Controversial handball rules ‘to be softened’ in Premier League after outrage over recent penalties awarded

[Archibald&Crooks]

It's hugely apparent that there's been a massive failure in taking an idea and thinking it through. Rule after rule, amendment after amendment they continue blustering their way through it and consistently get it wrong.

Anyone involved in signing off on these new rules should never be involved in the game again at any level. They've demonstrated their rank incompetence and I cannot believe that they continue to be allowed to hold positions of such influence over the game.

 

[wrd]

Oh so you're telling me they're now being asked to apply common sense, which was the point I was making all through Sunday

 

[Jamturk]

I think the ref was at fault, there was more than enough scope for him not to award a penalty.

 

[Trotter]

My understanding is the only penalty that would be overturned under the way PGMOL could just about stretch the interpretation of laws is the Ward one, and possibly the Lindelof one. But the Doherty, Dier and Leeds ones they would still be giving, no interpretation they can stretch to would support them not being given this season.

 

[UncleBuck]

Needs more than softening. I don’t see why we can’t bin it altogether, go back to deliberate or accidental and allow referees to actually make a decision based on their judgement.

If they want to use VAR to get a closer look at it again then fine.

I know it’s been mentioned in previous threads but why not just use indirect free kicks if it’s not deliberate?
Yes it’s complete garbage at the moment but I don’t see how they can change whatever instructions they’ve been told to implement for this season.

 

[tototoner]

didn't they change the CL qualification rules the year after we missed out when finishing 4th, we are cursed

 

[vuzp]

Yep. Clear message to attackers is to push defenders in the air and hope you can hit their arm. Dier’s interview was bang on - everyone just ignored the fact that he was pushed. Absolute cretins in charge

well it is really Dier's fault as he must keep his arms by his side and fall on his face, not try to break his fall (unlike Moura last season)
its easy really
( it really is a joke this hand ball )

 

[wirE]

They can't/shouldn't change a law during the season. They should have to stew in their shit for the rest of the season.

They did that before the CL final a couple of years ago....

 

[teedee]

They can't/shouldn't change a law during the season. They should have to stew in their shit for the rest of the season.

They would not be changing a Law of the Game, just redefining the interpretation of the guidance to referees. The sooner it is done the better for everyone.

 

[Metalhead]

Absolutely this, as much of a bollocks of a rule it is, and it is ruining the game completely.

Surely changing the rule after the season has started is giving others an unfair advantage?

Yes although I wouldn’t mind as it’s just as likely to cause us more disadvantage as anyone else.

 

[newbie]

After 3 shocking calls against us now it’s time to re think?

As a player I would be better to shoot at someone’s hand then go for goal?

Great rule ?

 

[guiltyparty]

Even though he couldn't see where the ball was and hit him from behind, so clearly no intent.

It states clearly that it doesn't matter if your arm is raised above your head. It's a penalty, regardless of intent. So even with the new leniency rule, Dier's handball would have stood.

 

[guiltyparty]

Cool. Assuming Spurs will be awarded the two points we got penalised for.

I mean can't literally have one rule for us and not for the rest right

Says Dier's would still be a penalty. So as far as they're concerned there's nothing to award.

 

[CowInAComa]

Says Dier's would still be a penalty. So as far as they're concerned there's nothing to award.

My understanding is that it is intended that referees are allowed to exercise some common sense intervention upon reviewing the incident rather than it being so black or white.

 

[Trotter]

My understanding is that it is intended that referees are allowed to exercise some common sense intervention upon reviewing the incident rather than it being so black or white.

But only within the laws. They will "stretch out" the body line a little, that is all they can do, Anything extended out such as Doherty was, or above shoulders like Dier was, they have no chance of being able to get away with not giving.

 

[guiltyparty]

My understanding is that it is intended that referees are allowed to exercise some common sense intervention upon reviewing the incident rather than it being so black or white.

Premier League referees to be more lenient on handball after outcry

Premier League referees are to take a lenient approach to applying the new handball law after an outcry from across the game.

This season there have been five penalties awarded for handball in three matchdays, compared with 19 across the whole of the last top-flight season. The change has been blamed on a new interpretation of handball which punishes a defender if the ball strikes their arm in an “unnatural” position.

After criticism from managers and players, Premier League club executives on Tuesday endorsed a change which would give referees more leeway in interpreting the law. The change has been endorsed by Ifab, the body which sets the laws of the game.

The strategy will be implemented from this weekend and it is expected to flip the approach applied in preceding weeks. Instead of looking for “unnatural” body shapes a referee will be invited to consider whether a player could be expected to have their arms in such a position given the way they were standing, or how they were interacting with opponents.

A separate clause in the handball rule which calls a foul if a player has the hand above their shoulder when struck will not be changed.

Under the new interpretation the majority of penalties given for handball this season would not have been awarded. They include the controversial spot-kicks awarded against Crystal Palace’s Joel Ward and Manchester United’s Victor Lindelöf. The penalty given late on against Eric Dier in Tottenham’s match against Newcastle would stand, though.

Dier called for a change in the laws following the decision, which gave Newcastle a late point. “Everyone’s on the same page,” he told the BBC. “Something has to change.”

Dier’s hand was above his shoulder, however, meaning the penalty would stand. The fact that he was caught from behind by a hard-driven ball from an opponent at close quarters would not be taken into consideration.

The change in approach comes early in a congested season and the Premier League insists it is consistent with the spirit of the new handball rules. But after Fifa took control of VAR in an attempt to standardise refereeing across the globe, three weeks in the Premier League is beginning to diverge.

 

[JimmyG2]

It states clearly that it doesn't matter if your arm is raised above your head. It's a penalty, regardless of intent. So even with the new leniency rule, Dier's handball would have stood.

“plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. (Karr)
The more things change the more they remain the same. What on earth are they on?

 

[14/04/91]

The rules actually include the following;

leeway will be granted in regards to ricocheted handballs, or if the player in question cannot see the ball.

it is not an offence for a player to handle “directly from the player’s own head or body”, “directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close”

So example 1 above should've clearly resulted in a no penalty decision. It's absolute madness that VAR calls it back, let alone the ref reviewing and agreeing. Total proof that the rules are wrong.

 

[DiscoD1882]

It's hugely apparent that there's been a massive failure in taking an idea and thinking it through. Rule after rule, amendment after amendment they continue blustering their way through it and consistently get it wrong.

Anyone involved in signing off on these new rules should never be involved in the game again at any level. They've demonstrated their rank incompetence and I cannot believe that they continue to be allowed to hold positions of such influence over the game.

David Ellery then. Apparently.

 

[Trotter]

The rules actually include the following;

leeway will be granted in regards to ricocheted handballs, or if the player in question cannot see the ball.

it is not an offence for a player to handle “directly from the player’s own head or body”, “directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close”

So example 1 above should've clearly resulted in a no penalty decision. It's absolute madness that VAR calls it back, let alone the ref reviewing and agreeing. Total proof that the rules are wrong.

The laws only say that, and can only be interpreted like that if you miss out the whole first section, and the line except for your the above offences