If it’s accidental, it’s accidental. If the advantage had been gained as a result of a ricochet off the referee, then the goal would have stood.
But the vast majority of handballs are accidental. Very few handball on purpose. In the past a deliberate handball was a sending off offence. Not sure it is now. A ricochet off a referee is different. He is impartial (hopefully) and gets no advantage from it.
But no one ever sticks to that script when the ball hits the hand of an opponent. A rule where all of our handballs are accidental and should result in play continuing, and all of our opponents' are unscrupulous cheating and should be heavily penalized, is one that's unlikely to be terribly practical.
The Rule was set to prevent a player from handling the ball in the manner of a goalkeeper, not to penalise him when the ball strikes him and there isn't any chance of avoiding the contact. A Referee in the Rules is deemed to be part of the pitch so any deflections by him don't count for anything.
Posted in Saints Stuff but will put it here too - https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2018/nov/28/mark-hughes-southampton-var-whinger
Not sure why the rule isn't just black and white on this. If the ball hits your hand you are penalised for it whether you do it on purpose or whether it hits you from point blank range. Make the penalty fit the crime so not all handballs are penalised the same way but they are all penalised.
The handball rule in practice has always been a grey area. All I know is that if a player gains an advantage (ie a goal) by unintentionally handling the ball then, in fairness, the goal should be disallowed. Ive seen many a goal disallowed when a ball has gone in off a players hand unintentionally and theres been no complaints. Cant see how last night is much different.
Would that apply everywhere on the pitch? Any time the ball touches an arm play must stop and a free kick awarded?
Yeah why not, its called football, in theory it shouldn't touch arm's or hands that often so won't be as stop start as it sounds.
It is not unusual for a football to be travelling at 80 mph. No one on earth can avoid being hit when it is at short range, so should they be penalised for not getting out of the way?
As I said above, if all handballs were penalised players would begin to shoot for defenders’ arms rather than the goal. I might just give up on football altogether if the game became a 90 minute penalty shootout.
It could be deemed a skill to aim for a players arm, also why not change the rule so all handballs don't result in penalties, maybe some are indirect free kicks. Like i said all should be penalised but maybe what punishment is right for one offence isn't right for another. VAR could make that decision much more accurately than deciding if intentional or not.
Because it would make it black and white, like i've said amend the punishment to fit the crime so. If a player gets hit by the ball from close range why should they not be punished for using an illegal part of there body to stop the ball.
I'm not 100% on this and correct me if i'm wrong but i think if the ball hits your foot in hockey and maybe even basket ball then play is stopped whether its accidental or not.
