Handling explained

[imsays]

With the High School season approaching here is the the parameters for calling handling.

Note how intent is what referees must determine.

 

National Intercollegiate Soccer Officials Association

NISOA Referee Training Camp » »

Soccer By The Rules – Handling

Joe Manjone, Ed. D.

 

One of the constant complaints from coaches concerns the calling of handling and the inconsistency of officials in making this call. The biggest complaint seems to be about calls in which there is no intent by the player to use the hand or arm to play the ball.

 

According to the definition of handling in:

 

Rule 18-1-1q: Handling is deliberately playing the ball with one’s hand or arm. The hand or arm must move toward the ball or the hand or arm must be carried in an unnatural position before an infraction of the rule can be charged.

 

Please note the following when interpreting this rule:

◾Handling includes not only the hand but also the arm or the area between the shoulders and the finger tips, thus, moving the upper arm, elbow or lower arm to play the ball is considered handling.

◾The act of handing must be deliberate. There has to be intent to play the ball unless the hand or arm is carried in an unnatural position. Thus, if a player is holding his/her hand or arms in a natural position and there is no intent to play the ball, even if the ball touches the hands or arms of a player and deflects to a position that is advantageous to the player or his/her team, no handling has occurred.

◾As the official, you have to determine if the hand or arm is being carried or held in an unnatural position. Some examples of unnatural positions might be: holding hands above the head; holding hands and arms extended with palms forward; and having hands extended below the knees while standing. An example of a player having arms and hands in a natural position where handling is often mistakenly called is a player who is running with arms naturally moving and the ball contacting the hand or arm. As an official, you must be certain that the player deliberately moved the hand or arm to make the contact.

 

Rule 12- 2 further emphasizes the need for intent on the part of the player to handle the ball as it states: A player shall be penalized for deliberately handling, carrying, striking or propelling the ball with the hand or arm. Exception: Goalkeeper when the ball is within his/her own penalty area. The penalty for handling is a direct free kick.

 

Please note:

◾Even though the ball may be carried, struck, or propelled by the hand or arm, there is no penalty unless you believe that there was player intent.

◾Please note that player intent does not have to be a planned act. It may just be a protective response as is indicated in 12.2 Situation C:

 

A2 kicks a low hard pass to his/her teammate; (a) B2, a male player who is in the path of the ball, moves his hand to protect his groin and the ball touches his hand; (b) B2, a female player who is in the path of the ball moves her hand to protect her chest and the ball touches her hand. Ruling: Illegal in both (a) and (b) for deliberately handling the ball.

◾Obviously, these were reflective but deliberate acts to make contact with the ball by moving the hand and are to be penalized by the official calling, handling. This is also emphasized in 12.2 Situation A:

 

A player, who is part of a wall in a free kick, moves the hands after the kick to protect his/her face from the ball. Ruling: This is a foul for deliberately handling the ball.

◾The deliberate moving of the hand or arm or the hand or arm being in an unnatural position is the key to making the call and if one of these factors do not exist, handling is not to be called as is shown in 12.2 Situation B:

 

A player who is in a defensive position during the taking of a free kick places hands or arms against part of the body for protection. The offensive player kicks the ball which strikes the hands still in front of the body or arms over the chest. In both cases the hands and arms are stationary. Ruling: This is not handling because the ball struck a stationary hand or arm rather than a hand or arm playing the ball.

◾Here the hands or arms were placed to stop the ball and they were in a natural position for a wall defender (protecting the body). However, the hands or arms never moved so handling did not occur.

◾However, if the hands and arms would have been held extended above the head, and were touched by the kicked ball, even though the hands and arms were not moved, handling would have occurred because the hands and arms were in an unnatural position.

 

One other error that officials make with handling calls is the calling and signaling “play on” when handling the ball touches the hand or arm, but handling did not occur. Please remember that calling “play on” means that a foul has occurred and the offending team would gain an advantage by you not calling the foul. If handling has not occurred, there is no foul, so “play on” should not be called (See Rule 5-3-1d for additional information on “play on”.

 

Be alert for possible handling by the goalkeeper when the ball is outside the penalty area. As is indicated in 12.2 Situation D, the goalkeeper is not permitted to handle a ball that is clearly outside the penalty area:

 

A2 takes a shot on goal and goalkeeper B2 is outstretched on the ground and reaches outside the penalty area and touches the ball. Ruling: Illegal

 

Calling handling requires much concentration and immediate decision-making on your part. Following the above rules and procedures in every high school game you work and making certain your partners do the same will provide the required consistency and make each game a better experience for everyone.

[bothways]

With the High School season approaching here is the the parameters for calling handling.

Note how intent is what referees must determine.

 

National Intercollegiate Soccer Officials Association

NISOA Referee Training Camp » »

Soccer By The Rules – Handling

Joe Manjone, Ed. D.

 

One of the constant complaints from coaches concerns the calling of handling and the inconsistency of officials in making this call. The biggest complaint seems to be about calls in which there is no intent by the player to use the hand or arm to play the ball.

 

According to the definition of handling in:

 

Rule 18-1-1q: Handling is deliberately playing the ball with one’s hand or arm. The hand or arm must move toward the ball or the hand or arm must be carried in an unnatural position before an infraction of the rule can be charged.

 

Please note the following when interpreting this rule:

◾Handling includes not only the hand but also the arm or the area between the shoulders and the finger tips, thus, moving the upper arm, elbow or lower arm to play the ball is considered handling.

◾The act of handing must be deliberate. There has to be intent to play the ball unless the hand or arm is carried in an unnatural position. Thus, if a player is holding his/her hand or arms in a natural position and there is no intent to play the ball, even if the ball touches the hands or arms of a player and deflects to a position that is advantageous to the player or his/her team, no handling has occurred.

◾As the official, you have to determine if the hand or arm is being carried or held in an unnatural position. Some examples of unnatural positions might be: holding hands above the head; holding hands and arms extended with palms forward; and having hands extended below the knees while standing. An example of a player having arms and hands in a natural position where handling is often mistakenly called is a player who is running with arms naturally moving and the ball contacting the hand or arm. As an official, you must be certain that the player deliberately moved the hand or arm to make the contact.

 

Rule 12- 2 further emphasizes the need for intent on the part of the player to handle the ball as it states: A player shall be penalized for deliberately handling, carrying, striking or propelling the ball with the hand or arm. Exception: Goalkeeper when the ball is within his/her own penalty area. The penalty for handling is a direct free kick.

 

Please note:

◾Even though the ball may be carried, struck, or propelled by the hand or arm, there is no penalty unless you believe that there was player intent.

◾Please note that player intent does not have to be a planned act. It may just be a protective response as is indicated in 12.2 Situation C:

 

A2 kicks a low hard pass to his/her teammate; (a) B2, a male player who is in the path of the ball, moves his hand to protect his groin and the ball touches his hand; (b) B2, a female player who is in the path of the ball moves her hand to protect her chest and the ball touches her hand. Ruling: Illegal in both (a) and (b) for deliberately handling the ball.

◾Obviously, these were reflective but deliberate acts to make contact with the ball by moving the hand and are to be penalized by the official calling, handling. This is also emphasized in 12.2 Situation A:

 

A player, who is part of a wall in a free kick, moves the hands after the kick to protect his/her face from the ball. Ruling: This is a foul for deliberately handling the ball.

◾The deliberate moving of the hand or arm or the hand or arm being in an unnatural position is the key to making the call and if one of these factors do not exist, handling is not to be called as is shown in 12.2 Situation B:

 

A player who is in a defensive position during the taking of a free kick places hands or arms against part of the body for protection. The offensive player kicks the ball which strikes the hands still in front of the body or arms over the chest. In both cases the hands and arms are stationary. Ruling: This is not handling because the ball struck a stationary hand or arm rather than a hand or arm playing the ball.

◾Here the hands or arms were placed to stop the ball and they were in a natural position for a wall defender (protecting the body). However, the hands or arms never moved so handling did not occur.

◾However, if the hands and arms would have been held extended above the head, and were touched by the kicked ball, even though the hands and arms were not moved, handling would have occurred because the hands and arms were in an unnatural position.

 

One other error that officials make with handling calls is the calling and signaling “play on” when handling the ball touches the hand or arm, but handling did not occur. Please remember that calling “play on” means that a foul has occurred and the offending team would gain an advantage by you not calling the foul. If handling has not occurred, there is no foul, so “play on” should not be called (See Rule 5-3-1d for additional information on “play on”.

 

Be alert for possible handling by the goalkeeper when the ball is outside the penalty area. As is indicated in 12.2 Situation D, the goalkeeper is not permitted to handle a ball that is clearly outside the penalty area:

 

A2 takes a shot on goal and goalkeeper B2 is outstretched on the ground and reaches outside the penalty area and touches the ball. Ruling: Illegal

 

Calling handling requires much concentration and immediate decision-making on your part. Following the above rules and procedures in every high school game you work and making certain your partners do the same will provide the required consistency and make each game a better experience for everyone.

As gently as I can ask this... Do you think this is going to change the arguments of even the people reading this board on what they believe to be good or bad calls?

 

Don't get me wrong I like this and will take it to heart as I think it defends many calls I have seen people complain about in the past but unfortunately facts rarely influence the people who are arguing against them.

[TAC]

Wait a minute. Soccer has rules other than offsides? Who knew.

[imsays]

Bothways if it helps just one parent to understand than I've done my job :thumb:

[gameplayedright]

As gently as I can ask this... Do you think this is going to change the arguments of even the people reading this board on what they believe to be good or bad calls?

 

Don't get me wrong I like this and will take it to heart as I think it defends many calls I have seen people complain about in the past but unfortunately facts rarely influence the people who are arguing against them.

 

I'm only one opinion but here it is, 3 problems, in order of importance , I see in a lot of officiating today, especially in HS games. This is general and not related specifically to handling.

1. Poor foul recognition, by far the biggest issue/cause of poorly officiating games IMO. Knowing the rules like the back of your hand is only the start to being a good referee.

2. Positioning. I see many refs, centers and ARs that simply can't keep up with the speed of play. Hard to "recognize" a foul if you can't see it.

3. No calls. Witness a lot of no calls by center refs and ARs. I perceive this as a scapegoat. Apparently some feel if they don't call it they can't make the wrong call. IMO a no call in many cases is worse then calling something, even if it is wrong. This also goes along with poor foul recognition, some no calls are simply not called because the crew did not know it was a foul.

 

With this said I see some very good referees in the game today and I truly respect and thank every ref that takes the time to work these games.

[imsays]

Fair enough gpr but there is a lot of emphasis on flow of the game in ref training. There was a coaches discussion with the referees and their thoughts were to allow more flow. However, the state point of emphasis this fall was to control physical play and contact above the shoulders.

[gameplayedright]

Good to hear, thanks for sharing imsays.

I'm all for flow of the game, some of the hardest games to watch (and certainly to play) are the ones constantly being stopped by the whistle. On the same token if the players are constantly fouling it must be called.

And the coaches asking for better control of the physical play and contact above the shoulders is great to hear! The more emphasis put on the technical aspects of the game the better IMO. The game has become more technical and will continue to do so. Rewarding the players that out work most others to become the top technical ones in the game is a very smart move. Becoming one of the top technical players is not natural, not a God given gift, it is achieved by tons of hard work and determination.

[Sir!]

The best refs also work hard to stay on top of changes in LOTG, points of emphasis, and physical fitness... I regularly see a number of our area refs hitting the track pre-season and appreciate their commitment.

[Oldtimebaseball84]

I have always said...sometimes just to myself....that I would never argue with a call if the ref was in the correct position.

 

This has always been by biggest beef.....followed second by the ref that thinks the game is about them and not the teams......

[MentschTrachtGottLacht]

3. No calls. Witness a lot of no calls by center refs and ARs. I perceive this as a scapegoat. Apparently some feel if they don't call it they can't make the wrong call. IMO a no call in many cases is worse then calling something, even if it is wrong. This also goes along with poor foul recognition, some no calls are simply not called because the crew did not know it was a foul.

 

You could well be right GPR, but for me, my first reaction was the direct opposite. I see handling be called more than it should because it looks so egregious to the fans, that it is easier for them to call it all of the time than to have to hope the fans understand intent or arm position. I've seen many handling calls when the defenders arm was straight down and there was clearly no intent to do anything at all.

[groinpull]

This is interesting but even at the highest levels, you see handling called differently by different officials, particularly if it will result in a PK. The biggest X factor is what constitutes an "unnatural position" of the arm/hand. Many times, a ref will award a free kick in the middle of the field for handling when the same infraction in the penalty area will not garner a PK. If the rule was called strictly in accordance w/ the laws of the game, I think there would be very few handling calls made.

[gameplayedright]

I think this falls right into what level are you refereeing? Clearly games are officiating differently based on the level of play. At the highest levels EPL, La Liga, International, etc the players are SO darn good, to the point unbelievable at times, they can make handling and fouls appear to be non-infractions at full speed, on the first look. But after watching it a few times on replay you can clearly see the intent. I marvel at how many times the referees get it right at those levels, and they only see it ONCE, at full speed and must make a spilt section decision under immense pressure.

 

But I do agree with groinpull, even at the highest level handling, many times is called differently depending on what area of the field it happen.

[futbalfan]

When I apply the rule when reffing my thought process is as follows if it helps:

1) What the arm in a "Natural Position"?

2) If yes, was the arm moved after the ball was played either into an unnatural position or to a natural position with intent to play the ball.

 

The above requires some explanation and I think this where the subjectivity of a REF comes into play that most are talking about here.

 

For me, "Natural Position" is situational. In other words is the arm in a natural position when struck by the ball based on what the player was doing? For example, a player running will naturally have an arm up to waist level. So when the ball struck the arm even if it where well away from the body but in a natural running position I would NOT consider it handling.

 

For the second criteria, it's about judging intent of the player and why both parts apply. It covers the situation when a player moves to an unnatural position even if not intending to play the ball but makes contact and if the player keeps arm in a natural position but but moves it to play the ball. An example of this later part is when you see players arms down and slightly out when a shot is taken but moves their body and in essence intends to make contact with the ball and their body or arm. This is why you see EPL players tuck their arms at their side or behind their back when a shot or cross is made in the box.

 

I think if you apply the above criteria with examples to the vast majority of he situations you see in a game a call or no call should be made correctly.

 

There are of course game situations, like in other sports, where an individual ref MAY apply additional third criteria such as "What would be the impact on the game or does the game require the call?".

 

An example of "does the game require it to me would be a player intentionally raising their arms even if out (some degree; not arms length out) from their body to protect their face. The player gains no real advantage to the handling even though technically its a foul but the ref would let it go and consider it "trifling" which is a part of LOTG.

 

Just one pov.

[bothways]

 

There are of course game situations, like in other sports, where an individual ref MAY apply additional third criteria such as "What would be the impact on the game or does the game require the call?

.

 

The first part of this question should never be a factor. A call even a small one impacts the game slightly, but if the violation occurred then call it. Don't get hung up on the "am I influencing the game" BS that coaches and players try to get in your head with.

[Sir!]

Often "non-calls" are simply the product of the referee appropriately letting the game be played... "de minimus non curat lex". That concept should apply equally inside and outside the penalty area, but I'm sure we'll continue to see calls not made in the box that are being made at midfield; or fouls spotted just outside the 18 that we're pretty sure were initiated inside the 18. The good news is that it diesn't happen that often and if we're honest we recognize that it tends to even out over time.