The referee has the last word – but please use all the technology available

Contents

"Shot at!" is an explanation I used to often hear from children playing soccer when a handball was supposedly unintentional, a goal was prevented and they preferred to let play continue for the fun of the game. The controversial scene when the Spanish player Marc Cucurella touched the ball with his hand in the penalty area in the quarter-final of the European Football Championship between Germany and Spain can also be interpreted in this way. There was no penalty, nor was there a review by the video referee; the referee on the pitch allowed play to continue.

But at the European Championships, we don't see children on the pitch, we usually see professionals worth millions. They have spent years, often decades, practicing every aspect of the game. Their body control and athleticism is so good that every foul or handball must be assumed to be intentional. Among other things, kicking an opponent's foot while fighting for the ball is punished ruthlessly, even at this European Championship.

Whether a foul was intentional or unintentional has long been irrelevant. A foul is a foul. At most, the type of punishment, such as a yellow card or just a free kick, can be a matter of discretion. This is the human factor of the referee, and a good referee also takes into account previous actions of a player, the importance of the game and the general course of the match. For example, revenge fouls are always a particularly stupid idea because they are easy to see through.

The referee should retain this role in the future, despite the chip in the ball, goal-line technology and the video assistant referee (VAR) and everything else that is supposed to reduce wrong decisions in a stadium today. I wonder why there is no clearly regulated technical support for handball of all things. German coach Julian Nagelsmann had a good idea right after the elimination against Spain: Why not calculate the trajectory of the ball without the hand of the opponent and then decide? Would that have been a goal? Or was the handball irrelevant to the scoring opportunity?

If you think about it a little further, a handball could be punishable if the hand on the ball prevented the goal. And it is only a venial sin if the handball did not significantly change the game situation to the disadvantage of the attacking team. This is again at the discretion of the referee.

There is not room for maneuver everywhere

This clarity already exists for other infringements of the rules, such as goals – Wembley is impossible with today's technology - and offside. It is of course bitter when Denmark are denied a goal in the round of 16 against Germany because of an offside. But the rules leave no room for discretion: if there is a part of the body with which the player can score a goal, it is considered offside. Where would you draw the line? At 5 centimeters? And does that apply equally to Andrija Zivkovic, who is 1.69 meters tall, and Vanja Milinković-Savić, who is 2.02 meters tall, using the Serbian team as an example? Offside is offside. And a handball that prevents a goal must also be clearly regulated.

All the associations have been trying to regulate this for years: "unnatural movement", "increased body surface", "the hand goes to the ball", all of which only led to players jumping around in the penalty area with their arms crossed behind their backs. Or let their arms hang loose, like the Spaniard Marc Cucurella. A larger body surface than with the gripping tools on the rump, of course, but also quite advantageous when the ball passes by. And according to the current interpretation of the UEFA handball rules, it is not a punishable handball.

It was not a penalty

Because that's the crux of the matter: as was already clear before the tournament, it wasn't a penalty. Roberto Rosetti, UEFA's head of refereeing, had shown a similar situation to that of Germany against Spain in the run-up to the European Championship, where the defending player had the ball hit his hand from close range in the penalty area: "That is never a penalty kick," he said. The referee in Spain's victorious quarter-final was apparently also guided by this. Even though Cucurella clearly saw the ball coming, which is the subject of much debate.

"As a referee, you can't look into the player's head, so other auxiliary criteria have to be used," said former DFB and FIFA referee Manuel Gräfe after the match. You can only agree with that: If the associations can't get it together to make the eternally ambiguous handball rule clear, other means must be found. Technology can help. Of course, it should not be the sole deciding factor because, as mentioned above, the human factor, including the referee on the pitch, is part of the sport.

Technology can make sport fairer

All of this is about fairness. It is not only the current score that determines the psychology of a sporting competition, but also the certainty that the rules are always the same for everyone. Soccer has long been so fair that a goal is a goal and offside is offside. Why not finally create clear rules for handball as well?

And, finally: Of course, not every club, not every smaller league can afford the technology. This has always been the case, "soccer" has not existed since some had better shoes or a more even pitch than others. In the national leagues, European Championship and World Cup tournaments, however, the technical aspects of handball in particular should be better clarified. The referee then has the last word, as it has always been and should remain so. And the whining that "AI should replace the referee" is nothing more than the reflexive cry: "Shot!" But that doesn't apply in professional sport.

(nie)