Hand Ball
 

Question for you pros out there. Reading the NFHS rule book it makes mention of the fact that if a ball is passed to a) a male and he moves his hands to protect his genitals, b) a female who moves her arms to protect her chest is ruled a hand ball.

Do you guys call it that way?

If it's obvious.

yes. and when i hear objections from the people accustomed to fifa laws, i just smile and say, "high school rules".

I personally do not. The main concern within the game is player safety. If they are protecting themselves, without playing the ball at the same time, then I will not call the handling infraction. However, if it that "procedure" is used in a way in which my discretion says they aren't exactly protecting themselves (for example, a girl on a very slow/weak ball in the air towards her chest and then plays it with her arms as a chest ball), then I will call the infraction. It comes down to judgement at that moment.

If, as stated in the base note, the hands or arms are moved so that the individual can play the ball using them, it is a violation of the rule. To make up your own add-on definations, such as safety factors as stated in this thread, admits you are not refereeing soccer but rather your own version of the game. Carried to an extreme I suppose you could allow the hands and arms to be used to protect the head from brain damage or eye injury, or ear drum concussion.

Kusskke many would argue that the NFHS "rules" that contravene the FIFA Laws of the Game ARE the "add on definitions", that create a question as to "what" game is being played. Under TLOG any movement of the hand/arm that is mealy reactive in nature to protect oneself is not to be punished. Only deliberately handling the ball to attempt to create a disadvantage for the opponent is to be punished. Phantnref's explanation IS the "real" soccer definition.

But the problem is that phatneff also calls it that way in an NFHS game, which is in complete violation of the NFHS rules. In short, he purposely ignores an NFHS rule because he likes the FIFA interpretation better. That's wrong. He shouldn't officiate NFHS games if he doesn't wish to apply the NFHS rules during the contest.

Yep. It's a hand ball -- and a deliberate move of the hand to hit the ball.

NevadaRef I do not disagree with your statement. I have stated before "if you accept and assignment by an organization you use that organizations rules for that contest." I was addressing the statement "not refereeing soccer but rather your own version of the game." I believe NFHS's "handling" interpretation is "wrong" for "soccer"; but personally when I work NFHS games I follow their requirements.

yea i never heard of that rule .....well caught buddy i have read the rule book rite now and just figure it out that you are rite....

This line of thinking, however, is quite prententious as it suggests that only FIFA is qualified to define the game of soccer, and that only the laws/rules set forth by FIFA are worthy of merit. This would be akin to saying that only FIBA basketball is "real", everything else (NBA, NFHS, etc) is something else. The rules of what ever organization you are playing by defines the sport that is being played.

BS... you have your analogy backward. Basketball was created in the US FIBA came along much later as the game spread to other parts of the world.

Football/Soccer was created in England. England, Wales, Scotland & Ireland hold 4 of the 7 votes on the IFAB which makes & maintains all "The Laws of the Game" that the vast majority of the world plays by. Even here in the US all "Club" players play by the IFAB/FIFA laws. Club players outnumber NFHS players by a massive amount. The "modifications" NFHS have made to the game have not improved the game but have created confusion for the players and spectators who learn the game under the "worlds" rules and then 1 season per year for only 4 years of the entire playing career they have to accept the NFHS's poorly though out "adaptations".

R2C, I'm not arguing the origins of any game, the validity of the rules, or whether or not they make any sense. My point is that the rule set by which you are playing does in fact define the game you are playing. Just because IFAB/FIFA is responsible for the rules that have the greatest world-wide acceptance does not mean other rulesets are not worthy of being called soccer. If I came up with a rule set that allowed the GK to handle the ball anywhere behind the center line, I could still call the game soccer. I probably wouldn't have enough support in my rules to garner any widespread acceptance, but as long as the general principles of my game were close enough to soccer, I doubt many would see my game and say "I have no idea what to call that, its like no other game I've ever seen". Most would call it soccer and then say "but that's BoomerSooner's version". While this is an extreme example, I think the minor safety differences in most cases aren't even worthy of the comment "but that's NFHS's version of soccer". Maybe those in the know will know the difference, but in the end it is still soccer.

I know I quoted you, but I guess my point is arguing the statement of Kusskke that all the various additions may cause confusion as to what game is actually being played. As a basketball official, I'm a huge fan of a single ruleset to get rid of all the fanboy's that watch NBA on Sunday afternoon and think all those rules apply on Friday night. However, I'm not going to say the NBA (or NFHS) isn't basketball.

LOL!! I just read this finally. Nevadaref will never miss an opportunity to say I'm wrong and shouldn't be reffing! That just kills me. And YOU got ME banned from the other message board??? Very interesting. You must be pretty good at doing other things other than reffing.......if you know what I mean...........to have the amount of pull you do! LOL!

The Rule Book states . . .