Goals scored or created with the use of an accidental handball will not stand from next season onwards, the International FA Board (Ifab) have confirmed.
The changes mean that a free-kick will be awarded when a goal or clear chance occurs from a handball.
Another change to the laws of the game means that if the player's arms extend beyond a "natural silhouette", handball will be given, even if it is perceived as accidental.
In other changes approved by Ifab, substitutes will have to leave the pitch at the nearest goalline or touchline instead of walking to their technical area in a bid to stop time wasting.
Additional approved law changes included measures to deal with attacking players causing problems in the defensive wall, giving a dropped ball in certain situations when the ball hits the referee and the goalkeeper only being required to have one foot on the line at a penalty kick.
Comments
About time too!
Isn't this now open to abuse? It's worth handling the ball as it will only result in a free-kick and not necessarily a goal?
I guess we'll know which players are being subbed going forward because they'll go stand on the centre circle!!
Its a good rule thats been introduced but think there are better ways to speed up substitutions
As we are discussing the rules, bring back the old obstruction rule. "Shepherding out" is obstructing play and goes against the natural flow of the game.
"The changes mean that a free-kick will be awarded when a goal or clear chance occurs from a handball" - what happens now?
as to the new handball law .. this surely means that canny attackers will now aim for opponents arms in the pen area and then scream 'penalty' in a variety of languages if said arm is hit .. putting more strain on the referee's discretion and multiple instances of VAR referral
Wasnt given yet was a clear bit of cheating (from a Scouser, nooo I hear you cry) else if not it would have been the worst attempted cross Ive ever seen
Watched the 3 Premier League games yesterday on NBC and they were discussing this natural silhouette.
Think they established there would have been 3 penalties in the Fulham/Chelsea game alone.
This would mean shepherding a ball out of play would end because if you’re doing it legally, you’d hand possession over.
It also means skilful shielding (as demonstrated so beautifully by Tony Watt that one time) would be legal, as long as you, or a teammate, touched the ball last.
“Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.
All players have a right to their position on the field of play; being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.
A player may shield the ball by taking a position between an opponent and the ball if the ball is within playing distance and the opponent is not held off with the arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.”
I am unsure of how it is obstruction as most of the time, the ball is within playing distance of the defender so they’re naturally shielding the ball out of play. It is of course different if the ball is say 3 meters in front of the defender and he intentionally blocks the attacker getting to the ball.
I can’t say that this law can be interpreted in several ways but as a referee myself, I admit there are many laws open to interpretation.
Totally agree.
The handball rule change will create more arguments than it will resolve
What are people's views on the penalty kick change - i.e. no rebounds.
It solves the problem of encroachment (all the players apart from the taker and keeper can be in the centre circle) but fundamentally changes the 'ball in open play' scenario.
On balance I think I'm against the change.