Question Number: 16891

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/25/2007

RE: Other

Nicholas Broderick of St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador Canada asks...

Situation: An attacker has broken through on an attack moving directly towards the goal with only the goalkeeper in front of him (i.e. he has an obvious goalscoring opportunity). The attacker misplays the ball slightly and has gotten away from his feet, and seeing this the goalkeeper makes an attempt to tackle the ball. Both players begin their tackles simultaneously, the goalkeeper with his hands and the attacker with his foot. The goalkeeper manages to reach the ball first, pinning it to the ground with one hand, but the ball is outside the penalty area. The foot of the attacking player inadvertently manages to pop the ball out of the hand of the goalkeeper and the ball squirts out to the feet of another attacker, who also has a goalscoring opportunity and is onside.

The question then is: Can the advantage clause be applied to the handling offense by the goalkeeper (DFK offense) despite the attacker having prevented the goalkeeper from releasing it from his hands (IDFK offense)? Does the attacker's intent on prying the ball from the goalkeepers mitts affect the decision, or may an attacker attempt to dispossess a goalkeeper who is illegally handling the ball in an attempt to gain an advantage?

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

What a great question!
The DFK offence for handles the ball deliberately and does the keeper's protection of no challange for the ball once in his hands apply outside his penalty area?

The special consideration of legally handling the ball only applies within the keeper's own penalty area!

In my opinion if the ball is knocked free and it was not in a excessive or dangerous manner where safety is the primary issue I could apply advantage and the keeper later receives a caution show a yellow then possibly the dreaded red card for what could have been DOGSO by deliberately handling the ball.

The rational of allowing an attempt to fish the ball away is based on the reasonable nature of the existing challenge. I mean if the keeper has both hands on the ball collapsed to his chest while lying outside his own penalty area the ball clearly out as well, the dfk for the handles the ball deliberately a lock. We will likely not allow any further challenge as it is too unsafe to do so. This would be the same if it was any player not just the keeper.
Yet if the keeper was upright but outside and the challenge was a shoulder to shoulder and the keeper drops the ball we could allow play to continue using the advantage clause.

I feel a simultaneous challenge in your first case is not unreasonable to allow play if the safety issue and timing were not the primary factors. If the keeper had pinned the ball outside using his hand and the cleat first challenge breaks his hand when there was time to pull out. We could have a DFK and even a caution or send off against the keeper but the misconduct of the nature of the challenge by the opponent could see a yellow or red card go the other way as well.

The key is referee experiance and situational awarness to not be so hasty to stop play as the only option, while deciding fault or seeing further misconduct! Understanding advantage and not overreacting to why play could be stopped but also allowed to await an outcome, one perhaps which no one anticipated but the referee!
As in all cases your match, your decision, your reputation!
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Great question. The keeper has deliberately handled the ball outside his own penalty area. Almost simultaneously, the opponent kicks the ball. The keeper cannot claim any special privileges outside the penalty area. You say another attacker is onside (that seems a bit of a stretch but we'll accept that) the ball goes to him and a goal is scored. You should allow advantage and allow the goal. You may also caution the keeper for unsporting behavior. Had the keeper grabbed the ball is such a manner that the opponent could NOT have played it, you would punish the handling with a DFK and probably send of the keeper for DOGSO.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

I concur, this IS a good question!

Outside the penalty area, a keeper has no special powers. Definitely the handling offense would be called if the keeper managed to hang onto the ball.

The referee can invoke advantage on the keeper's handling foul. That doesn't give license to the attacker to commit a foul himself! Is it an offense to kick free a ball that the keeper has handled outside the PA? I think not, as long as the player can do it safely. If he kicks the keeper at the same time he is kicking the ball, then he has committed a "foul", but because the keeper committed a foul first, it can only be dealt with as misconduct.

So how do we sort all this out? Actually in this case the whiz-bang speed of the play helps us. The referee probably won't have time to indicate advantage before the ball is kicked away, which gives the option of fixing it when things come to a halt. If the challenge is clean, no problem - allow the goal. If the challenger fouls the keeper, then blow the whistle and indicate the handling foul by the keeper was what happened first, free kick inbound.

Deal with the misconduct. The keeper may be sent off for denying a goal - but NOT if the goal was actually scored on the follow-thru! Else a caution for unsporting behavior is appropriate. If the attacker has managed to kick the keeper, you will have to decide whether that challenge was worthy of a caution or send-off on its own merits (demerits?). Again, decide whether the keeper has committed DOGSO or USB.

Whatever you do, don't decide that you invoke advantage, and then the attacker immediately wastes the advantage by fouling the keeper. That will look like you are ignoring the handling foul by the keeper, even if you do card him for it.

Answer provided by Referee Steve Montanino

I vote this one gets question of the month. We get many questions here that I fear are redundant. This question is not.

I concur with my fellow pannelists above. Don't blow the whistle too soon, watch what happens next...
1. If the ball goes into the goal from a legal play AND the attacker has committed NO foul - award a goal.

2. If the ball goes into the goal BUT the attacker had fouled the keeper to win the ball, disallow the goal and award a direct free kick to the attacker where the keeper handled the ball.

The misconduct is up to you to figure out, based on what you see happen precisely.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

In this situation the referee is usually going to whistle instantly and regret it. In most cases they are inexperienced, have marginal foul recognition and are behind play. They will see the keepers hand on the ball and the attacker kick it away. That's when we hear the whistle. All the parents, save those sitting at the top of the penalty area will clap, the others will scream handball and the referee won't hear a thing.

This ain't right. Lets get the referee into position, get him some experience and see what happens. The goalkeeper handles the ball outside his penalty area, a direct free kick offence. An attacker clips the ball out of his grasp but not in a dangerous manner, that's well played. The ball rolls to another attacker, not offside, who has an opportunity to take a shot, now that's an advantage I want to play out! Call out "Advantage, Play On" and see what happens. The other attacker is free to play the ball and when he does he has taken the advantage and used it. Done!

Things the referee must consider: was the keeper handling the ball outside his penalty area misconduct, was there any danger in the way the attacker won the ball, did the advantage materialize? Consider these well because this one is going to be a moment of truth in the match. If there is a goal the referee will be well advised to have a word with the keeper about where he handled the ball and out there he has no special rights. There didn't seem to be a danger and there was definitely advantage to be played. This will keep him off your back if he thinks he was done badly by the decision.

I wouldn't want to have this happen on my match...

Regards,

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 16937