The Rational Ref | How 'Stonewall rules' keep the peace on the pitch

Stonewall or stone-cold? Two penalty decisions in Hong Kong's First Division last weekend and two more triggered by handball in the English Premier League were spot on - or, to use the fashionable vernacular, they were all "stonewall penalties".

The term in soccer is puzzling because when someone "stonewalls" elsewhere it means they are using delaying tactics. It is a verb. The meaning has been shamelessly turned on its head This kind of penalty call is 100 per cent correct - a dead certainty - and there is absolutely no use arguing about it to delay the call. The stonewall penalty cannot be stonewalled.

Did "stonewall penalty" derive from its opposed meaning of "soft penalty"? In the colourful and intuitive domain of the English language, a "hard" penalty may have evolved into stonewall penalty via the more apt term "stone cold". A stone-cold penalty would make more sense. But, to referees a penalty is a penalty by any other name. Whether an egg is soft or hard-boiled, it is still a boiled egg.

Both Wigan and Stoke gave away penalties because the ball hit a defender on the arm when it was in an unnatural position. But what are natural and unnatural positions, and what is handball? The rules are clear. Anything else is open to interpretation.

Unfortunately, it is usually the players and coaches who misinterpret by basing their decisions on past experiences rather than the rules. Whenever the ball is around the torso area, players with something to gain will always shout "handball, ref", or in Australia, "hands, sir".

Referees are not mind readers but there are tools they use to decide whether the act of handling the ball is deliberate. Referees interpret handballs based on whether the hand moves towards the ball, whether the hand is in an unnatural position, and the distance between the player and the ball. In contrast, players generally "wing it".