As this is being debated (at last) far and wide ..the TV pundits who were instrumental in causing the chaos when none existed a long while back
For 70 or 80 years the game survived with the law describing handball as when the hand played the ball deliberately..nothing to do with ball being kicked against it. Everyone was clear
Then in the years that followed it got extended to include the wrist
Then the forearm..and by then the deliberate bit gradually faded
By now it was the upper arm and it didn't matter whether it was deliberate or not, it wasn't part of the equation.....
Now chaos rules and the pundits spend hours and hours pontificating over replays on whether it hit the arm or not .. and as a lucky postcript ..it would be lucky , was it intentional or not
Now when every one realises how stupid the rule is, the pundits jump on the bandwagon cying foul. Anyone watching the game in the last 20 years will have seen that chaos.
This is back down to the law makers ..either rename hand ball or the gradual drip feed will ensure hitting the shoulder will be deemed punishable in future if it comes into contact with the ball inany shape or form ..it has all developed into a nonsense.
Cut out , all this arm in a natural or un-natural twaddle return the law to the original intention..hand to ball. If players make themselves "big" so be it ..same for both sides...thankfully it would then give the pundits less to talk about it and we would end up with less controversy.
The game is being scarred by recent law changes despite at top level a huge marketing success .. Keep everything simple and everyone understands.
As a postscript, I once sat in on a referee instruction course a number of years past where the debate was centred around this law in relation to the wall at free kicks. The debate raged as to whether the player committed an offence if the ball hit him whilst his hands were passive but placed to protect the unmentionables. Some argued that was a deliberate act in the first place as it was an intention to stop the ball ! ...
For 70 or 80 years the game survived with the law describing handball as when the hand played the ball deliberately..nothing to do with ball being kicked against it. Everyone was clear
Then in the years that followed it got extended to include the wrist
Then the forearm..and by then the deliberate bit gradually faded
By now it was the upper arm and it didn't matter whether it was deliberate or not, it wasn't part of the equation.....
Now chaos rules and the pundits spend hours and hours pontificating over replays on whether it hit the arm or not .. and as a lucky postcript ..it would be lucky , was it intentional or not
Now when every one realises how stupid the rule is, the pundits jump on the bandwagon cying foul. Anyone watching the game in the last 20 years will have seen that chaos.
This is back down to the law makers ..either rename hand ball or the gradual drip feed will ensure hitting the shoulder will be deemed punishable in future if it comes into contact with the ball inany shape or form ..it has all developed into a nonsense.
Cut out , all this arm in a natural or un-natural twaddle return the law to the original intention..hand to ball. If players make themselves "big" so be it ..same for both sides...thankfully it would then give the pundits less to talk about it and we would end up with less controversy.
The game is being scarred by recent law changes despite at top level a huge marketing success .. Keep everything simple and everyone understands.
As a postscript, I once sat in on a referee instruction course a number of years past where the debate was centred around this law in relation to the wall at free kicks. The debate raged as to whether the player committed an offence if the ball hit him whilst his hands were passive but placed to protect the unmentionables. Some argued that was a deliberate act in the first place as it was an intention to stop the ball ! ...