Question Number: 30588

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 7/10/2016

RE: Any Other

former youth ref of Hordaland, Norway asks...

Two law 12 questions:
What is the correct call if a goalkeeper commits one of the non-standard handling offences (e.g. touching the ball with an object held in his hand) in his own penalty area? Would this be an indirect free kick due to stopping play for a caution for the unsporting behaviour? (A caution even if preventing a goal as it is a handling offence.)

In the new laws offences against team-mates may be punished with a penalty kick (or direct free kick). The details of law changes explained why this was the case for offences against match officials, but no reason was given for this. Do you have an opinion on this change? I don't envy the ref who stops a promising counter-attack because the goalkeeper pushed a defender in the heat of the moment, and then has to explain that it is a penalty as well.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi
On the first one as it is the goalkeeper it is not deliberate handling so it is a caution for unsporting behaviour and an indirect free kick restart. An outfield player doing the same results in a penalty kick.
In respect of the new law referees will be looking for acts of violent conduct rather than minor, trifling incidents such as team mates pushing each other. In the past when two team mates were fighting it was an IDFK restart. It is now a direct free kick. It is probably not such a big change really as I cannot recall ever having to stop the game for team mates fighting or for that matter *fouling* each other to a point that I had to step in. Plenty of verbals yet no physicality. A cursory viewing of the web shows that these type of incidents tends to happen when the ball is out of play so the restart does not change.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Thanks for the question,

The Laws specifically state that the goalkeeper cannot be cautioned or sent-off for any handling-related offence inside his own penalty area.

It gets a little murky here; a held or thrown object is considered an extension of the arm, so any player holding an object to contact the ball would be penalised for deliberately handling the ball. Naturally the goalkeeper is allowed to handle the ball, but not with an object. So that's the problem - he hasn't committed anything specifically covered in the Laws as an indirect free kick offence (or direct free kick).

I believe it could be covered as a violation of the law which covered what the player is allowed to wear/have on the field. A caution for Unsporting behaviour can be issued for a breach of that (for instance, failing to wear shinpads), and because the referee stops play for illegally using an object and cautions for that, the restart is an indirect free kick.

As for your second question, I can only assume that IFAB have decided that a physical offence should meet the same punishment no matter who the target is.

The referee will always have the option of determining that an offence is trifling and not worthy of attention, as he does now.

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

See Question: 30591