Question Number: 20697

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 12/28/2008

RE: Under 16

Joe Thomas of Cardiff, Wales asks...

if the ball is played forward to the goal keeper from his own player, does it still count as a back pass ?

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

This is really becoming tiresome. I know you are not a referee but even players should occasionally read the Laws Of The Game. There is no rule regarding a backpass, sideways pass or front pass. Confusing terminology gets interjected into soccer and it becomes Law in the minds of many, especially players and coaches. There is a prohibition in Law 12 that simply states the goalkeeper may not legally handle a ball that has been deliberately kicked to him by a teammate. Doesn't say anything about direction nor does it use the term 'pass'. If the ball is played by a teammate in any other legal means and the ball is inside the keeper's penalty area when he handles it, he has done so legally.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

Whether it counts as a back pass or not is immaterial, because there is no such offense named in the Laws.

Law 12 says it is an indirect free kick offense if the goalkeeper 'touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate.' Do you see any mention of the direction of that kick? Forward, backward or sideways, if the ball is deliberately kicked to where the keeper can get it and she then handles it, the offense should be called.

Answer provided by Referee Jon Sommer

There is no such rule as 'back pass' it is a footballer term and not a referee term therefore leading to your question. I hope the answer has now been cleared up for you and you are aware of these incorrect 'terms' in the future.

Regards.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

Joe, the purpose of prohibiting the keeper from picking up a ball kicked by a teammate is to prevent timewasting - when the ball is in the keeper's hands, no other player can make a play for it.

This can create an unfair situation, such as when a defender kicks the ball under pressure to a place where the goalkeeper can pick it up, which then stops the attack. FIFA/IFAB have been advocating more attacking play and less defensive tactical timewasting, and referees are asked to respond accordingly.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Consider the following when determining if there has been foul play in this situation:

1. The ball is deliberately kicked, [with the foot], by a colleague of the keeper.

2. It is kicked to the keeper or a place where the keeper can play it.

3. The goalkeeper uses his hands to play the ball.

If all three legs of this triangle are present there is foul play. Times where all three legs are present but there's no foul play include the desperation clearance off the goal line by a defender that winds up at the keeper and he handles it. A desperation clearance that will wind up an own goal and the keeper handles it. And, possibly, the ball is clearly kicked to another defender [or teammate] and is clearly not intended for the keeper but the keeper interferes with things and uses his hands. In the latter case the referee should use his discretion with the whistle but consider a few words of wisdom to the keeper about his stretching the Law.

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

You might want to look at US Soccer's Q@A site for the DELIBERATE PASS BACK? December 30, 2008 answer.

q.v. http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

As a group we abhore the term "back pass" as a refereeing term as the direction is completely irrelevant. Was the ball deliberately kicked by a team mate to the keeper? Forward, backward, or sideways! While we debate the interpretation of the law and the fairness of its application there are two distinct concepts that are not adequately dealt with in my opinion.

This is the intent of this law where some feel ONLY if time wasting is involved is it applicable. Yet we often reiterate intent is not a consideration so if the deliberate kick was not intended for the keeper does it make it ok for the keeper to use the hands?

The other is the wording and NON-use of the word DIRECTLY on a deliberate kick yet where it specifies DIRECTLY on a throw in.

The new premise of an opposing player pursuing the ball is now FORCING the keeper to use the feet instead of the hands to play the ball. The original pursuit was almost a waste of time as the keeper grabs the ball with his hands and then redistributes the ball only to repeat this tactic ad nauseam whenever there was pressure applied to win the ball.

Now active pursuit by an opponent is forcing a play on the ball instead of a keeper pick-up and thus generates attacking options not previously available.

This is in my opinion why I consider the NEARNESS of any opponent in deciding if this infraction is or is not trifling in nature if we are not accepting the literal written interpretation.
Cheers

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 20736

See Question: 30630