Question Number: 30704

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 8/31/2016

RE: 5 Adult

Ian Langthorp of Gosport, Hanpshire England asks...

Question-Player after rounding the keeper deliberately bent down and headed the ball in the goal. I awarded an indirect free-kick for unsporting conduct and cautioned the player .

Should I have awarded the goal and then cautioned.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Ian
Interesting one and the jury is somewhat out on this one. A similar incident happened last year in France in a Pro game and it caused a lot of furore at the time. The referee awarded the goal and he did not caution the player.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iegs6_UoSLk
I believe this is the second time this happened in a French League game with the first one by Herman Kore sparking a fury from the opponents with the goalkeeper getting seen off for violent conduct. I believe the player and club had to apologise to the opponent club.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=WXeiB1d0STc
So really it is up to the referee although the goal CANNOT be awarded if there is a caution before the goal is scored. There is some suggestion that it was considered USB by IFAB as showing a lack of respect for the game. If so the goal is disallowed, the player is cautioned and the restart is an IDFK inside the goal area.
Personally I am in the caution for showing a lack of respect. If the after goal celebrations are considered to be gesturing in a provocative, derisory or inflammatory way to be a caution then doing it just before the goal should also be a caution.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Ian,
There's an old video like this that has recently popped up on my social media feed.
It's interesting because it highlights just how antagonistic this unnecessary action is. The keeper runs back and reaches the goal just as the player stands back up, and the keeper tries to smack him in the back of the head and later needs to be restrained, as the defenders are surrounding the referee and there's a confrontation between the attacker and the defending team.
I'm certainly not saying that the fact that the defending team is trying to get a goal overturned is in itself a reason to overturn it (as we know, players will try anything), but it's worth being aware of what the concern with this action is. It is extremely antagonistic.
Is it antagonistic enough for a caution? Honestly, I think this is up to the individual referee - if I was assessing a referee and this came up, I would accept either approach.
Bear in mind that under the Laws of the Game, a goal can only be scored if the attacking team hasn't breached the laws leading up to the goal. If you caution for this, then you're saying the laws have been breached before the goal, therefore a goal cannot be awarded. So your only 2 options are to allow the goal and have a stern word, or to disallow the goal, caution the player (as there is no particular foul here, you cannot award an IFK without a caution) and restart play with an IFK to the defence from where the offence occurred (or anywhere inside the GA, if it occurs inside there).

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Personally, I would be loathe to caution for this so long as it were the first example of questionable behaviour by this player, or unless there were something else going on in the game that would indicate a pattern of disrespectful behaviour by him and/or his team.

I would not disagree with my colleagues however, that this could be called either way.