Question Number: 28938

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/3/2014

RE: Competitive Adult

Jonathan of Stafford, TX Ft Bend asks...

I'm a bit confused about the law concerning the release of the ball from the GK back into play in terms of a drop kick or punt.

The law clearly states that a foul only occurs if the GK is played before releasing the ball from his hands, yet the universal opinion is that a player cannot block a punt or drop kick even after it has been kicked (which is certainly well after it has been released from his hands).

Also, the rules specifically state that a referee should move to anticipate and prevent any such action, yet the universal opinion is that this action warrants an automatic yellow.

It seems to me that this (cautioning for playing a ball that has already been kicked by the keeper - while at no time touching him or impeding his forward progress in his own area) is a very poor interpretation of the laws of the game.

There is simply nothing in the laws that this can be drawn from.

Furthermore, the spirit of this law is to protect a GK from being challenged in a vulnerable position - leg at full extension before connecting with the ball. How in any way does cautioning a player for playing a ball that has been kicked, while not impeding or touching the keeper in any manner an action towards the spirit of this law?

What am I missing? (Former Keeper)

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Jonathan,

The Laws state that it is an offence to 'prevent the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands'.

The intent behind this law is for the keeper to be able to get the ball into play by releasing it some distance into the field. A player blocking that kick is preventing the keeper from releasing the ball. The ball may have left his hands, but it hasn't left his immediate vicinity - which is what the law is intending.

Also look at it this way; it would become a farce if players were allowed to block the keeper (as opposed to actually kicking it from his hands), because then they'd just jump in front of the keeper whenever he kicks the ball and he wouldn't be able to effectively release the ball into play. That, and being an ex-keeper yourself, I'm sure you could imagine the problems that could also cause!

You are correct that the Laws expect referees to try to prevent any such behaviour; that's basically telling the referees that if it looks like a player is thinking of doing this, to tell him not to! It's always better to prevent a foul than to have to blow the whistle.

As for whether this warrants an automatic yellow - it's at the discretion of the referee. There is a common view that blocking the keeper from releasing the ball is an automatic caution. Personally, I disagree with this - but I believe I'm also in the minority. I believe the reasoning is that it's a blatant and deliberate breach of the law, and it disadvantages the keeper as a free kick is less of an advantage than a punt.

You are right that part of the law is to prevent the keeper from a risky challenge - a player sticking his leg up, studs towards the keeper at very close proximity to block the kick (or even kicking the ball as the keeper drops it from his hand to the foot) will receive a yellow, just because it's an extremely dangerous action. If contact is made, a red card is very likely.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Jonathan
The Laws state that it an offence to *prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands* and * A player must be penalised for playing in a dangerous manner if he kicks or attempts to kick the ball when the goalkeeper is in the process of releasing it* and *commits a foul for the tactical purpose of interfering with or breaking up a promising attack*
Now it is up to the referee to interpret these and also to decide in any disciplinary action which by the way is not compulsory. The disciplinary action will take account of whether the foul was tactical by stopping a promising counter attack or that the players actions were reckless posing a risk to the goalkeeper. There can be times when it is simply a foul and no further action is required.
I would also point out that for the action to work the player has to get close to the kick or the throw. If the player is away from the GK it is futile or it will require some other action such as deliberate handling to stop the ball.
Now your question is timely in that Chris Smalling was sent off in the Manchester Derby with one of the cautions for blocking a kick by the goalkeeper Hart
http://www.independent.ie/sport/soccer/premier-league/chris-smallings-moments-of-madness-haunt-united-as-city-claim-manchester-bragging-rights-30711465.html
Now one could argue there was no threat to the safety of the goalkeeper and it was not reckless however the foul was certainly tactical in that it prevented Manchester City from starting a counter attack with many United players out of position. Most in the game had no problem with the caution.
Now here is an example of a referees not cautioning but having a word only
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryPIcQP1mcM
Here is another example
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3de7_wD8UWQ
The referee decided in the circumstances that the best decision was an IDFK only as there was nothing reckless nor tactical

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

See Question: 33441