Question Number: 31235

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 2/7/2017

RE: Under 16

Paul of England, UK asks...

My son who is a goalkeeper went to take a drop kick. A player from the other team stood just out side the penalty area in front of him. When my son move to the side to go around him the player would follow to stay in front of him. The player even told my son to stand further back into his area to take the kick. He appealed to the Ref to ask the player to give him space to take the kick. The Ref then gave an indirect free kick against him for holding the ball to long. Was the Ref correct?

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Paul,
Preventing the goalkeeper from releasing the ball is an indirect free kick offence. This can take the form of knocking it out of the keeper's hands or blocking the kick.

Some players - and unfortunately some referees - have the mistaken idea that as long as the players in front of the goalkeeper is outside of the penalty area then they're allowed to block the kick. This is incorrect - preventing the goalkeeper from releasing the ball doesn't only apply to opponents within the PA.

Having said that, without seeing the incident, it's possible the referee didn't think the opponent was close enough to actually block the kick, but it sounds more like a misunderstanding of the law.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Paul,
my colleague Ref Wright gives a good read on what likely the thought process (as flawed as it might be) could have been . The keeper is NOT to be bothered in the release ! PERIOD! No shadowing, no innocently wandering about then reappearing in line with the kicking direction. A referee who FAILS in his duty to ensure this occurs creates the situation of a keeper either holding on to the ball too long or frustration sets in and the ball is deliberately aimed to strike the nearby player.
I do not understand why a referee thinks the opponent standing his ground by choosing to shadow and inhibit the release takes precedent on the keeper releasing the ball as the LOTG state 100% it is an offence to interfere with the release! Only if an opponent was NOT interfering i.e. way off to the side or well away out in front and the keeper ran towards him rather than move away or off to the side could there be no INDFK infraction for interfering with the release. The keeper should be free to choose a route to do as he wishes but the opponent is not required to move out of the way if he was not in the way to begin with.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi
There are a number of example on the web of this type of action. I recently saw three such situations and in all three the ball struck the player. In two instances the referee cautioned the attacker and awarded the IDFK to the goalkeeper while in the 3rd one the referee allowed play to continue, in my opinion incorrectly.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nD90LfNrPqM
I personally would not allow a player to shadow the goalkeeper that prevents release and it is a judgement call as to when to step in to award the IDFK to the goalkeeper. Many times the kick or throw happens with no contact on the ball and there is no issue to deal with.
I suspect that the referee here may have taken exception to the goalkeeper getting involved with an opponent and also perhaps shouting at the referee to deal with the situation of moving the player back. That can look like delaying the game depending on when it happened plus challenging the referees authority which may not be a wise move
Sometimes the only way to deal with this is to make the release and see what develops. I would say that in the majority of cases the IDFK and caution against the attacker will be awarded.
If the GK gets involved in verbals and starts challenging the referees decision making he can draw the 6 second infringement which may have happened here. Technically the referee can do that as he can opine that the actions of the attacker did not prevent the release. Sometimes there is a fine line between both.
My advice is that the GK should get on with play and try not to get involved in what might happen. Referees generally deal with what actually happens and I suspect nothing happened here in the opinion of the referee that prevented release just that the GK chose not to do so.

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

See Question: 31245