Question Number: 23656

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 7/12/2010

RE: All levels Adult

Doug Anderson of Orillia, Ontario Canada asks...

This question is a follow up to question 23635

'...on the taking of the kick...' -
If the questioner meant the kick awarded after the deliberate kick to the keeper, this should have been an INDIRECT free kick,from inside the penalty area, right?

So, the handling on the goal line - if truly and directly from ensuing kick - could not have prevented a goalscoring opportunity. No goal could have been scored directly from the that IDFK! No DOGSO - No sending off!

Expecting the ref to be able to make that call - processing all that info instantaneously - is a big task and I agree with all of the mentoring comments.

DSA

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

Ref Anderson, you are correct. I think we were all so flabergasted at the referee's poor discrimination between foul and fair that we forgot the resultant kick was indirect. If a goal cannot be scored, there can be no DOGSO.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Anderson
Well spotted. The panel was focussing on the IDFK element along with the deliberate handling that allowed for a lack of focus on the fact that a goal cannot be scored directly from an IDFk . You are quite correct in that a player cannot be sent off for a DOGSO H.
The player can still be dismissed though for a DOGSO if in the opinion of the referee it denied a goal scoring opportunity by preventing the ball going to an opponent with an easy opportunity to score. This was not described here yet I suspect that there is more to the original scenario.

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Thank you for your help here. We strive to always give correct answers, but occasionally we flub or need help, and that's where our readers shine!