Question Number: 31553

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 5/20/2017

RE: Division 1 Under 14

Vic Beacham of Monash, ACT Australia asks...

A defender was pushed to the ground by an attacker in front of his goal, as he hit the ground he tried to kick the ball away. The referee awarded the attacker a penalty kick.

After the game the defender's coach sought clarification from the referee and was told that it was illegal for a player to kick the ball unless he is in a standing position, to which the coach cited bicycle kicks as a kick not made by a player in a standing position. Was this referee correct in his interpretation of the rules?

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Vic,
I'm afraid that, unless there was some kind of local competition rule about this (and there shouldn't be, as it is not one of the officially-permitted modifications) the referee was not correct. There is nothing in the Laws of the Game requiring players to be standing upright in order to legally kick the ball.

There is a potential scenario when a player is on the ground, that in trying to play the ball this might put either the player themself or an opponent in danger. If this occurs, it is known as 'playing in a dangerous manner.' However even if it does occur (and there's no indication in your description that it did) it would not normally lead to a penalty kick but only an indirect free kick - unless there was contact with the opponent leading to a kicking foul, which again, does not match your description.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Vic
The myth that a ball cannot be played while on the ground. Anyway I am afraid from what was described here the referee was wrong on two counts
On the first one a free kick should have been awarded to the defender for the push to the ground by the attacker.
On the second one the only offence that the defender could have been guilty of was playing in a dangerous manner which has an indirect free kick restart. Even at that there is nothing in the laws that requires a player to be standing to play the ball. A player though may not lay on the ball in a manner that puts himself at risk from an opponent nor may he try to play the ball on the ground in a way that prevents an opponent from kicking the ball for fear of injuring the player.
So if we ignore that there was no push by the attacker and all that the defender did was play the ball on the ground in a way that was a risk to himself the absolute worst scenario for the defending team was an indirect free kick for playing in a dangerous manner.
I would have said that if the ball is kicked away smartly by a player who has just fallen to the ground then there is no offence.
I also think that the bicycle kick is not a great example. I would have cited a legal perfectly executed sliding challenge which is in effect playing the ball while on the ground.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oPXELI9DWQ&t=

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Vic,
hmmm nothing much about this situation makes for a clear understanding of the LOTG?
(1) Attacker pushes Defender? = possible DFK out PUSH NOT GIVEN
(2) Defender kicks ball on ground ? = at worst a PIADM INDFK in NOT GIVEN
It is a MYTH that playing the ball whilst on the ground is automatically PIADM (playing in a dangerous manner) there is POTENTIAL that it might be considered as an unsafe action same as a high foot or lowered head or a bicycle kick but we judge the playing actions as reasonable or unsafe.
(3) Referee awards a PK ? = a player kicking the ball while not in a standing position SIGH! = grounds for a protest as the referee has altered the LOTG
There is no such law!
The explanation by the referee is a total fabrication likely based off the myth of PIADM which is AT BEST an INDFK for an unsafe action without physical player to player contact. Contact can change the INDFK to DFK .
A slide tackle performed unsafely often results in DFK contact but I have on rare occasions seen a failed reckless slide tackle shoot under a leaping player who then stumbles upon returning to earth the choice to see this tackle as PIADM given there was no contact we can also equate such an attempt as an attempt to trip which is a DFK restart rather than an INDFK . I might add such challenges are certainly cardable contact or no contact!
I offer this explanation.
Many a great attacking goals or defensive clearances occurs by players from the seat of their pants! Just sitting lying or sliding!
However, a player on the ground MIGHT be found guilty of unsafe play by being a danger to themselves or others they must do something to create that situation as in preventing the opposition from fairly challenging for the ball
- lie on top of the ball with no effort to arise ,
-to pinch the ball in-between their legs body & try to roll or somersault away -or cover/protect the ball using the arms head or legs to fend off opposing players trying to reach in to safely drag the ball away
If an opponent can not play the ball unless he kicks at the player on the ground that is unsafe, if the opponent refrains from doing so the referee awards the INDFK in his favour. Should a opponent disregard the opponent on the ground and just kick away then that turns what MIGHT have been an INDFK for him to a DFK against him. A referee will gauge how a player returns to his feet in shielding the ball and how quickly he does it as well as any action taken to kick the ball away from danger to his team. A player is NOT to be punished for trying to act as a defender or attacker just because he may have fallen!
Cheers