accept that he was turning to brace for the contact - but he's left his arm sticking well out in front of his body the obligation is on the defender to, as far as can reasonably be expected, to not be doing that - to keep the arm closer to the body. No DOGSO though - there's another defender in front of the keeper who might be able to intercept. While the concept of 'unnaturally making the body bigger' needs to consider what is natural for the players movement at the time, I feel like this one is on the defender - but I accept this could be a bit contentious. I'd say this would probably have to be a YC though, given it's still stopping a good opportunity on goal.

6) Easy foul for me. Absolutely no reason at all for the arm to be out so far away from his body like that. Very difficult for the referee to spot. AR got caught some 5 yards + behind play as well but locally, you'd expect some teamwork between ref and AR to work out this decision. Often the ref clearly looking to the AR is 'asking for help', then a shake of the head can say 'no' (if acceptable in your area), or the appropriate penalty signal. YC for me.

7) This is a tough one. I can accept either decision, but I'm leaning towards no foul. Arm was close to the body, little time to react (and I think he expected his teammate to have blocked it) as he's turned away. I'm not sure he could have done much more. Now, if you give a foul here, you need to seriously think about RC-DOGSO. Keeper is behind, sure, but my stance is unless the keeper absolutely, clearly, easily has it, then you need to consider it DOGSO-H (and I tend to lean even further away from 'keeper is there' at local level). That's a second aspect where a room full of referees probably wouldn't see agreement here.

9) Definitely no foul. The arm is in a perfectly natural position given the situation - even relatively close to the body. The ball is deflected straight down onto the arm - in an unexpected direction - at point blank range. Could the player have reasonably done anything to avoid this? I think not

12) No foul. Now, if a player is going to ground to block, they're going to have an arm underneath them for support to fall on - if the ball strikes this, it's no foul. Law 12 states it not an offence if: when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body. The arm is a little away, but I don't think it's enough away to be a concern.

14) Definitely a foul, but no card. Plenty of time to react, arm was out in front, he stood and let the ball that range, it'd be a different story.

Incidentally, while people like to talk about the 'new laws' a lot, I don't think my interpretation would be any different compared to the old law

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Luke
The great handling debate will continue and while the updated Laws have helped in some situations the decisions on these can the same based on the previous advice and the current advice.
I would say that at the Pro level the tolerance levels would be lower than say at Underage and grassroots plus referees at lower levels do not have access to video or VAR.

Now as to each video I could argue that all of the handlings were offences and I could also argue that they were not with No 9 being the only one that many will agree on where the ball brushes the player's arms from a downward header by an opponent.

The reason I say that is that handling is a matter of opinion as to arm position, distance to the ball, time to react etc. It is for that reason that I think that the handling law is so difficult in that a straw pole of referees will not have 100% unanimity on each call . I watched a video of an instructional class being given by Referee Esse Beharmast to USSF referees some time ago and he asked for a show of hands on each video much like what was shown here. From what I could discern the room was divided on many of the calls. Yes such coaching events is to improve that yet we know that it does not work uniformly as each situation will be different in each game.

Now if we look at all the videos we see that none of the contacts were deliberate movement of the arm to the ball yet rather the ball making contact with the players arms in a way where the referee has to decide whether the player made himself bigger by the use of the arm. Has the player placed his arm in the way of the ball and / or has the player made no effort to avoid the ball with the arms/ hand.

At one time USSF was advising referees that an arm on the ground making contact with the ball was to be considered handling. The current wording says "when a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body". I can argue that it is a natural movement in this video yet does the ball hit the players arm on the ground or on the way to the ground and is it extended laterally or is that due to his movement. Again it is not definitive with no certainty.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

ITOOTR (in the opinion of the referee ) is a classic statement of ambiguity in a game marred by constant tinkering of this handling issue.

#2 close in the hard shot but he initiated the contact by rushing in a PK foul
#6 close in the hard shot he did try to turn away but arm fully extended a PK a foul

#7 & 9 no foul

I will say I am 100% a foul on the #12 It was a foolish tackle where the defender CHOSE to leave his feet, he did not FALL nor was he getting up The arm was NOT under him it was dragged out, and away and blocked the cross pass,. Sorry, but in my match 100% a foul EVERY time!

# 14 is accidental the back-peddling #17 defender created the confusion you can PLAINLY see the defender whose arm did eventually contact the ball was NOT trying to do so but avoid crashing into number 17. Look at his eyes for the loss of his focus. I would not award a free kick in this case based on my gut instinct. Still, he did ward the ball away albeit slightly so I can see it given by some!

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Hi Luke,
Number 9 is the easiest one to discern because it is a deflection of the ball off another player
Deliberate handling has caused more angst in soccer than just about anything except perhaps offside lol The best advice I can give you aside from understanding the LOTG and their application is if you use your gut or have an opinion just be sure you apply that opinion to BOTH teams equally. Fair is fair, we can agree to disagree if it is or it is not, but we must be consistent with the two teams under our charge even if we have a slight inconsistency with our peers! From our pitch to your pitch in the spirit of fair play!