Why are handball calls causing confusion in Premiership?

In the immediate aftermath of a controversial encounter at Rangers on Saturday, Livingston manager David Martindale was left baffled at the non-award of a penalty for handball during the first half of their 2-1 loss.

Three days later, Hibernian head coach David Gray referenced the Ibrox incident while lamenting a lack of consistency from officials after his team conceded a spot-kick in their 2-0 defeat at Motherwell.

Both incidents have cast fresh confusion over the use of the handball law within Scottish football, but what does the rule actually say? And is it being implemented correctly?

Here, BBC Scotland attempts to make sense of it all...

Why are we talking about this?

Having just levelled the game away to Rangers on Saturday, Livingston goalscorer Tete Yengi struck in the box looking to send the visitors into a shock lead.

Although it was a tame effort, the close-range shot was heading towards goal when it hit the hand of defender Emmanuel Fernandez.

Match official Ross Hardie took no action at the time and video assistant referee (VAR) John Beaton did not recommend an on-field review.

Guidance provided by the Scottish Football Association (SFA) to the BBC on Saturday said the Rangers centre-back was at close proximity and his arm position was natural for his movement as he moved across the face of goal to make the block.

Livingston have claimed the incident has "officially been recognised as a mistake" by the SFA, so does that guidance become obsolete?

After the break, a goal from Mohamed Diomande - initially ruled out for offside but overturned by the VAR - went on to secure a narrow 2-1 victory for the hosts.

At Fir Park on Tuesday, it was Hibs defender Grant Hanley's outstretched hand the ball struck when Motherwell forward Elijah Just hit a shot from a tight angle.

It is difficult to tell if the effort was going on target, with Scotland centre-back Hanley - who was sent off for denying a goalscoring opportunity 15 minutes later - only about a yard away from Just when the strike hit him.

Like the incident at Ibrox, referee Duncan Nicolson took no initial action. However, an on-field review was recommended and Nicolson then pointed to the spot.

Tawanda Maswanhise converted the first of Motherwell's two goals, with the Fir Park side going on to earn a comfortable 2-0 win.

What are the rules?

The rules from the International Football Association Board (Ifab) - football's lawmakers - state that a ball striking a player's arm or hand does not automatically result in penalisation.

The ball must hit below the armpit to be considered an offence, but what else?

• Deliberately touching the ball with your hand/arm.

• Touching the ball with your hand/arm when it is in a position that makes your body unnaturally bigger, and that position is not the result of their body moving fairly as part of play.

• Scoring a goal against the opposition with your hand/arm or scoring immediately after the ball has touched your hand/arm, even if accidental.

OK, so when is a handball not a handball?

• If you head, kick or play the ball with another part of your body and it then hits your own hand/arm (unless the ball goes directly into the opponents' goal or the player scores immediately afterwards).

• If you fall and the ball hits your supporting arm, which is between your body and the ground (unless the ball goes directly into the opponents' goal or the player scores immediately afterwards).

• If you are hit on the hand/arm by a ball which has been played by a team-mate (unless the ball goes directly into the opponents' goal or the player scores immediately afterwards).

It is clear there are multiple things to consider, and the subjective nature of these decisions result in managers calling for consistency.

But how do these points relate to the two recent incidents from Ibrox and Fir Park?

A convenient FAQ on the Ifab website asks what the outcome should be if a player prevents the ball from going into their own goal with their hand/arm but does not deliberately handle the ball and does not make their body unnaturally bigger.

The answer? Not a handball. Perhaps that was the thinking in the VAR room as they rewatched the incident from Ibrox.

At Fir Park, though, VAR Greg Aitken must have felt Hanley was making his body "unnaturally bigger" to recommend an on-field review.

What do managers & pundits think?

Hibs head coach Gray disagreed with the decision to punish his player.

"I'm not sure what he's meant to do with that," he told BBC Scotland. "The shot is clearly going miles wide. Grant [Hanley] hasn't made himself any bigger, he's not even trying to block the shot.

"The biggest issue for me is inconsistency. What I just watched at Ibrox [on Saturday]... Inconsistency is the problem. I don't know the rule."

BBC Scotland pundit Lee Miller said on Sportsound: "The penalty decision is so harsh. Is it an unnatural position? It's going miles wide as well."

On Saturday, Livingston boss Martindale was also perplexed. "For the life of me, I don't understand how it's not given in our favour," he said.

"It's going on target, could be a goal. I know if that incident is at Livingston, it goes against us. I know 100% that's a penalty against us.

"When we're spending hundreds of thousands of pounds on technology to get big decisions right in games, it's disappointing."

Former Premiership midfielder Michael Stewart reacted to the incident at Ibrox by saying it was "outrageous" for the VAR not to get involved.

Ex-Rangers winger and coach Neil McCann said Martindale was "right to be fuming".

The next VAR review with Willie Collum, the SFA's head of refereeing, should reveal all. Though whatever the outcome, do not expect questions on inconsistencies to go anywhere any time soon.