Question Number: 33737

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/27/2019

RE: Adult

Matthew Venables of Ballasalla, United Kingdom asks...

Can a keeper save the ball with his hands, while not catching the ball to waste time and then pick the ball up ?

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Matthew,
It depends entirely on how the referee views the keeper's actions. The law does say it's an offence if the keeper ''touches the ball with the hand/arm after releasing it and before it has touched another player''

However this has to be taken together with another section of the law that defines when the keeper has control of the ball with the hands. Up until 2018, the law said that a keeper was not considered to be in control of the ball if it rebounds *accidentally* from them. In 2018, the word 'accidentally' was removed, with the following explanation:

''Goalkeepers often unsuccessfully attempt to catch/hold/stop or 'parry' the ball but as this is a 'deliberate' touch with the hand(s) they have technically controlled the ball so cannot pick it up. This is not the Law's intention and is not enforced; removal of 'accidentally' clarifies the Law.''

So the IFAB is making it clear here, that even if the goalie has touched the ball with the hands, if it rebounds from them, and irrespective of whether that rebound was accidental or not, the intent of the law is that they should not be penalised for this.

Despite a perception to the contrary, there are actually many, many places in the law where the referee is still asked to consider a player's intent. As the IFAB's words indicate, this is one of them. So for me, if the referee judges that the goalkeeper has merely unsuccessfully attempted to catch, hold, stop or parry the ball but has not been able to do so, they should not be penalised but if the keeper has deliberately fielded a ball with their hands when it was perfectly possible and easy for them to do so, and they have chosen not to do so simply in order to waste time and to exploit a perceived loophole in the law, the referee should award the indirect free kick.

Yes, this requires the referee to be a bit of a mind-reader but as I have mentioned, there are lots of places where this is true. In most cases it will be possible to use the speed, power and direction of the ball as it comes toward the keeper, as a clue to what is happening. If a consideration of those factors taken together, bring the referee to the judgement that this was simply a rebound, there is no offence. If the referee sees it as a deliberate ploy to get around the law, they should penalise it.

I agree with ref McHugh that this is a rare offence and not one that a referee will often see, or have to punish and I think that (as with various other offences involving a judgement of intent) the referee should probably give the player the benefit of the doubt in most cases until or unless it becomes blindingly obvious what the keeper is doing.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Matthew,
Maybe it will be dependent on how difficult the referee felt the shot was to handle so the keeper needs to be aware of a few things. Like what is a Parry?

Once the referee feels the keeper has complete control of the ball, (keep in mind we generally allow a few extra moments to compose themselves after say, going to ground to make a save. The keeper is permitted six seconds upon which he must release the ball back into active play so it can be challenged for possession by the opposition.

The interesting aspect of making a save is it can be easy or hard!
A deliberate catch with a firm solid grasp of iron or a desperation block where the ball careens off, up and over or rebounds back out as they scramble to reacquire it. Or perhaps the slippery ball squirts free or pops out & again the keeper scramble to get it back under control. In most if not all of these cases we generally do not punish a 2nd touch as the control sequence is ongoing .

The ONLY 2nd touch violation is IF the referee is TRULY 100% convinced the keeper could easily catch or pick the ball up with no problems at all & chooses to parry, that is use the hands to stop the ball on the ground or knock the ball to the ground when he could EASILY have picked it up. The parry is considered to be a catch & release motion all at once without worrying about the 6 seconds. In other words the control sequence is allowing the ball to be easily redivided and released on the ground to continue play. It is usually done when the save is easy and no opponent is close by to create the need to grasp the ball firmly. It is a rare call because it is a silly tactic.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Matthew
If it is a strong shot and a rebound off the goalkeepers hands then there is no issue about delaying the pick up of the ball.
However if it is a weak shot and it is seen as a save, catch and then a release all close together then the goalkeeper may not touch the ball again with his hands. Should the goalkeeper do that it is an offence punished by an IDFK.
Now it is a pretty rare offence and I have only punished it once in years of refereeing. It was a Youth game, there was a very weak shot and the goalkeeper instead of using his foot to control the ball used his hands. He promptly dribbled it off to deep in the the penalty area with an appeal from an attacker that he could not pick it up. The GK stood there with the ball at his feet until challenged by an opponent. When he picked it up I awarded the IDFK and I told him that he controlled the ball in his hands which meant the restriction of touching the ball again with his hands applied. Then intention as well was to use up time and that is fine if he used his feet only. I have seen plenty of questionable ones which correctly were not called. My advice is t that referees only call the certain deliberate catch and hold ones where the ball is clearly thrown down and then with a late change of mind picks it up again to withhold the ball from challenge by an opponent. Those are rare.