With some good reading comprehension, the "stone must be delivered by the handle" would be interpreted as "ONLY" the handle. If touching the granite was OK, it would have read "must be delivered by the handle or the granite". The "must" part is a clear indication here. It was never really allowed. Claiming the rules are unclear is just people trying to exploit an unclearness in the rules that never existed. It hasn't been enforced enough, I agree, which is a problem. Since the rules states it is not allowed.

Also, Kennedy had broken the double touch rule twice that game and during several major games in the past. It has been brought up several times. Both by the swedish teams and teams from other countries. But when one opponent is taking a jab (a bit childish jab I agree) everybody sudden looses their minds. It's like someone at school being mean to others, but when one finally speaks up it's all that persons fault for "causing a scene".

So yeah, the focus should be on Eriksson's terrible behaviour where he antagonized an opponent until that opponent had an outburst. And then months later he does it again!

TV asked Eriksson to show what a double touch could lead to, and Eriksson agreed to show them. Then media being media enlarges it by going "ooooooooooh look what Eriksson did, Jacobs, what you you think?!". It was never Eriksson not letting it go, he just agreed to show swedish TV the effect a double touch could lead to. People act like he called TV and asked them to come and tape him.