Question Number: 12097

Law 18 - Common Sense 1/24/2006

Gil Acedo of Pasadena, CA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 12040

Question #12040:

Regarding the question of the GK bouncing the ball before releasing it back into play. Ref Dawson states that if the ball were to hit a bad patch of ground or a puddle of water and squib away, forcing the GK to chase after the wayward ball and "regrab" it, that perhaps there would be no call.

If I saw the GK handle the ball in this situation I would definitely award an IFK to the opponents for a "second" handling by the GK.
Am I offbase here, at least under these circumstances? Should I ignore this infraction?

Also, I was reprimanded once for not making this call during a game when a GK, fully in possession (ball in hands) of the ball, dropped and then regrabbed the ball while running to the top of the PA. I decided in my mind that it was an inadvertent drop and, in keeping with the spirit of the game, or so I thought, to not give an IFK to the opponents.

I caught h*** from the spectators and was later advised by one of my refere/advisors that I was in error. I should have made the call and allowed the opponents to take the IFK.

What say you, my esteemed panel of referee royalty?

Thanks for all of your help.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

ASk yourself what possible reason COULD induce a referee to award a goal scoring opportunity from one where none exisited?

If the keeper carried the ball and possibly on the kickout extended his hands over the boundrylines placing the ball outside the area in law, he has deliberately handled the ball and a DFK restart is the accepted restart. Yet in context we can choose to overlook this foul as it has no definative impact on what the keeper was trying to do which was release the ball back into play. Now if the attacker had the ball and the keeper tried the same thing reaching out to grab the ball marginally outside the PA it is not only a DEFINATE DFK restart it has cautionable misconduct or send off DOGSO to boot!

I have issues when people tell me we have NO choice because the law says so? There are VERY, VERY, few absolutes in a real game of soccer. Enforcing the laws sounds like a policing action. I tend to think of traffic violations in the order of 1/2 mile over the posted speed limit as not even on the radar to radar blips at twice the posted rate that scream for a reaction.

Look at what occurred and why it occurred? Look at the result ?

INDFK for a rehandled released ball (2nd touch)was part of the effort to stop a keeper from wasting game time or stopping the attacker from a fair challange once the ball was released on the ground or back into play. This was introduced because at the adult elite level players find ways to do what they think is best for them to win even if it was bloody mind numbingly boring!

Those blessed with IFAB and FIFA power tweak the laws of the game and the Q&As to reflect an understanding that gradually comes to light. Now and then we get a few burnt out bulbs but change is part of life and soccer changes too.

The four steps to 6 second evolution takes that concept of a backpass and melds it with the desire to see active attacking play rather than hold on and waste away the match into defensive humdrum submission.

I deliberately set my response into the elusive gray area of why we MUST do things and when we COULD do things which are part of the delicate balance of bendable laws .

While spectators are not well known for a neutral perspective ask you referee assessor this.
"If I as referee felt that within 6 seconds the keeper was always in the process of releasing the ball where would I be wrong?"

If an assessor tells you that a keeper who drops the ball onto the ground to have it bounce up and be caught is a release is mistaken. If an assessor tells you that to dribble the ball in basketball style is an infringement he is again mistaken.

If you tell an assessor the keeper touched it a second time but it was an accident you are mistaken he cannot in law do so the regrab is a continuation of posession not a second one!

In your match as referee your opinions concerning facts of play are final and as such uncontestable. You did not award an INDFK for a second touch BECAUSE in YOUR opinion the ball was NOT being released it was being bounced and within the six seconds the ball bounced a bit oddly. So what?

If a keeper saves a ball and upon crashing to the ground drops the ball and then scrambles madly to reclain it how different is a fumble than that? So what if he had it grasped for 2 seconds before it squibs out of the hands. Remember FIFA SPECIFICALLY states it is ok to bounce the ball and NOT to consider this as a release of the ball into play within the SPIRIT of the game.

On your keeper running about and dropping the ball did he then kick it and have it roll about on the ground before he regrabbed it with the hands just as the opponent was about to shoot on goal? OR did the ball travel to the ground and back again into the hands as he continued his run?

While we refrain from encouraging techy gotcha calls we are also instructed NOT to punish doubtful or trival infringements not that we can ignore or break the law in these situations , however, the letter of the law is restrictive but NOT unfairly so, the intention of the Q&A allows the spirit to go free in my opinion.
IF there was an attacker who was close by and was prevented from kicking the ball I look harder to see the regrab as a second touch rather than a regain of possesion after a fumble. The six seconds are always ticking though! LOL!

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

I agree with Ref Dawson. The keeper is in an action that is totally permissable in Law. Circumstances beyond his control cause the ball to veer away. Why punish the keeper for an act of nature? He was not trying to circumvent the Law. I'd let him pick it up. In fact, if an opponent got to the ball first, I'd stop play and do a dropped ball quickly to the keeper.

Answer provided by Referee Nathan Lacy

First, I agree with the above in that the keeper had no intention of releasing the ball - it happened accidentally - so why punish him/her for it. Second, when some refs make these calls and others don't is it any surprise that spectators become "confused" and/or expect that we make certain calls based on what they have seen in the past? For this reason it is imperative that we become as consistent as possible as a group of refs in enforcing the Laws consistently. I commend you on seeking clarification and perhaps you can pass this along to some of your other ref friends. All the best,