Willie Collum has pledged to improve communication and transparency in his new role as the Scottish FA’s head of refereeing operations, as well as improving some interpretations of rules – most notably, handball – that had infuriated players, managers and supporters last season.
In fairness to him, it appears he has got off to a good start on all counts.
Collum has spent a fair portion of his opening weeks in the position engaging with various stakeholders in the game, taking on feedback from the clubs and subsequently outlining to the media where we can expect to see changes in how referees are interpreting certain situations.
Chief amongst those is with the sort of handball incident that we saw in the opening match of the Premiership season on Saturday, as the ball made contact with the arm of Rangers midfielder Connor Barron as he attempted to block a cross from Hearts attacker Yan Dhanda.
It was an incident that was strikingly similar to a controversial penalty decision that went against Rangers last term, as John Souttar was penalised for handball against Kilmarnock after a VAR review in a match at Ibrox.
It has been made clear though that while such incidents would have led to the award of a spot kick last season, this season, they will not, with the SFA following UEFA’s lead in relaxing the handball rule in certain situations.
The key point to consider in the Barron incident is his proximity to the ball when it is struck. When the ball strikes the arm of a player in the penalty area from close range this season, it will usually not be deemed a punishable offence, whereas it most likely would have last term.
The ‘natural’ position of a player’s arm – Collum referred to this as the ‘football expectation’ - will also be taken into account, with referees instructed to consider whether the player who has made contact with the ball could reasonably have had time to get his hand out of the way.
Read more:
Barron’s arm does move upwards towards the ball in this example, but as it is not away from his body and in an ‘unnatural’ position, it may reasonably be considered to be a result of his movement in his attempt to block the ball.
A further point, which may debatably be pertinent to this case, is whether or not the player has gained an advantage by blocking the ball with his arm. More specifically, referees have been asked to consider where the ball would have gone had it not hit the player on the hand or the arm.
Had the ball carried through in this example, it may well have struck Barron’s chest, rather than making its way into the penalty area, and if so, he would have gained no advantage from the positioning of his arm.
That is not to say that every handball where the arm is away from the body will be punished, but this is also something that was highlighted in the Souttar incident from last season, with the ball clearly heading for his chest had it not made impact with his arm first.
So, it may be said that the standard has been set in the first game of the season, but Collum had actually set it prior to the season beginning, which is why Hearts manager Steven Naismith was relaxed in his response to the incident, and why he was happy enough that referee Nick Walsh had made the correct call.
The challenge now is for referees to apply that interpretation of the handball rule consistently across the season. No two incidents are ever the same, and Collum himself knows that there will be controversial incidents throughout the campaign.
By setting his stall out clearly with the managers and media early on though, there should be less grumbling about transparency and fewer penalty calls for handballs where players have had no opportunity to avoid contact, the contact has not been deliberate, and a player’s movement is deemed to be ‘natural’.
