The Laws haven't changed for handball - Referees?

[oldasitgets]

I actually got worried of late, as some referees have changed the Laws of the game regarding handball.

Yesterday a player even quoted me the new law.

I usually reckon to know about rules (Laws) so I checked up.

"Handball" If a Player handles the ball deliberately (except for the

goalkeeper within his own penalty area)

There's nothing about gaining an advantage.

There's nothing about changing the flight of the ball

There's nothing about a player having his hands in a raised position

All the referee has to decide is if it's intentional.

I have heard referees say "I know you didn't intend it, but it was a penalty."

"You gained an advantage - so it's a free kick"

The ONLY Criterion is the word "deliberately". That's all the referee has to decide if the ball contacts a player's hand.

I know that they need to give us something to moan about on "Match of the Day" but if they make up new bits to rules, players, and it would appear, referees listen and believe them.

Oh I can't find any "International Board" decisions that change this but, have a life, so may have missed that.

Is it me?

[B Manning]

As a referee handball has to be deliberate, I will not give handball for the ball that strikes a players hand or arm I need to be satisfied in my own mind that the player intended to use his hand/arm, but the amount of crap i get off of players who want a handball decision when its completely accidental defies belief at times. This last weekend with pitches that are drying out and bumpy with the ball popping up off the surface I must have had at least 20 shouts for handball in fact I think I only gave 1 free kick for that offence during the game but the amount of dissent when I ignored the appeals needed to be heard to be believed.

[Anita]

I refed a game and a player kicked the ball and it hit my hand and he shouted for hand ball He couldn't understand why i nearly wet myself laughing :D

[Guest Luffy]

Stig,

Can see your point but it would be a little unfair if everytime someone hit the ball as hard as they could from close range and in hit the arm because they are part of the body a penalty or a free kick is given. It is a natural reaction to raise your arms to protect your face or other parts of your body, therefore, if the referee uses common sense their should be no problems.

I do agree that if a players so called spreads himself in the box and it hits his arm then yes the player should be penalised.

[Spider]

Stig, that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard you say!!!! ;-)

[oldasitgets]

The one thing that I love about hockey is that you can whack the ball at an opponent. If it hits his leg or foot, as well as nearly crippling him, you get a free hit! (Of the ball not the player)

Is anyone really skilful enough to actually hit a hand?