Question Number: 15979

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 7/9/2007

RE: Select Under 15

Bob Roach of Charlottesville, VA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 15970

In reference to 15970, I had an incident a couple of years ago where my daughter was in goal and she pounced on a ball with both hands. The play came to a stand still with my daughter holding the ball against the ground. The striker, standing still over my daughter, then swung her foot at the ball, missed, and caught my daughter in the face. My daughter released the ball to grab her face and the striker kicked the ball into the goal. Ref allowed the goal.

After the game I asked the ref (politely) what his thinking was on the goal. His explanation was that because the ball was trapped on the ground my daughter did not have 'control' of it. Therefore the striker was allowed to play the ball. He was more inclined to give my daughter a caution for dangerous play because her face should not have been where someone could kick it. Unfortunately there were no AR's for this match so he had no help in the situation (there are now AR's for all matches at this level).

Our team won the match, but my concern was more for my daughter's face than the game result. She was very lucky that she wasn't seriously hurt. She is tough and stopped a pk and a couple of breakaways after this incident.

As a ref, I try to be fair when there is a 50-50 challenge involving the keeper, but I also try to keep an eye out for any situation which is or could become dangerous. I would have not only disallowed the goal in this situation, but I would have at the minimum cautioned the striker if not sent her off for an excessive or dangerous foul.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

As we all know, things look worse when they happen to one of our loved ones. However, if the facts are as you presented, the goal should not have counted and the minimum called would be a kicking foul. I too would be inclined to see this as misconduct, especially if there is any time lag between the keeper trapping the ball and the kick taking place. I'm not sure where this ref got his definition of trapping. Good for your daughter that she was able to overcome the incident and continue playing well.

Some refs have a "always protect the keeper" mindset, and others have a "well, he's the keeper, he should expect to get kicked" way of thinking. We should strive for a balance between the two. As my colleagues who are keepers will attest, sometimes the keeper just does have to take one for the team, and put himself in danger of being hurt. But that doesn't excuse a random cheap shot.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Bob,
unfortunately not all referees are educated to the degree we would like to see but it should be straightforward intro stuff that a keeper has control in your situation without a doubt hands on ball trapped on ground the ball is unavailable to opponents. As my colleague wisely points out there will be times when foot ball and hands arrive all at once and times when the attacker MUST back off or try and avert a collision. Your daughter is to be commended keeper is a tough position to play and PIADM is at times part of job requirements when throwing one self into the feet of an attacking striker to prevent a goal or shot.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Bob. The referee you spoke to was an idiot and should not be refereeing ANY games much less young children. He obviously didn't understand what constituted control and added insult to injury by suggesting your daughter had done something wrong. I suppose if she dove for a ball and missed it and an oppoent then winds up and kicks her in the face, he'd penalize your daughter for PIADM. Also, this guy didn't understand that you CANNOT caution for PIADM. There's no misconduct involved. Had I been the referee no goal, send off for kicking an opponent with unecessary force

Answer provided by Referee Steve Montanino

The whistle should have been blown the instant the striker kicked your daughter in the face. Next, at a minimum a caution should have been issued to the striker who wasn't allowed to play the ball anyway at this point - possibly this could be a send-off (in fact its more likely than not) for kicking the opponent with excessive force.

The referee was obviously in error regarding his understanding of the law as it pertains to keeper possession (and kicking an opponent) (and playing in a dangerous manner).