But if a defender is in possession of the ball and in a position to actually make a controlled enough play to aim the ball at his defender's hand... why wouldn't he just clear it? You have the obvious no-risk, high-reward play (clearing the ball) that has been part of the game forever or the high-risk, high-reward play (your suggestion) which results in a DFK. Nevermind the logistics of execution, I just don't see the logic in it. You're going to play for a DFK in your goal area so you don't give possession or a throw-in to your opponent 30+ yards away from goal? Is that the logic? It just doesn't make sense. It won't be taught at the professional level. Well, yes on the first part (though not sure "pandering") is the right word. Billions of people are invested in the professional game and that's who the Laws and IFAB are written for. Is the stuff about Fourth Officials "pandering" because 99% of games in the world don't have them? The Laws are for the professional game and then they get adjusted--either explicitly with rules of competition or just via custom with their execution--as you move down the ladder. Nothing is new there. Also, despite me hating the campaign about the "triple punishment" and having preferred an adjustment around the suspension side of things, I think most would say that change has worked out pretty well. There are no more kinks than when DOGSO was just rigid and now goalkeepers stay on the field when they make an honest challenge for the ball which results in a foul and--85% of the time--a goal anyway. The campaign was frustrating but the result doesn't seem to be "nonsense." I also don't understand what you're asserting in the last sentence with "fault" vs. "praise." Handling is incredibly convoluted as things stand now--both inside and outside the referee community--and I don't see too many referees getting universal praise even when they are objectively right per the Laws. If a change here makes everyone's expectations more streamlined regarding attacking teams not being able to benefit from inadvertent handling (notwithstanding a few of the points raised above), won't that make it easier for referees?