Everyone knows that the human being is a faulty design. At least that’s what he’s believed for generations when a nail has to be hammered into the wall. Why does it take two Devices: a hammer, a nail? In response to acute demand, why has evolution not designed a kind of hammer finger that can drive any nail into the wall? The eternal DIY problem with the dark blue thumb would be solved immediately if such a nail was not hit precisely on the head again.
A particularly noticeable faulty construction of humans is one of their supposedly richest types of play: the footballer. Because in football, the arms and hands that are carried along are naturally annoying. Which is why it is more and more common to catch footballers trying to hide them behind their backs at full gallop. But if nothing helps: The footballer himself is such a botch that he gets whistled after it every day. Namely, when the ball not only touches the foot, but again the hand. Last week, at the highest athletic level, in the Champions League, the strangest contortions could again be admired.
A slight touch only in the penalty area, in which, as the name suggests, stricter legislation is applied – the referee points to the point. And it is not uncommon for a merciless whistle to turn the entire dramaturgy of a game. On purpose or not? It doesn’t matter, in the most recent rule reform the motive of intention was removed from the handball rule, now the referee no longer has any discretion. Hand is hand – there are penalties. With all unmotivated ricochets who accidentally graze slightly splayed arms; with every carefully calculated chip of the ball that hits the opponent’s forearm.
Only with clear handball there should be penalties!
The audience, which has always been confused about the question of handball, seemed almost ready to endure the topic of game day after game day, resigned to fate, bowed to grief. There are more important things right now. But now this technical question is raised again at the top by means of a diplomatic dispatch. The football European boss, Aleksandar Ceferin, wrote to the football world boss, Gianni Infantino, what must have cost him some overcoming, both are not considered best friends. Ceferin asks that you work towards ensuring that the criterion of intention should play a role again as soon as possible in the assessment of handball. Only Infantinos Fifa has the corresponding influence, because it is affiliated with the International Football Association Board (IFAB), which is also based in Zurich and oversees the football rules.
Ceferin must be supported! Accidents and coincidences should no longer be punished with penalties, as action and punishment are not proportionate to one another. Please only take penalties if you can see the advantage and taking advantage of it. Even then, there would still be plenty of room for interpretation. In order to reduce this, the solution has long been proposed. Another level of sanction would have to be in the penalty area: only with clear handball there should be penalties, with lighter offenses there would be a free kick.
This would mean there would be a constant debate at the dividing line between free kick and penalty kick, but the absolute would be out. And the absurd. After all, in which other code is it stated that the motive for an offense cannot be taken into account to mitigate the penalty? Not even if the footballer, this misconstruction, only has one thing in mind: to bring his superfluous arm to safety in front of the ball.
.
