Question Number: 32696

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/10/2018

RE: Rec Adult

Russell of Sydney, Australia asks...

Foul Recognition

Can you pleas talk us through why the officials marked off the England goal deep into added time in the UNL.

http://www.yoursoccerdose.com/2018/09/08/england-vs-spain-highlights/

A commentator suggest the only thing they can see is a push by the English attacker on the Spanish defender.

But if you chalk it off for that, why not call the foul by the Spanish defender blocking the attacker just prior to this. The defender take a quick look at the ball in the air, then takes all concentration off the ball and into shielding the attacker from getting to the ball.

We know that shielding is allowed if the ball is within playing distance, however, recent new rules also say you must be making an attempt to play the ball. Hard to see that in this instance as he clearly was not looking at the ball for the next few seconds when it matter (coming down to being with playing distance.

So, if the no goal is for a push by the English attacher, then why not the blocking by the defender.

Possibly both the block and the push are low level fouls that may possibly be not called if this was elsewhere and well away from goal.

The panels thoughts welcomed.

BTW, how good was the pass that set up the England goal. Equally, how cleaver was the evasive run by the spanish scorer in their second goal.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Russell,

For others viewing, it's about 6min 50 into the video.

The reason the goal was disallowed was because the keeper was fouled.
The keeper jumped straight up into the air. One leg slightly out in front, but perfectly natural for a jump and pointed away from the attacker. The attacker ran into this leg - you can see the keeper tip over in midair. Immediately this tells you that there's been contact.
The attacker was pushing through the defenders (maybe a foul, maybe not. More likely at a lower level, probably not at this level), got close to the keeper, then the keeper jumped, grabbed the ball, and the attacker turned around as he took the final step or two towards the keeper with his back facing the keeper. As a result, he's collided with the keeper's leg. It wasn't just part of a challenge that couldn't be avoided - there was no reason for the contact. It was simply careless by the attacker.
As a result of that contact affecting the keeper's balance, he's brought the ball down and lost it on the attacker.
Also, the other thing to be aware of is hips - the attacker is leaning forwards as he collides with the keeper, so his hips are pushed back into the keeper. A player in front pushing hips back into an aerial player is a foul, because it puts the jumping player off balance and it's impossible to protect against.

In answer to your question about the defender blocking - he didn't. The defender was following the ball and stopped when he saw the keeper was getting it. He didn't run across into the attacker's path then stop, he stopped to avoid running into his own keeper. Players are entitled to their own space on the field - and he was entitled to not be pushed out of that space. When he started being pushed in the back he did push back, but he wasn't blocking the attacker from running, just stopping himself from being pushed over.

Watching it a few times, you can see some shift in the defender's shoulders as the attacker approaches, but the feet don't move - so he hasn't stepped across, but simply braced for the inevitable impact (and in a manner that didn't charge the attacker).

Disallowing this goal was, I thought, an excellent decision by the referee.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Russell
I watched the game in real time and it was a foul for me.
The England player Wellbeck simply moves into the way of the Spanish goalkeeper DeGea and makes no attempt to play the ball. Once there was contact it was a foul and the goal had to be disallowed.
Had Wrllbeck challenged for the ball it would have been a different decision to make
Now this a foul that I see regularly and it looks like the opponent is doing *nothing* when in fact he is deliberately fouling. The player just moves in such a way so as to impede with contact.
A few other thoughts
De Gea should have made a better effort at the save and for me it should have been a punch away
The referee was slow to *sell* the foul as there appeared to be some confusion on the call.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

OH Russell,
you are listening to the commentators for explanations? lol It looks to me like the English player bumped the keepers legs AFTER he had contact/possession of the ball. As you are aware it is an INDFK at minimum if you interfere with the keeper in any way preventing his release & a DFK if he is physically charged. It was casual not exactly an extravagate leg sweep but a slight butt bump causing him to spill the landing. It was not exactly stellar goal tending but I see enough to understand the referee awarding the free kick out. I believe the AR was in communication addressing this a well.
Cheers