Ben Wilson
 
 
 
 

The Laws of the Game on handball have been under discussion among fans and media commentators after the Hyundai A-League match between Sydney FC and Perth Glory.

Late in the match the ball struck the arm of Sydney FC defender Rhyan Grant inside the penalty area with the score 2-1 in Sydney’s favour.

A lot of the commentary has been to the effect that the ball simply hitting the hand or arm in the penalty area is a definite penalty.

Not so. The Laws of the Game state that “handling the ball involves a deliberate act of a player making contact with the ball with his hand or arm”.

Of course, it’s left to the interpretation of the referee to consider whether the act is deliberate.

The factors referees consider when judging whether it’s a deliberate handball under the Laws of the Game include:

•The movement of the hand towards the ball (not the ball towards the hand)
• The distance between the opponent and the ball (unexpected ball)
• The position of the hand does not necessarily mean that there is an infringement

In the case of the incident yesterday, even though the ball made contact with the defender’s hand, the following characteristics were evident:

• It was ball-hit-hand and not hand-hit-ball, ie; there was no movement of the defender’s hand towards the ball.

•The ball went directly to the hand at speed from a very short distance

•The defender’s arms were in a natural position for a player jumping

The referee Peter Green was correct to judge that this was not deliberate handball and therefore the decision not to award a penalty was the correct decision.

Ben Wilson is the FFA Director of Referees

 
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author, and do not reflect those of Football Federation Australia.
Poll
Which opening round fixture are you most looking forward to?




Comments (21)
 
Marco, an indirect free kick cannot be awarded for a 'deliberate' handball. There is no such thing as an accidental handball.
ballboy  |  
12 Feb 2013 03:41 PM
 
 
If handball has to be deliberate, then you only have to ask yourself, as a player, how many times you deliberately handled the ball. I have had many handballs given against me, many of which I have no problems with, but I have never deliberately handled the ball. If that's the rule then there should be virtually no handballs given. Surely it's a matter of playing carelessly and deriving unfair advantage from handling the ball. In such a case a player playing with their arms unnecessarily elevated could be deemed careless and the current decisions would make sense. Deliberate handling would therefore be at least a yellow card. I'm also happy with the referee making a call, if they are consistent. I think the incident in question could have gone either way, but I maintain that players rarely deliberately handle the ball - so the rule should reflect what really happens i.e. referees make a reasonable and consistent call.
Mick  |  
10 Nov 2012 01:49 PM
 
 
Agree 100% Bob, was a definate penalty and I'm a Sydney FC supporter, a defender making themselves big to block cross should be penalised if the ball comes in touch with the outstretched arm. I don' t agree that his arm placement was a "natural" positioning of the arms. Refereeing mistake........again!
Matt  |  
4 Nov 2012 09:01 AM
 
 
Handball does not have to be intentional. Intentional handball is a yellow card.
Terry  |  
3 Nov 2012 05:50 PM
 
 
what a stupid rule who would delibrately try and touch the ball with their hand ????????
Kosta  |  
1 Nov 2012 03:39 PM
 
 
Ben is 100% correct and the level of understanding of one of the most simple rules on the laws of the game astounds me. Marco, the reason Kewell was sent off was for denying goal scoring opportunity. There is no way it could be yellow-carded for what he did. It was either play-on or penalty and red card. The red card was correct because Kewell tensed his arm and used it to make himself larger. If he wasn't playing the ball deliberately, his arm would have rebounded backwards from the impact of the ball - which incidently is exactly what happened to Ryhan Grant's arm - the ball hit his arm and it recoiled. Grant did not make himself biggerThe question is whether his arms were in a natural position given the movement he was trying to make. There was nothing unnatural about Grants arms position. Bent - I think you'll find that the handball rule is interpreted fairly consistently, much more consistent than many other rypes of fouls. But because of people's failure to understand the law they think it's inconsistent. It's not hockey!
Nathan  |  
31 Oct 2012 01:30 PM
 
 
Spot on Ben, the rule is easy to understand and is consistently applied across many leagues. Storm in a teacup from disgruntled fans I can appreciate, but the rules remain the rules. Same with the Sigmund red card, correct application of the rules, if Phoenix don't like it they need to instruct their defenders to not grab and pull back opposition
keith  |  
30 Oct 2012 10:18 PM
 
 
PLZZZ Ben the issue is not so much the call its the consistency you will see it a few weeks a almost identical situation occur in a match and the referee will give it as a penalty and it will likely happen against Perth. Then u will see Fergie even more furious. If your going down this path that a arm away from the body which affects the path of the ball in the penalty area must be intentional only to give a penalty make sure its consistent or just give a penalty every time. What will you say in a few weeks if a penalty is awarded against Perth or any other team for that matter for a non intentional handball ? I’ve already got a response for you "the referee had every right to assume the arm away from the body was an intentional handball and thus awarded a penalty Interpretation is a joke, rules are easily followed Hits the hand = penalty.
bent  |  
30 Oct 2012 06:26 PM
 
 
If the explanation is so obvious why do we see so many penalties given for this kind of ball handling, including at World Cup Finals? I think two kinds of hand balls should be recognized. 1. Deliberate hand-ball 2. Unintentional hand ball from which a team gains an advantage. (stopping a goal opportunity - penalty, otherwise indirect free kick). I think this lack of choice is why referees constantly make contradictory decisions. An example is Harry Kewell;s sending off vs Ghana. If the above was in law, the referee could decide that perhaps Harry's wasn't intentional (no send-off but perhaps a yellow - i.e. benefit of doubt). However, it did stop a goal and therefore a penalty. In Grant's case a better decision would have been an indirect free kick. The ref was faced with the decision that if I give a penalty, this warrants a sending off . I like the tennis and even hockey situation where a team can ask for an independent decision based on footage (once in each half? until they get it wrong) for any call. Such a scheme may even negate the need for goal line technology. I also believe there are cases where players take a dive to highlight they have been fouled. In such cases I believe a penalty should be given if the ref decides it is but the diving player can still receive a card. I also believe that an independent review committee should ban players that have taken a dive, particularly where it has resulted in a wrongly given penalty/free kick.
Marco  |  
30 Oct 2012 05:15 PM
 
 
Grant could have jumped with his hands by his side if he wanted to. He deliberately made himself big and therefore in my book it's a deliberate handball. This ruling allows all defenders to do starfish jumps in the penalty area and claim accidental handball if the ball hits their arm or hands.
Philip  |  
30 Oct 2012 04:19 PM
 
 
okay, lets just wait till the referee determines the rule differently in future, what will be the response. Will there be another reason given especially if it is ADP etc who does the squealing. By then it is too late to have the decision overridden and another less fortunate team will be hard done by. Once you put your arms out you are trying to prevent the ball passing you, sit back and watch attacking players jump for a ball, it is not necessary to jump with arms raised unless 1 you are trying for maximum height;2. you are looking for reason for a free kick or penalty not to be given.
Greg  |  
30 Oct 2012 03:40 PM
 
 
I know I jump with my arms like a scare crow - thats natural. The fact that he deliberately made himself bigger doesn't seem to enter your analysis though - but I guess that is the problem with referee's in this country. They are too busy sticking up for each other then admitting they are wrong.
Glen  |  
30 Oct 2012 12:53 PM
 
 
Dear Mr Wilson, Are you also saying as Director of Referees that Jeronimo Neumann was denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity against Wellington?
martin  |  
30 Oct 2012 11:52 AM
 
 
Yes this is right, it has to be deliberate. Otherwise all you would ever see is attacking players aiming shots at the defenders hands! I'm not surprised Ferguson doesn't understand this rule either, though.
charlie  |  
30 Oct 2012 06:42 AM
 
 
No Bob. The crucial fact is the player's arms were in a natural position for jumping. Therefore, the player never deliberately played the ball with his arm. He jumped, did NOT put his arms in an unnatural position, then the ball was blasted into his arm from 2 meters away. So it's clear the ref was 100% correct. This incident is very different from when the Newcastle GK LEFT HIS BOX AND DELIBERATELY EXTENDED his arms in an unnatural position earlier in the season and it was rightly judged handball. If you can;t see this, nor accept it, then there;s not much else to be said.
Chris  |  
30 Oct 2012 01:46 AM
 
 
Bob, I dont think you understand much about the LOTG, human movement, or in fact the game itself. To claim that Rhyan Grant did anything premeditated is complete garbage. Please grow up.
Steve2  |  
30 Oct 2012 12:02 AM
 
 
Deliberate or not,, Refs call.... hah..what a Joke,,..who's good at acting. Taking the game 3 steps backwood. C'mon, how can Sigmond get a Red card with a clear dive, Smeltz not given penalty when legs taken out round 1, frustrating for sure, Perth should have been given Penalty. If this isn't looked at seriously, game will lose 'new' supporters, Aussies have taken long time to embrace this game because of this stuff. Make a call, those of us who started to support the game learnt the rules but seems its ignored as A League has 'big named OS players' ........Not gonna keep me following, sorry
Michael  |  
29 Oct 2012 11:05 PM
 
 
There needs to be a greater awareness by all players and coaches at all levels as to the specifics of the handball provisions in Law 12 of The Laws of the GameIn my view, Ben Wilson is absolutely correct, it would have been a harsh decision to award a penalty against Rhyan Grant. In many respects, the players only have themselves to blame....they appeal consistently for handball even when the ball smacks the middle of the chest. As a referee I see it constantly in senior games and even as part of the crowd on Sunday there were appeals that clearly weren't on. The surprising thing is that players and coaches at senior level simply do not know the applications of the Laws. Handball must be deliberate - there must be movement of the hand toward the ball or the position of the arms must be unnatural in the sense that the body is made bigger.
Simon  |  
29 Oct 2012 10:05 PM
 
 
if it was a glory players hand in the glorys box it would have been a penalty guaranteed
chris  |  
29 Oct 2012 07:58 PM
 
 
Points 2 and 3 stand Ben, but there was clear movement of arm to ball (arm was up above ball and comes down striking the ball) Your defense would be more convincing if you had not tried to argue against this. 'Grant was in a natural position for jumping and the ball was struck at close range and thus it is fair to assume there was no intent to handle the ball' is a more than adequate defense of the decision. Handball decisions should never be criticized either way unless there is a blatant handling of the ball that goes unpunished (grabbing, swatting) as intent is hard to judge and impossible to prove. Commentators and supporters need to accept that the only person who can make this assessment is the match official. I (and I hope, you) would also defend this decision if a penalty had been awarded as much as I do for it not being awarded.
Steve  |  
29 Oct 2012 07:49 PM
 
 
So basically everyone should put their hands up in the air to block a cross before it's made. As long as they don't deliberatly move the hand towards the ball they can still have a much better chance of blocking the cross, and if it's blocked by already outstretched hands, it can't be considered a foul. Another shocking decision.
bob  |  
29 Oct 2012 07:45 PM
 

Ben Wilson

Ben Wilson is the Football Federation of Australia director of referees. A FIFA Assistant Referee from 2000 to 2011, Wilson officiated in almost 200 NSL and Hyundai A-league matches, including five Hyundai A-League Grand Finals as well as six FIFA tournaments. The highlights included the 2006 FIFA World Cup, 2011 Asian Cup and 2009 AFC Champions League Final.