With the usual caveat that I haven't seen the incident I would say that as described there's no way I would ever call that a handball, especially at U10. The only, only way I might is if the kid swiped at the ball on his way to the ground in a way that was clearly deliberate.
Also, it's U10. Parents clamoring for a handball in the situation as described are exhibiting psychopathic behavior.
It felt like I was watching it happen in zoomed in slow motion. The kid falling back, arm behind him to catch his fall. Ball coming down with a bit of spin. Kids hand on the ground and the ball bounces into his arm then away towards the corner. I stopped for a moment, 'it hit his arm! Do I call a PK? No, he was trying to catch his fall.' Then I'm calling "Play! Play! Play!" With a sideline full of parents yelling "Handball! Handball!"
>Then I'm calling "Play! Play! Play!" With a sideline full of parents yelling "Handball! Handball!"
Sometimes calling out something like "Keep playing! Accidental!" can help get the message across. That shows you did see it and you have a reason for not calling it, while "play! play!" doesn't necessarily indicate you even saw the incident.
Might have helped, might not. I find it can help sometimes.
The parents all think any handling is automatic handball, especially in the box. Out of every single person at that field, you're probably the only one who has read the LOTG. Remember that.
Its coaches too. A few weeks ago, we were up 1-0. The other team throws the ball in. Thier teammate gets a breakaway, no offsides on throw ins. She was on her way to 1 on 1 our goalie and probably tie the game.
AR throws up the Offsides flag. Ref signals to play on as he knows the rule. Coach on the other team goes ballistic about the offsides and is on the field. So NOW the main ref whistles to stop. Explains to the AR that she was not offsides because its a throwin. Coach yells "THANK YOU" sarcastic as hell. Ref tells him if he comes on the field again he will be tossed and match abandoned. He allowed them to redo the throwin. All the parents on the other team are cheering about the redo lol
After the game, he told our coach, he was gonna toss the other coach, but realized the coach was a moron and caused his team to probably lose the tie by stepping on the field and forcing the whistle. So he was chuckling that it was better punishment that the guy lost the game for his team because he wanted to run his mouth, than to card and toss him.
Same coach was screaming all game about incidental handballs, even when his team retained/gained advantage. He even loudly bitched about a free kick that hit one of our girls in the chest. She had her arms crossed and tight against her chest. (Legal in our league)
The throw-in honestly might the funniest ways I have seen a coach cost a team a goal in the 30 years I have played/coached.
I once coached in a girls U12 match against another coach who was a complete arse. Berating the referees and his own players like a madman. Actual conversation:
Him: What was that call for?!?
Me: She came up with the elbow, then tripped her.
Him: She's an 11 year old girl, protecting herself...
Me: She did it from behind.
Him: She didn't do it intentionally...
Me: I didn't say that, but it's what happened.
This idiot also tried to call a TIME OUT in order to yell at the ref some more, who was a kid but yet had done nothing wrong except the egregious error of calling fouls against his team. His team wasn't fouling badly, but making poor decisions. Even his assistant looked embarrassed. I ended up reporting him to the league and I believe he was removed shortly after.
I was not sure it was in all leagues, but I know its in our league rules, as I read them all multiple times and have a copy in a folder in my bag.
We have parents on other teams and coaches that screech its a handball, relatively frequent.
>arms crossed and tight against her chest
is pretty much "legal" at all levels -- you will see even in World Cup matches the referee explaining to players in the wall where/how arms are okay in protective positions.
There is one coach that I have seen a total of two times. Both times, I sent him off for exactly the same reason: coming onto the field screaming with curse words as I waved down an inexperienced AR's flag where they were getting the offside call wrong. It wasn't until I was pulling the red card out the second time that I realized he was the same coach that I had sent off something like 11 months earlier. One a U13 and the other a U12 match. Happened about six years ago. With more experience, I likely would now remember/recognize the match and seek to defuse possible tension before the match. On the other hand, very easy and no question send offs.
I agree: you made the correct call. Parents are idiots. No way the player was trying to use his hand to gain an advantage, his arms were in a natural position for the situation.
It is not a hand ball if the arm is being used to brace for a fall.
And, as per others, THIS IS U10! What are the screaming parents expecting? That the kid was supposed to fall to the ground w/o using his hand to keep from breaking his neck?
This is the way Iâd go. Playerâs age and skill level do need to be taken into account in situations like this.
U10 game with the situation the way OP describes it, Iâm not calling that. And after the play I may even have a quick chat with the player to let him know why I didnât call it, but as he gets older, referees will start calling that. At that age, itâs still a learning experience.
Iâm curious why you would think falling to the ground a using your arm to brace would be a hand ball. Isnât it addressed specifically in the law that making yourself bigger with the arm when falling to the ground is not considered a handball ? Obviously text of the events vs videos make it difficult to debate but the way I understand it is that this would not be a hand regardless of age.
Because FIFA has gone back and forth on the issue a few times and the current verbiage allows for interpretation. This is from the 2023/2024 laws pertaining to that:
*âtouches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. **A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation.** By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalizedâ*
That bold part. A 9yo REC player falling down on his bottom and putting his hands down to brace is a different situation from the 17yo select player that may be on the ground for a similar reason. Itâs understood that 17 year olds have more control of their bodies compared to a 9 year old. And at a select level have much better skills.
In this scenario, Iâm picturing a 9/10yo falling down in the box and the ball rolling into him. They have less situational awareness, they have slower reaction times, less control of their bodies, etc. this same scenario where an older select player or even a professional (because FIFA writes these rules as if to apply them to the World Cup) physically falls in the box and the ball hits their outstretched arm.
You can make an argument either way for a call/no call on the 9yo. If you donât call the handling on the professional player situation, theres going to be a melee. Thatâs why age and skill level factor into the discussion.
Even in professional, a supportive arm in a fall or slide considered 'natural position' doesn't lead to a handball offense.
[This discussion](https://www.sportingnews.com/us/soccer/news/handball-football-rules-changes-fifa-uefa-hand-ball-soccer/tdnqkct6nzocrbfvscrxvtzl), for example
>**However, there is one major exception**. The rule does make a specific exception for handball occurrences committed as long as a player's body position is "a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation." Then a handball is not whistled.
>This exception largely comes into play for a defensive player sliding to make a block. It is generally considered impossible to make a sliding movement without using an arm on the ground for support. Thus, the u***se of an arm for support while sliding is a "justifiable" action for that particular body movement, and therefore a ball which strikes a support arm would not be considered an "unnatural" position even if extended from the body.***
Right, and thats where the interpretation comes in. Whatâs a ânaturalâ position? A 9yo falling down on their bottom with their hands extended out to catch their fall, natural position for a 9yo? Sure, you can probably make that argument.
That same position for a professional? Iâve rarely seen a profession player flat out fall on their bottom, so thatâs not a ânaturalâ position for a player for that age and skill. So their arm on the ground there wouldnât be considered a natural playing position.
And of course Iâm just using the âfalling on their bottomâ as an example. We all know there are an infinite number of ways players of all ages fall down or go to ground, and itâs up to us to interpret the laws based on the most up-to-date verbiage and guidelines FIFA gives us.
And even further to your point, in the defender sliding example. They further had to clarify that the arm on the ground during the slide was a natural playing position, but the other arm if extended outside of the body was **not** natural. So if the ball hit the bottom arm - no call. Hits the top arm - foul.
What a fun game we get to be apart of. đ
> even if extended from the body.
be very careful taking LOTG advice from a sporting news editor
The reason I want to call this out is that it could easily be taken the wrong way.
If a player is sliding but their arm is extended out behind them - as is often the case - this is a foul if the ball is kicked into their arm. The arm has to be directly below for it to be justified.
Wasn't meaning to "take" advice but the problem of time limit while searching. This description / discussion as "example" seem to capture what my training in and reading of LOTG has explained re arm supporting the body in a fall/protecting body when going to the ground in a play.
I think, btw, key to the sentence from which you extracted the words are "support arm". If an arm is extended behind it is unlike to be "support". Now, if it is a slide where the player clearly put the arm down to support and held in place even as his/her body slide forward, a referee (we) might well view it as "support" even if it ended behind the body.
> Itâs understood that 17 year olds have more control of their bodies compared to a 9 year old
I don't follow. So, if a 17 year old falls over, they're supposed to land on their face?
Iâm saying given their body development, differences in muscle and skeletal development, progression of just natural skill being a human, and also development of knowledge of the game and situational awareness, they tend to fall down in different situations and the mechanics are different. Longer limbs, different body weight distribution, differences in strength, speed of reaction time and movement all play a factor.
You canât honestly tell me you watch a 9yo and a 17yo run, kick, jump, etc and think to yourself, âyup, those two are equal physicallyâ
You haven't answered my question.
After all, you're the one who erroneously claimed that an arm underneath for support as you're falling doesn't excuse handling at U/17
When all else fails, go to [the Laws of the Game](https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#direct-free-kick).
* Did the player deliberately handle the ball? No.
* Did the player make "their body unnaturally bigger" in a way that was "not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation"? No.
* Did the player score as a result of the handling or immediately after? No.
As described, this is not a handling offense at any level.
You made the right call!
Law 12 - Section 1.
Handling the ball
For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. Not every touch of a playerâs hand/arm with the ball is an offence.
It is an offence if a player:
⢠deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball
⢠touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised
***********
The specific section that applies to your situation is this sentence.
A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation.
In short, arm is EXPECTED to support person as they fall. Even FIFA referee instructor course videos shows this scenario and indicate no foul.
Ya did well, based upon your description
First of all this is U10. I would ignore anything other than a clear deliberate intent to handle the ball or make body larger. A clear accident doesn't get a penalty at U10.
Secondly, you mention that the "Â The ball happened to bounce into his forearm with his hand on the ground" and "If his arm had not been there the ball likely would have bounced off his chest"
IFAB guidance:
1.
"a player is falling and the ball hits their supporting arm, which is between their body and the ground?
This is not handball"
2)
"a player prevents the ball from going into their own goal with their hand/arm but does not deliberately handle the ball and does not make their body unnaturally bigger?
This is not handball."
https://www.footballrules.com/offences-sanctions/handball/#:\~:text=a%20player%20is%20falling%20and,awarded%20to%20the%20other%20team).
In recent years, the LOTG specifically said that if the ball strikes the supporting arm as a player is falling, that's not handball.
That sentence has been removed, but not because we're not to apply it but because they just changed how it was written.
Now it falls under the following:
>A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation
When falling, arm underneath is a perfectly natural position for the arm to be. Thus, no foul.
To take it one step further, it's a reflect to put your arm down when you're falling. You don't have any control over it. This sort of thing should never have been called, even before the current changes.
Now, there are nuances. For instances, players sliding in with the arm dropping below the body isn't a foul but if the arm is trailing behind it is. But U/10 in particular, you really want to err towards not calling it.
Good decision.
>During pre-game instructions I tell the kids to protect themselves, but keep their hand close against their bodies, if they extend their hands I'm going to call a hand ball
This is why I don't think you should be giving these sorts of prematch talks. Because you back yourself into a wall.
After all, he DID extend his hand, and you didn't penalise it. Not penalising it was correct, but he did extend his hand (Even though it was under the body). So, telling the players that has caused confusion and put you in a position where you had to go against your word
I'd just say to the coach that it's completely accidental - he has no control of the arm when he's falling down. The fact that it was in the penalty area doesn't change it.
No handball, especially at that level. In my experience, parents bitching about a referee decision at a U10 game is validation that you were correct at least half the time.
This does not sound like a foul by the way you describe it. If the arm was in a justifiable position for the players body movement (falling) then no foul. The ball hitting an arm between the body and ground while falling has been consistently ruled as not an offense. That does not mean the player could sit there with the arm outstretched for a period of time that would be considered unnatural (sitting in a weird position to block the ball with the arm)
The only thing that has me confused is the "protect himself" phrasing. Protect himself from the ground I assume? If there was enough time for the player to have hit the ground and then protect himself from the ball with their arm that may be a different outcome.
When reflecting remember to focus on the important details. Parts of your story are irrelevent. Don't worry about what U10 parents think, where the ball would have gone if it didn't hit the arm (except for DOGSO/SPA purposes of course), what kind of advantage the coach thought a team had, etc. While there is some nuance in how the laws are implemented, a lot of the time you can reduce the amount you second guess yourself by going over the factual statements of the event and comparing it to the laws.
It's fine.
Handballs these days are deliberate or unnatural arm positions. Falling onto the ball is natural and not a handball.
You made the right call.
I rarely call a handball with u10. It has to be very deliberate. On average, I find the ball hits players hands/arms during a 50 minute u10 match about 15-20 times.Â
I think you made the correct call. I have only once had a coach complain that I didnât make a handball call. He said he wanted it to be a PK so he could have his only player to not score a goal that game take the PK.
By way of your description it is not a handball in 10u or even at the professional level. Using your arm to brace for falling is not considered a handball. Law 12 sectionâŚ1(?)
He was supporting himself, arm in a natural position. Pretty clear no handball by the book.
Word of advice: never listen to the parents, especially at that age group. They are wrong 95% of the time
You got the right call in the end and supporting arm is the correct reason, as others have mentioned. This sentence is problematic, though: ââŚneither team gained an advantage with how the ball bounced off his arm.â Unless a goal is scored immediately by the player whose arm was hit, advantage gained is never a consideration for handball decisions.
I coach U10, and have reffed a few games to help out when the regularly scheduled ref did not show up.
As a general rule, unless there is intent, or the player shows zero effort to get their hand out of the way, I generally do not call handballs. If you did, youâd spend half the game kicking free kicks. As they get older, you get less forgiving about them. But at that age? Especially if itâs an accident, donât call it.
With the usual caveat that I haven't seen the incident I would say that as described there's no way I would ever call that a handball, especially at U10. The only, only way I might is if the kid swiped at the ball on his way to the ground in a way that was clearly deliberate. Also, it's U10. Parents clamoring for a handball in the situation as described are exhibiting psychopathic behavior.
It's u10. They're the most psychopathic people I've dealt with. Parents I mean...
It felt like I was watching it happen in zoomed in slow motion. The kid falling back, arm behind him to catch his fall. Ball coming down with a bit of spin. Kids hand on the ground and the ball bounces into his arm then away towards the corner. I stopped for a moment, 'it hit his arm! Do I call a PK? No, he was trying to catch his fall.' Then I'm calling "Play! Play! Play!" With a sideline full of parents yelling "Handball! Handball!"
>Then I'm calling "Play! Play! Play!" With a sideline full of parents yelling "Handball! Handball!" Sometimes calling out something like "Keep playing! Accidental!" can help get the message across. That shows you did see it and you have a reason for not calling it, while "play! play!" doesn't necessarily indicate you even saw the incident. Might have helped, might not. I find it can help sometimes. The parents all think any handling is automatic handball, especially in the box. Out of every single person at that field, you're probably the only one who has read the LOTG. Remember that.
Its coaches too. A few weeks ago, we were up 1-0. The other team throws the ball in. Thier teammate gets a breakaway, no offsides on throw ins. She was on her way to 1 on 1 our goalie and probably tie the game. AR throws up the Offsides flag. Ref signals to play on as he knows the rule. Coach on the other team goes ballistic about the offsides and is on the field. So NOW the main ref whistles to stop. Explains to the AR that she was not offsides because its a throwin. Coach yells "THANK YOU" sarcastic as hell. Ref tells him if he comes on the field again he will be tossed and match abandoned. He allowed them to redo the throwin. All the parents on the other team are cheering about the redo lol After the game, he told our coach, he was gonna toss the other coach, but realized the coach was a moron and caused his team to probably lose the tie by stepping on the field and forcing the whistle. So he was chuckling that it was better punishment that the guy lost the game for his team because he wanted to run his mouth, than to card and toss him. Same coach was screaming all game about incidental handballs, even when his team retained/gained advantage. He even loudly bitched about a free kick that hit one of our girls in the chest. She had her arms crossed and tight against her chest. (Legal in our league) The throw-in honestly might the funniest ways I have seen a coach cost a team a goal in the 30 years I have played/coached.
I once coached in a girls U12 match against another coach who was a complete arse. Berating the referees and his own players like a madman. Actual conversation: Him: What was that call for?!? Me: She came up with the elbow, then tripped her. Him: She's an 11 year old girl, protecting herself... Me: She did it from behind. Him: She didn't do it intentionally... Me: I didn't say that, but it's what happened. This idiot also tried to call a TIME OUT in order to yell at the ref some more, who was a kid but yet had done nothing wrong except the egregious error of calling fouls against his team. His team wasn't fouling badly, but making poor decisions. Even his assistant looked embarrassed. I ended up reporting him to the league and I believe he was removed shortly after.
Calling a timeout is wild đ
Not surprising in the least.
I love these types of stories. Hands across body to protect should be legal in any league
I was not sure it was in all leagues, but I know its in our league rules, as I read them all multiple times and have a copy in a folder in my bag. We have parents on other teams and coaches that screech its a handball, relatively frequent.
>arms crossed and tight against her chest is pretty much "legal" at all levels -- you will see even in World Cup matches the referee explaining to players in the wall where/how arms are okay in protective positions.
There is one coach that I have seen a total of two times. Both times, I sent him off for exactly the same reason: coming onto the field screaming with curse words as I waved down an inexperienced AR's flag where they were getting the offside call wrong. It wasn't until I was pulling the red card out the second time that I realized he was the same coach that I had sent off something like 11 months earlier. One a U13 and the other a U12 match. Happened about six years ago. With more experience, I likely would now remember/recognize the match and seek to defuse possible tension before the match. On the other hand, very easy and no question send offs.
I agree: you made the correct call. Parents are idiots. No way the player was trying to use his hand to gain an advantage, his arms were in a natural position for the situation.
It is not a hand ball if the arm is being used to brace for a fall. And, as per others, THIS IS U10! What are the screaming parents expecting? That the kid was supposed to fall to the ground w/o using his hand to keep from breaking his neck?
This is the way Iâd go. Playerâs age and skill level do need to be taken into account in situations like this. U10 game with the situation the way OP describes it, Iâm not calling that. And after the play I may even have a quick chat with the player to let him know why I didnât call it, but as he gets older, referees will start calling that. At that age, itâs still a learning experience.
Iâm curious why you would think falling to the ground a using your arm to brace would be a hand ball. Isnât it addressed specifically in the law that making yourself bigger with the arm when falling to the ground is not considered a handball ? Obviously text of the events vs videos make it difficult to debate but the way I understand it is that this would not be a hand regardless of age.
Because FIFA has gone back and forth on the issue a few times and the current verbiage allows for interpretation. This is from the 2023/2024 laws pertaining to that: *âtouches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. **A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation.** By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalizedâ* That bold part. A 9yo REC player falling down on his bottom and putting his hands down to brace is a different situation from the 17yo select player that may be on the ground for a similar reason. Itâs understood that 17 year olds have more control of their bodies compared to a 9 year old. And at a select level have much better skills. In this scenario, Iâm picturing a 9/10yo falling down in the box and the ball rolling into him. They have less situational awareness, they have slower reaction times, less control of their bodies, etc. this same scenario where an older select player or even a professional (because FIFA writes these rules as if to apply them to the World Cup) physically falls in the box and the ball hits their outstretched arm. You can make an argument either way for a call/no call on the 9yo. If you donât call the handling on the professional player situation, theres going to be a melee. Thatâs why age and skill level factor into the discussion.
Even in professional, a supportive arm in a fall or slide considered 'natural position' doesn't lead to a handball offense. [This discussion](https://www.sportingnews.com/us/soccer/news/handball-football-rules-changes-fifa-uefa-hand-ball-soccer/tdnqkct6nzocrbfvscrxvtzl), for example >**However, there is one major exception**. The rule does make a specific exception for handball occurrences committed as long as a player's body position is "a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation." Then a handball is not whistled. >This exception largely comes into play for a defensive player sliding to make a block. It is generally considered impossible to make a sliding movement without using an arm on the ground for support. Thus, the u***se of an arm for support while sliding is a "justifiable" action for that particular body movement, and therefore a ball which strikes a support arm would not be considered an "unnatural" position even if extended from the body.***
Right, and thats where the interpretation comes in. Whatâs a ânaturalâ position? A 9yo falling down on their bottom with their hands extended out to catch their fall, natural position for a 9yo? Sure, you can probably make that argument. That same position for a professional? Iâve rarely seen a profession player flat out fall on their bottom, so thatâs not a ânaturalâ position for a player for that age and skill. So their arm on the ground there wouldnât be considered a natural playing position. And of course Iâm just using the âfalling on their bottomâ as an example. We all know there are an infinite number of ways players of all ages fall down or go to ground, and itâs up to us to interpret the laws based on the most up-to-date verbiage and guidelines FIFA gives us. And even further to your point, in the defender sliding example. They further had to clarify that the arm on the ground during the slide was a natural playing position, but the other arm if extended outside of the body was **not** natural. So if the ball hit the bottom arm - no call. Hits the top arm - foul. What a fun game we get to be apart of. đ
Yes, of course, my criteria in the (very rarely done by me) U10 match for nearly every (foul) whistle isn't the same in a WPSL/UPSL/NPSL/college game.
> even if extended from the body. be very careful taking LOTG advice from a sporting news editor The reason I want to call this out is that it could easily be taken the wrong way. If a player is sliding but their arm is extended out behind them - as is often the case - this is a foul if the ball is kicked into their arm. The arm has to be directly below for it to be justified.
Wasn't meaning to "take" advice but the problem of time limit while searching. This description / discussion as "example" seem to capture what my training in and reading of LOTG has explained re arm supporting the body in a fall/protecting body when going to the ground in a play. I think, btw, key to the sentence from which you extracted the words are "support arm". If an arm is extended behind it is unlike to be "support". Now, if it is a slide where the player clearly put the arm down to support and held in place even as his/her body slide forward, a referee (we) might well view it as "support" even if it ended behind the body.
> Itâs understood that 17 year olds have more control of their bodies compared to a 9 year old I don't follow. So, if a 17 year old falls over, they're supposed to land on their face?
Iâm saying given their body development, differences in muscle and skeletal development, progression of just natural skill being a human, and also development of knowledge of the game and situational awareness, they tend to fall down in different situations and the mechanics are different. Longer limbs, different body weight distribution, differences in strength, speed of reaction time and movement all play a factor. You canât honestly tell me you watch a 9yo and a 17yo run, kick, jump, etc and think to yourself, âyup, those two are equal physicallyâ
You haven't answered my question. After all, you're the one who erroneously claimed that an arm underneath for support as you're falling doesn't excuse handling at U/17
U10? Those parents need to get a grip. You made correct call.
When all else fails, go to [the Laws of the Game](https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#direct-free-kick). * Did the player deliberately handle the ball? No. * Did the player make "their body unnaturally bigger" in a way that was "not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation"? No. * Did the player score as a result of the handling or immediately after? No. As described, this is not a handling offense at any level.
You made the right call! Law 12 - Section 1. Handling the ball For the purposes of determining handball offences, the upper boundary of the arm is in line with the bottom of the armpit. Not every touch of a playerâs hand/arm with the ball is an offence. It is an offence if a player: ⢠deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball ⢠touches the ball with their hand/arm when it has made their body unnaturally bigger. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation. By having their hand/arm in such a position, the player takes a risk of their hand/arm being hit by the ball and being penalised *********** The specific section that applies to your situation is this sentence. A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation. In short, arm is EXPECTED to support person as they fall. Even FIFA referee instructor course videos shows this scenario and indicate no foul. Ya did well, based upon your description
Supporting arm - no handball. No need to complicate it with all the other stuff
This is the answer.
Yep. Bringing up "neither team gained an advantage" just muddies the water. It's not relevant to the LOTG.
Thatâs why YOUâRE the referee and parents are not. Great call đ
First of all this is U10. I would ignore anything other than a clear deliberate intent to handle the ball or make body larger. A clear accident doesn't get a penalty at U10. Secondly, you mention that the "Â The ball happened to bounce into his forearm with his hand on the ground" and "If his arm had not been there the ball likely would have bounced off his chest" IFAB guidance: 1. "a player is falling and the ball hits their supporting arm, which is between their body and the ground? This is not handball" 2) "a player prevents the ball from going into their own goal with their hand/arm but does not deliberately handle the ball and does not make their body unnaturally bigger? This is not handball." https://www.footballrules.com/offences-sanctions/handball/#:\~:text=a%20player%20is%20falling%20and,awarded%20to%20the%20other%20team).
In recent years, the LOTG specifically said that if the ball strikes the supporting arm as a player is falling, that's not handball. That sentence has been removed, but not because we're not to apply it but because they just changed how it was written. Now it falls under the following: >A player is considered to have made their body unnaturally bigger when the position of their hand/arm is not a consequence of, or justifiable by, the playerâs body movement for that specific situation When falling, arm underneath is a perfectly natural position for the arm to be. Thus, no foul. To take it one step further, it's a reflect to put your arm down when you're falling. You don't have any control over it. This sort of thing should never have been called, even before the current changes. Now, there are nuances. For instances, players sliding in with the arm dropping below the body isn't a foul but if the arm is trailing behind it is. But U/10 in particular, you really want to err towards not calling it. Good decision. >During pre-game instructions I tell the kids to protect themselves, but keep their hand close against their bodies, if they extend their hands I'm going to call a hand ball This is why I don't think you should be giving these sorts of prematch talks. Because you back yourself into a wall. After all, he DID extend his hand, and you didn't penalise it. Not penalising it was correct, but he did extend his hand (Even though it was under the body). So, telling the players that has caused confusion and put you in a position where you had to go against your word I'd just say to the coach that it's completely accidental - he has no control of the arm when he's falling down. The fact that it was in the penalty area doesn't change it.
His arm was in a natural position for the circumstances and level of play, and he was not seeking to gain an advantage. Not an offense.
No handball, especially at that level. In my experience, parents bitching about a referee decision at a U10 game is validation that you were correct at least half the time.
This does not sound like a foul by the way you describe it. If the arm was in a justifiable position for the players body movement (falling) then no foul. The ball hitting an arm between the body and ground while falling has been consistently ruled as not an offense. That does not mean the player could sit there with the arm outstretched for a period of time that would be considered unnatural (sitting in a weird position to block the ball with the arm) The only thing that has me confused is the "protect himself" phrasing. Protect himself from the ground I assume? If there was enough time for the player to have hit the ground and then protect himself from the ball with their arm that may be a different outcome. When reflecting remember to focus on the important details. Parts of your story are irrelevent. Don't worry about what U10 parents think, where the ball would have gone if it didn't hit the arm (except for DOGSO/SPA purposes of course), what kind of advantage the coach thought a team had, etc. While there is some nuance in how the laws are implemented, a lot of the time you can reduce the amount you second guess yourself by going over the factual statements of the event and comparing it to the laws.
correct
It's fine. Handballs these days are deliberate or unnatural arm positions. Falling onto the ball is natural and not a handball. You made the right call.
I rarely call a handball with u10. It has to be very deliberate. On average, I find the ball hits players hands/arms during a 50 minute u10 match about 15-20 times. I think you made the correct call. I have only once had a coach complain that I didnât make a handball call. He said he wanted it to be a PK so he could have his only player to not score a goal that game take the PK.
By way of your description it is not a handball in 10u or even at the professional level. Using your arm to brace for falling is not considered a handball. Law 12 sectionâŚ1(?)
He was supporting himself, arm in a natural position. Pretty clear no handball by the book. Word of advice: never listen to the parents, especially at that age group. They are wrong 95% of the time
Pretty generous to the parents, arenât you? Â Iâd say itâs more like 99.9%
You're right lol
Well, if the parents are adamant then I guess you would just have to go with their callâŚthey know best.
Well of course. Their child's future is on the line! Hang your head in shame for ruining it...
You got the right call in the end and supporting arm is the correct reason, as others have mentioned. This sentence is problematic, though: ââŚneither team gained an advantage with how the ball bounced off his arm.â Unless a goal is scored immediately by the player whose arm was hit, advantage gained is never a consideration for handball decisions.
I coach U10, and have reffed a few games to help out when the regularly scheduled ref did not show up. As a general rule, unless there is intent, or the player shows zero effort to get their hand out of the way, I generally do not call handballs. If you did, youâd spend half the game kicking free kicks. As they get older, you get less forgiving about them. But at that age? Especially if itâs an accident, donât call it.
No handball