Question Number: 31195

Kicks From The Penalty mark 1/22/2017

RE: Adult

Muhammad Rizwan Khan of Abbottabad, KPK Pakistan asks...

Sir, Here in our local tournament and at the end of the match which was ended at 0-0 to decide the winner the penalty shootout was awarded. During the last penalty kick the kicker kicked the ball before the whistle was blow by the referee and the ball hit the goal post and goal was denied. What decision referee should made? Should the penalty kick was retaken again or as its the mistake of attacking player and the ball didnt enter into goal.. As per my opinion the Infringement for encroachment start after the whistle..

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi
Interesting question. The Laws tell us that in Kicks from the Penalty Mark unless otherwise stated, the relevant Laws of the Game apply. I would contend that a signal is required for the kick to be taken as per a normal penalty and certainly when an early kick that is taken without the signal which is scored would result in a retake otherwise it would be hotly contested by the goalkeeper that he was not ready and rightly so.
By the way it has nothing to do with the encroachment. It is simply a question as to whether the conditions were fully met for the kick to be taken.
In your scenario the correct technical decision in Law is a retake. In a game situation however the referee might be able to ignore it on the basis that the kicking team just see it as a miss provided of course the goalkeeeper was on the line ready for the kick and not a factor in the miss. There are times in the game when the signal is implied and the referee does not have to intervene. This could be one of them.
I recently had to disallow a goal scored from a ceremonial free kick that was taken before the whistle. All the conditions were just met as I was about to blow the whistle yet I would have had a riot had I allowed the goal to stand as I was confronted by the defending team who said it was on the whistle and they were arguing that the GK was not ready. I went with the retake and the kicking team had no cause for complaint as they knew it was on the whistle.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hello Mr. Khan.
The correct decision, in actual law is to retake the kick! Although it is argued the BEST decision is to let it stand! Failure to retake sets a precedent that what is necessary can be ignored on occasion. Yet permitting the shot as a miss satisfies the match dynamics.

This is an easily preventable situation, in over 40 years not once have I ever had this occur. I very clearly hand the ball to each PK kicker and tell them you go on the whistle only, I look them in the eye, hold the whistle up and get a response be it a yes or head nod !

That said, if I ever was to retake for going early DESPITE my very VERY clear instructions, I show a yellow card and caution the kicker for NOT paying attention and putting me in a position where I have to give the putz another attempt on goal, making it appear I am favoring his team with another opportunity when in fact we are only acting as a neutral observer applying the standard of law which would not permit the restart to go ahead UNTIL it was signaled! There is no encroachment here, it is simply whether the PROCEEDURE is being followed correctly.

In any unusual circumstances there MAY be a one time option based on the reactions and reasonable response to the reality of a given situation. The miss being accepted by the teams it is not unreasonable to simply count it as miss and move on. Yes you can lie and suggest you did in fact signal. Perhaps you really did whistle softly! I seriously doubt that works for a goal scored under such circumstances as it would DEFINATELY require a retake, even if the keeper was correctly positioned. I will say this what one CAN do or should do as a matter of integrity and fairness is defined by law! If it is not the same in every situation, be at least consistent with your meddling.

I have seen these sort of PKs retaken on occasion with no caution simply a dressing down of WAIT for the whistle! But once on a relatively powerful PK taken EARLY the keeper was not on his line and was struck by the ball In trying to react to make a save he was injured forcing him to be replaced, leaving the game with a broken nose. The PK kicker was sent off for VC and shown the red card reducing his team by a player.

It made a lot of people angry and the decision was protested. Still the referee in that match, an u-18 game between two rival towns had told him to WAIT for the whistle! Thus by NOT waiting, the kicker CREATED a very unpleasant situation! There are consequences when you decide to involve a referee in a situation that was not of his making but he must resolve an outcome!.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

The technically correct answer is that the penalty should be retaken, no matter what the outcome. While I can see an argument that the player has made an error by taking the penalty without a signal (whistle) from the referee and in general, players should not benefit in any way from infringing the Laws, it is a fairly technical infringement and since the Laws require a retake in this situation, that is what I would go with.

As Ref Dawson states, this is an avoidable situation - the referee should give clear instructions to make sure the players know they must wait for the whistle and hopefully be alert enough to intervene if the kicker starts moving towards the ball before the whistle.