Question Number: 34257

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 6/24/2021

RE: Competive Adult

Hans of Den Haag, Zuid Holland Netherlands asks...

Of course this is about yesterday's game France vs Portugal and the 1st penalty. The foul that Hugo Lloris made on Danilo Pereira.

I don't really question the penalty, but I like to understand it better.

I have heard the argument that Danilo Pereira gets to the ball first, which isn't relevant imo, since it is not mentioned in the rules.

So I presume the ref called this reckless. But why is the keeper reckless and not the player? Both went for the ball, were committed and didn't have eye for the other player.

I really have the feeling the ref didn't see that the keeper actually hit the ball first and after, the player. Would he have made the same call? Neuer and Barthez were in similair situations and those times it was called in favor of the goal keeper, because it was more clear the keeper hit the ball first and then the player. Why is this different?

thanks in advance

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Hans,
I have seen far worse get off scot-free, so it was a contentious call, but I agree 100% a penalty. If there was DOGSO it would not require a red card send-off, reduce France by a player UNLESS it was deemed excessive as SFP or VC.. DOGSO is mitigated by the PK opportunity if we hold the keeper made a reasonable attempt/challenge to punch the ball out of harm's way. Although in my opinion, it was a reckless manner in which it was done. Keepers are known to reach out & over, HOWEVER, they can not indiscriminately punch into or go through the opponent while doing so.
The issues
(1) the force used
(2) timing late but just
(3) was Dogso criteria met?
(4) was it a reasonable effort by the keeper to challenge?
The redirection of the keepers' fist off the ball then into the head of the oncoming player then the chicken wing follow though was fairly obvious and endangered the opponent! We need to respect that although being a keeper is a dangerous profession when tossing your body into the oncoming knees and feet of opposing players or jumping up high to grab the incoming lobs and deserve our protection they can not use MMA tactics to win the ball.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Hans
Thanks for the question.
There could be a chance that referees in the tournament have been told to clamp down on unfair aerial challenges where a player makes contact on an opponent’s head with an arm. Case in point was the penalty award against Lovren in the Croatia v Czech Republic game. I have seen a number of other cautions for head contact with arms in other games. If that is the case I totally agree with that as players should not be subjected to the dangerous consequences of an elbow into the head in aerial challenges just because an arm is used to gain leverage or in the case of goalkeepers in aerial challenges to play the ball?
Put it another way. Move this challenge to the ground where the Portuguese player plays the ball and the goalkeeper makes contact with him on his leg as part of the challenge it would be a foul without question. Why should it be any different in an aerial challenge?

In this challenge Loris makes heavy contact with the opponent on the side of his head with his elbow after the ball is headed by the attacker which for me is a stonewall penalty. Both penalty challenges were considered reckless by the referees which resulted in cautions. If Loris got the ball first, fisting it away, most referees might not consider it a foul yet in my opinion players cannot disregard the dangers to an opponent in any challenge and yes it works both way with protection required for goalkeepers as well from reckless aerial challenges by attackers.
Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed while Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned.
There will be times when players will come together in challenges as part of a natural movement yet the manner of these movements cannot be dangerous or reckless.

In the infamous Neuer challenge in my opinion the referee got that decision wrong. He subsequently said he should have awarded a throw in yet for me Neuer acted with total disregard to Higuain in the challenge leading with his knee. In the Neuer case he got the ball yet he was always going to make reckless contact with a raised knee into an opponent which for me was a foul. Many agreed that it should have been a foul against Neuer. Some say that Neuer’s movement was natural and therefore a coming together yet I know from coaching that goalkeepers are coached to lead with a knee for protection which is the bit that is reckless in my opinion. If he just came and jumped it would be a coming together. Move it around and say that Higuain led with his knee into Neuer to make the header would it be a foul challenge? It would be for most if not all.