Question Number: 32682

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/2/2018

RE: Competitive Under 16

Gregor Gramlich of Seminole, FL United States asks...

When a goalkeeper, who is judged by the referee to be in control of the ball, is hit in some manner by an attacking player, is that a direct kick offense or is it "playing in a dangerous manner", which is restarted by an indirect kick? The specific scenario I had today was when the goalkeeper was outstretched on the ground attempting to get the ball. The ball was within his hands and an attacker kicked it. Those two things happens almost at the same time, but I judged the goalkeeper to have had control first.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Gregor ,
When a keeper is judged to have ball possession he CAN NOT BE challenged. That includes his releasing the ball into play where impeding ( blocking) or PIADM ( an unsafe action like taking a kick at the ball while he has it in his hands) , COULD result in an INDFK . HOWEVER , these are NON contact NON DFK fouls. If the keeper is physical hit or contacted as in a charging, or kicked it would be a DFK & judged as careless reckless or excessive. We must remember that DFK has an element of no contact if the action was deemed an ATTEMPT to kick or strike. If there is doubt or a simultaneous event advantage applies,.
While it is feasible to apply a caution for USB actions that have no contact thus are the INDFK fouls we use reckless or excessive to gauge the DFK fouls for an appropriate card colour if warranted.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Gregor,
The Laws of the Game tell us that any foul that involves physical contact results in a direct free kick. So if there was any contact with the keeper in the commission of what was in your opinion an illegal challenge, you have to award a direct free kick. However a direct free kick can still awarded even if there is no contact. The law says, for instance that it is a DFK offence to even attempt various kinds of action, if they are judged to be careless, reckless or using excessive force.

In the case of a player who tries to illegally challenge a keeper who has control of the ball in the way you describe, as far as I am concerned this would almost always be considered as at least careless and so should result in a DFK. As ref Dawson says, if you consider the challenge to have been reckless or using excessive force you should also issue a card of the appropriate colour.

I would have to say that I would not normally expect an offence involving a player kicking the ball while it was in the keeper's hands to result in an indirect free kick, regardless of whether there was contact.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Gregor
Contact always results in a direct free kick. In PIADM there is not contact and an IDFK restart.
In real time in your example it will be very difficult to determine if only the ball was kicked. There is every chance there will be contact on the GKs hand so it is a direct free kick.
The Law also allows the referee to punish an attempt to kick, trip, strike with a DFK. So again if the GK has control of the ball he may not be challenged and any attempt to kick the ball is a direct free kick.
Anyway do not sweat the small stuff on the restart as it is unlikely to make any difference to the game. The bigger decision is whether it is an offence or not.
A raised boot towards the GK would be PIADM with no contact so the defending team gets an outbound IDFK free kick. The same boot that kicks the ball, makes possible contact on the hands is a DFK. The team will not be bothered or is an DFK or an IDFK