- Soccer Rule Referee Resources
- Home
- Ask a Question
- Articles
- Recent Questions
- Search
- You-Call-It
- Previous You-Call-It's
-
VAR (Video Assistant Referee)
- Q&A Quick Search
- The Field of Play
- The Ball
- The Players
- The Players Equipment
- The Referee
- The Other Match Officials
- The Duration of the Match
- The Start and Restart of Play
- The Ball In and Out of Play
- Determining the Outcome of a Match
- Offside
- Fouls and Misconduct
- Free Kicks
- Penalty kick
- Throw In
- Goal Kick
- Corner Kick
- Common Sense
- Kicks - Penalty Mark
- The Technical Area
- The Fourth Official
- Pre-Game
- Fitness
- Mechanics
- Attitude and Control
- League Specific
- High School
- Common Acronyms
- Meet The Ref
- Advertise
- Contact AskTheRef
- Help Wanted
- About AskTheRef
- Soccer Rules Changes 1580-2000
- Panel Login
|
- Soccer Referee Questions on Soccer Rules
You-Call-It 45 Question...There is a red throw in! The ball is throw in towards a red defender standing at the edge of his PA . The red defender is not paying attention and the ball bounces then rolls by him into his PA. An opposing player chases the loose ball, our slacker red defender tries to make up for his lack of due diligence to reacquire the ball and shields the ball from the attacker as the semi alert keeper rushes up but rather than kick the ball away chooses to use his hands to grab the ball as referee your call is? Your Match, Your Decision, Your Reputation
Our Hintwas it TO the keeper? or did it GO to the keeper? Is that the SAME? Does it make a difference?Our Answer...IF the defender shielding occurs without the ball being within playing distance an INDFK for impeding or even a potential holding foul and a PK possibility with DOGSO criteria to be evaluated. For the sake of this situation lets say ball was within playing distance and legally screened.
There is but one for sure answer to this question given the keeper is RECIEVING a directly throw in ball from a team mate, it will be an INDFK restart for the keeper';s illegal use of hands on the ball from where he does so subject to the special circumstances within the goal area .
Those referees that try to form their own idea of what this portion of the law is, what it means and how it can be manipulated into a non call are in my opinion incorrect to do so. To say the throw in was not intended for the keeper but it still went directly to him anyway is a red herring of unimportance as we do not JUDGE intent we look at what occurs, what actions are involved, who is involved!
I caution those referees who think it is ok to overlook illegal handling especially when blatant and the opposition is unfairly affected. I point out the LOTG old Q&A had this to say about a defender taking a throw in , directs the ball towards their own goal and the goal keeper caught out of position tries to handle the ball but fails to prevent the ball from entering the goal. As referee your decision is?
Apply advantage, award the goal, the INDFK offence for illegally handling the ball is not as advantageous as awarding the goal which by way of the keeper providing a secondary touch the ball did not directly enter the goal. If they are awarding a goal for a mistake, awarding an INDFK if the ball was stopped by the hands seems in line with their thinking.
To some degree we have greater leeway in a deliberate kick TO the keeper than a throw in the goes directly to the keeper. WHY? Because the ball flight can be altered by say a high wind or deflect off a foot or knocked away in a challenge for the ball with an opponent and the ball might go towards the keeper or the general direction of the goal itself but it was NOT a deliberate kick by the team mate ...TO... the keeper. Yet in a throw in where no one else or nothing else matters, only if the ball gets to the keeper directly the no hands restriction MUST apply.
If in fact there was a wind so powerful that a say a throw in from the touchline was rerouted and reversed itself and somehow wound up directly in the keepers hand inside his area and the referee decided seriously this does not require an indfk restart to say the infraction is trifling and allow play to continue maybe the best option. To say it is NOT an infraction is incorrect. That was our Question YOUR Answer is...AskTheref.com Educating and Amusing The Soccer Referee Since October 11, 1999<-->
|
- Soccer Referee Extras
- Tuesday, December 3, 2024
<>
|