Question Number: 32340

Law 14 - The Penalty kick 3/30/2018

RE: 3 Adult

Fidel Jaary of Auckland, Auckland New Zealand asks...

Hi There,

Team had been awarded a penalty, kicker stepped in to kick the ball from the penalty spot, i was AR1 standing on the penalty area, the keeper was moving side ways and suddenly before the kick was taken he took few steps forward, the kicker missed the kick and i raised my flag for the infringement of the goal keeper, the kick was retaken and scored. the team argued that the kick should not be taken because the kicker had missed.

Was i correct to raise my flag and was the referee correct to allow the retake.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Fidel
Thanks for the question. Law 14 tells us that the defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts UNTIL the ball has been kicked. It makes no mention of the kick being missed.
So the correct decision is a retake because of the infringement of Law 14 and the goalkeeper MUST now be cautioned for that encroachment.
So you were correct to raise the flag and alert the referee to the encroachment. Unfortunately what has developed over many years is that some encroachment has been largely ignored so myths have developed such as the team here thinking that encroachment on a miss not involving a save is not called. That is incorrect plus add in trifling and doubtful encroachment not being called which means that unfortunately referees have contributed to the myth by not calling encroachment regularly when probably it should have been. A viewing of most missed PKs will probably attest to some level of encroachment both by players and goalkeeper.
I also believe that the compulsory caution may add to the lack of calls by referees and assistants with only blatant offences being sanctioned. Perhaps I could pose this teaser. If the goalkeeper was already on a caution would a second caution on an early move off the line by a pace or so be forthcoming with no save of the ball and the ball blasted high and wide. I know what the Laws says yet we know it is not always that black and white.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Fidel,
When you say 'missed', do you mean, missed the goal entirely?
Whether the kick was saved or missed the goal, the law is the same. The keeper infringed, a goal wasn't scored, so it's a retake.
On that note, did the referee caution the keeper? Remember it's a mandatory caution these days.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Fidel,
I see nothing wrong in your actions? Once a signal for the PK is given the keeper by the LOTG must remain on his goal line until the ball is kicked forward. If he moved forward ahead of the ball and was obviously out into the goal area ahead of the kick being taken he is not permitted to do so.

The miss COULD be because the PK was affected by the early movement or just a bad effort .
The Letter of LOTG do not care why!
The Spirit of those laws perhaps cares a bit more!

Personally I think the keeper is given a raw deal under this format as this restriction is too difficult to be realistic. It is WHY so much variation in how referees approach the concept of encroachment.

This new wrinkle of a MANDITORY caution is utterly ridiculous because the ENCROACHMENT is created by the pressure & anxiety of the wait, aided by the fact a PK kicker can feint whilst the keeper is shuffling about side to side to draw him into making a move & anticipate the direction of the shot.

It is kind of reminiscent of a player who is running into an offside position just as the ball is kicked. The AR is trying to line up the timing issue as the player tries to gauge his run to NOT be offside so by sprinting or moving sideways then changing direction just as the ball is released. The leg swing into the ball the ball rebounding off the foot al of this is occurring just as the keeper or attacker is preparing to also move forward. The keeper will always appear to be stepping out just as the kick is taken as, in his eyes, the ball is on its way so a step toward is RARELY seen as encroachment given it appears simultaneously. Kind of like the reason when in doubt on offside we keep the flag down because we can not be sure!

You have likely observed that the run of the defenders and attackers who are outside the PA are often in ahead of the kick being taken often by yards not feet. They too try to gauge the timing issue, not wanting to be late to the party as it were. When a PK kicker stutters steps & feints he often encourages this early movement of anticipation. It was due to this result they started to look at PK kickers' actions that went too far trying to feint are now guilty of USB
if they stop or kick past the ball.

You should note the status of HOW a PK is taken is currently under review BECAUSE of this very issue of encroachment NOT being effectively dealt with. Under the current LOTG if an anally retentive referee was so inclined he could likely redo almost 90% of PKs and be absolutely correct to do so under the letter of the law. It is this spirit balance everyone is on about sigh
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Fidel,
According to the law, as regards the question of a retake, when:

''the goalkeeper or a team-mate offends:
[...]
if the ball does not enter the goal, the kick is retaken; the goalkeeper is cautioned if responsible for the offence''

So a retake was the correct decision. In terms of the original offence by the keeper, the wording is that:

''The defending goalkeeper must remain on the goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball has been kicked.''

Based on this you were correct to raise the flag though as my colleagues have noted, this is a somewhat poorly enforced area of the law for various reasons, one of which may be that the requirement for a mandatory caution might be making some referees more reluctant to call the offence.