Question Number: 26046

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/9/2012

RE: Comp. Adult

Phil Wearmouth of Umina, NSW Australia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 26034

Maybe I've missed something here. The defender throws the ball to his teammate who heads it back to the keeper, and somehow there could be a problem? How? Once the ball leaves the thrower's hands it is open play and normal rules apply, including being able to head it back to the keeper (not a back pass because it was headed).

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

True, unless, in the opinion of the referee, the throw to the teammate's head was done to circumvent the LOTG, in which case this would be misconduct and an IDFK would be awarded the opponents.

Would this ever be called? Probably not.

Do the Laws allow for it to be called? Yes they do.

This may be viewed as similar to a teammate of the keeper flicking the ball with his foot up to his head so that he may head the ball to his keeper. This is the famous 'trickery' to circumvent the Laws that is often discussed but rarely if ever called.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Phil
It would only be an offence if the situation was contrived and set up to circumvent Law 12. The referee has to make a call on whether the situation just happened and that the ball was available for challenge in which case there is no offence.
Context might be a factor that could influence the referee's decision on this.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

Please note this is not a punishment of the keeper, but of the defender who went around the LOTG to get the ball into his keeper's hands. If, and this is the crux of the issue, the referee does not believe based on the circumstances in view that the header was anything but fair and honest play, then there is no reason to stop play and issue the caution. If the referee did decide it was trickery (rare!!), then a caution is issued and the indirect free kick is taken from where the defender headed the ball.

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

See Question: 26067

See Question: 26073

See Question: 27220