Question Number: 30893

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/13/2016

RE: C1 Under 15

Frans Versluis of Edina, MN United States asks...

This question is a follow up to question 30875

Thanks Richard and Joe for your answers. So my take away is that impeding is not a foul as long as the ball is not in play (while waiting for the corner kick to be taken)but it becomes a foul after the kick is taken. In my experience the impeding usually stops right after the ball is kicked because the attacker is changing his/her focus from the goalie to the ball. It seems to me that at that time the damage to the goalie is already done because he/she couldnot even see when the ball was kicked and therefore putting the goalie at a clear disadvantage. I watched the videos you suggested Joe and from what I can see 'the impeding' all happens before the corner is taken and therefor allowed. I my situation the attacker was much taller than the goalie (which I know should not factor in rule wise but still..) and was not even looking at the ball but just making sure she was blocking the goalies view. The impeding probably ended when the corner was taken so no foul was committed. Seems to me a rule/spirit of the rule situation.

What if the same situation occurred with a DFK instead of a corner. Then the ball would still be in play, not? Would deliberate impeding the view of the goalie then be a foul?

Thanks much!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Frans
this is a tactic that happens in most games. The attacking team is perhaps trying to distract the goalkeeper and make his movement somewhat restricted by having to go around a statue. The attacking player is also using the law which allows an entitlement to his position on the FOP. What cannot be allowed happen is that the positioning turns into pushing, shoving leading to misconduct. The referee must deal with that. Before the kick the law does specifically state that holding that occurs before the ball is in play (and especially at corners and free kicks) should be dealt with by the referee, up to and including cautioning the offending player(s). Examples are seen all the time where defenders / goalkeeper to deal with your situation place themselves to protect the GK which generally involves pushing and shoving. A word is generally suffice yet if it gets to aggressive behaviour then the cards come out. The restart is still a corner.
Also it make no difference if it is a corner kick or a free kick. A foul can only happen when the ball is in play not before.
Now let me say again that interfering with the goalkeepers line of sight to the ball is NOT an offence. The only exception can be in offside and as that is not possible at a corner it does not apply. So if the GK is disadvantaged by the opponent stood in front in line with the ball that it no concern to the referee. The main concern for the referee on calling a foul is does the attacker interfere with the movement of the goalkeeper after the ball has been put into play. If as you say nothing has happened AFTER the ball us put into play then there is no foul.
If the player is just stood there doing very little my advice is to look for holding, blocking, impeding after the ball is put into play. Call that foul once the corner kick is taken. If there is none and even if he is blocking line of sight or just being in that position then there is no offence and play continues.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Frans,
it is not impeding, it is seen as possible USB if a player decides to mimic the keeper movement's to the point where you as a referee feel it is leading to confrontation and actual holding as in pushing off or leaning into physical contact. Think of it as degrees of separation, your hair off your head is tickling my nose, you are invading my space, if you back into me or seek to maintain close contact, if there is bumping, pushing you as referee should deal with it and you are not incorrect to assign it as USB and a caution can be warranted under certain provocation but it is NOT a foul. This occurs prior to the restart and the restart continues as before.

Keep in mind, if you believe the keeper is being impeded just prior to the ball being struck it is in fact a foul once the ball is struck. the actions of why it is done, does it in fact have the desired effect? We are instructed to warn against holding prior to restarts and caution if it persists after the warning, before the restart . Once the restart is permitted only then can it be an INDFK for impeding or a DFK for holding

Caution aside for a non foul of USB. As a team would you rather be awarded ball possession for impeding once the ball is in play as opposed to your opponents being warning or cautioned for USB prior to the restart and they listen and then score a goal on the restart?

There is NO Offside criteria in play OFF a corner kick or a goal kick or throw in so blocking the line of sight of the keeper is permitted. However, this is NOT permitted on ANY FREE KICK be it an INDFK or DFK by the attacking team as offside DOES apply so impeding the keeper is a most useless endeavour whereas positioning ones self making it difficult for the keeper is ALWAYS permitted as long as it is done fairly. There are no laws stating you are forced to make it easy to get ball possession but within the mantra of ITOOTR we all have our views as to what constitutes USB and holding when they jostle for position and your need to say or do something before a restart but AFTER a restart IF those conditions still exist they can become FOULS!
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Frans,

I'm afraid that you might be muddying the waters slightly by referring to this as impeding. I'm not entirely sure that this constitutes impeding as defined in the Laws of the Game. Merely standing in front of the goalkeeper - even if this blocks the keeper's view, is not impeding as I understand it. Other than one reference to impeding a thrower (which also does not apply here), the main use of the term in the laws is as part of the expression ''impeding the progress of an opponent'' which involves ''moving into the opponent's path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.'' This, as far as I know, has always been meant for situations where one player is moving towards a ball which is in play (usually relatively close by) and an opponent blocks the player's path towards the ball.

So the way I see it, impeding does not really apply to the situation you describe. I know some my colleagues have used the term but I think that is only in an effort to address the question in a way that matches your description of it.

In any event, whether you call it impeding or not, it is not an offence if the player is just standing there and maintaining a position. Now, what usually happens is that the player stands so close to the keeper that whether because of the keeper trying to get around the blocking player or because the player blocking the keeper gets too close, contact occurs.

Once that happens, you can deal with it as holding and according to the laws, ''Referees are reminded to make an early intervention and to deal firmly with holding offences, especially inside the penalty area at corner kicks and free kicks [...] before the ball is in play.''

In the particular situation you describe and if you are convinced (as you apparently are) that the sole intention of the player was to block the keeper physically, even if no holding had occurred yet, I suppose you could apply the ''spirit of the law'' and issue a gentle verbal warning to the forward if you feel it is necessary. Once the ball is in play and assuming the forward then blocks the keeper's progress towards the ball, impeding (with or without contact but usually with) would have occurred and you could call it. However if the forward still just maintains a position and the keeper is free to move around to get the ball, there would be nothing to call.

Finally, as ref Dawson states, if an opponent blocks the keeper's view at a free kick there's the additional possibility that offside might apply.