On a drizzly afternoon in south London last Saturday, Roy Hodgson cut a dejected figure on the pitch at Selhurst Park.
The Crystal Palace manager had just minutes earlier seen his team lose 1-2 to Everton, the Toffees’ winning goal coming from a controversial penalty after Palace defender Joel Ward was – somewhat harshly – adjudged to have handballed Lucas Digne’s knockdown.
In a no-holes-barred post-match interview with the BBC, Hodgson claimed that he “simply did not understand” handball decisions like the one that had cost his team.
“I simply cannot understand how we have allowed this rule to come into existence. I don’t blame the referee, the referee is under instructions, but as you’re walking off the opposing manager agrees with you, the referee agrees with you, but he has to give a decision that decides the game, and I think that’s a pity.
“I do not understand how we, in football, and I’m talking about the Premier League, referees, managers, coaches and players, have allowed this rule to come into operation.
“It’s completely unacceptable, and it’s destroying my enjoyment of the game of football”.
The decision to penalise Ward was just one of a host of contentious handball decisions in the opening three rounds of Premier League fixtures, decisions Hodgson claimed were “killing the game”. Palace themselves were the beneficiaries when Manchester United defender Victor Lindelöf was adjudged to have handled Jordan Ayew’s shot a week earlier, and only last Sunday Tottenham midfielder Eric Dier gave away a last-minute penalty after being deemed to have handled the ball when attempting to block a header, earning Newcastle United a point.
As post-match discussions focus ever more on controversial decisions, we ask, how did we get to this point, and perhaps more importantly, can it be changed?
The Laws of the Game
The new rules regarding handball have come under intense criticism in recent weeks, being described as “ludicrous”, “madness” and “nonsense” by pundits, managers and players alike.
According to the International Football Association Board (IFAB), football’s law-making body, a player is deemed to have handled the ball if:
- Deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, including moving the hand/arm towards the ball
- Scores in the opponents’ goal directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, including by the goalkeeper
- After the ball has touched their or a team-mate’s hand/arm, even if accidental, immediately:
- Scores in the opponents’ goal
- Creates a goal-scoring opportunity
- Touches the ball with their hand/arm when:
- The hand/arm has made their body unnaturally bigger
- The hand/arm is above/beyond their shoulder level (unless the player deliberately plays the ball which then touches their hand/arm)
IFAB also clarifies what does not constitute a handball offence, including when the ball touches a player’s hand or arm:
- Directly from the player’s own head or body (including the foot)
- Directly from the head or body (including the foot) of another player who is close
- If the hand/arm is close to the body and does not make the body unnaturally bigger
- When a player falls and the hand/arm is between the body and the ground to support the body, but not extended laterally or vertically away from the body
As well as the clarifications introduced earlier this year, law was changed to state that the upper boundary of the arm was in line with the bottom of the armpit. But the reason for the changes boils down to an attempt to simplify, rather than confuse, one of the biggest grey areas of the sport. All of these changes were aimed at making instances of handball clearer cut. Unfortunately, the outcome has been anything but.
In instances such as Dier’s last weekend, the letter of the law was applied correctly, as his hand was above his head. This same logic applies to the penalty given against Brighton and Hove Albion striker Neal Maupay after the full-time whistle in the match against Manchester United.
However, the more contentious incidents highlight an age-old problem. The 17 laws that define the sport are, by their very nature, open to interpretation. Indeed, IFAB themselves claim that “referees should apply the Laws within the ‘spirit’ of the game”. What emerges is a constant battle between the various rule makers, and rule enforcers, of English football about how the laws should be interpreted and enforced. From IFAB to FIFA, the Premier League to the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL), until that battle is won, we may yet see more contentious decisions.
Can it be changed?
The simple is answer is, possibly. Just three days after the Dier incident, the BBC broke the news that the Premier League was set to lobby IFAB for a change in law. Referees – who are reportedly as frustrated as clubs about the current rules – have apparently been told to be less strict in their application of the law, particularly when it concerns a player’s natural body shape. If the Premier League receives a response from IFAB which it deems unsatisfactory, the BBC reports that the league will request a change to the law.
Even if the law was to be changed, it would not come into effect until next season at the earliest, with any law changes having to be approved at the IFAB annual general meeting in March 2021. However, it provides a glimmer of hope for the many football fans who are weary of repeated focus on controversy, rather than football.
But amidst the uproar, football would be wise to reflect on how we got to this point. For decades, football fans, pundits, managers and players alike have ripped referees apart for errors when it comes to handball decisions (and for most other decisions deemed incorrect, for that matter). Perhaps these changes – just like those with the Video Assistant Referee – were a result of years of football’s inability to accept mistakes. Perhaps now we have seen the other side of the coin, we may finally accept the imperfect nature of our sport after all.
By Callum Parke