Question Number: 23011

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/26/2010

RE: District Adult

Russell Roxburgh of Sydney, NSW Australia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 22811

The plot thickens with this if the 'keeper touched the ball prior to the ball entering the goal...whether or not you had deemed the first touch as putting the ball into play, the keeper in touching/playing the ball would be viewed as touching the ball the 2nd time to allow the goal to stand. I would tend towards re-taking the kick, as it was not touched and moved, prior to the 2nd attacking player kicking the ball. This would go more to the spirit than reality of the rules. As you noted, it would have been a goal kick, except the keeper was more agile in this case!
Suggestions duly accepted. Thanks.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

I had never considered the interpretation that a tap is a fake that is meant to confuse the goalkeeper into making a commitment. If he guesses wrong, he concedes a goal. Sounds unfair on the surface, doesn't it?

The counter-argument to that is that the referee is supposed to hold his arm up until the second touch is taken. But do we really expect the keeper to be watching both the ball and the ref?

This can be likened to the referee giving an incorrect signal - signaling for IFK when it's a DFK or vice-versa. In those cases the kick is to be retaken because the referee potentially confused the goalkeeper.

Still, players should react to what they see happen on the field, and trust that the referee sees the same thing. Sometimes that doesn't happen, and the goalkeeper would make the wrong choice. But sometimes life isn't fair. I hate it when that happens.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Roxburgh
Goalkeeper have to make choices based on what is presented to them in free kick situations. If a goalkeeper for whatever reason at an IDFK assumes that the ball is in play and he makes an attempt to save the ball which end up in the goal then I'm going to have to award the goal. There can be many reasons why the player has kicked the ball at the goal which includes hoping for a deflection, looking for a rebound, did not know it was indirect, assumed the team mate has touched the ball etc etc.
The goalkeeper also has to make decisions based on what is presented such as did he miss the ball being put into play and assumed it was, was his view obscured by the defensive wall, did he misinterpret indirect, thought it got a slight deflection off a player etc.
If he is alert enough, tuned in, clearly sees that the ball was not touched and he allows the ball to go into the net then the restart is a goal kick with no debate from either side.
If the own goal is disallowed IMO there would be match control issues for the referee with the team that scores aggrieved that the ball was touched into the goal by an opponent and that the touch put the ball into play legally.
I recall seeing a video of a throw in by a player to his goalkeeper who missed the ball and then in his attempt to stop the ball entering the goal he touched it into the goal. The decision was a goal. Did he try to prevent the corner kick or to prevent what he thought was going to be a goal. Either way the goal has to be awarded. Would it make any difference if it was an opponent who tried to throw the ball into the goal or that area?

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

My take is that virtually every player that taps the ball with the bottom of his shoe THINKS he has 'kicked and moved' the ball, thus putting the ball into play. His teammate then thinks he can blast the ball into the net and score a goal. Also, I doubt any keeper would take the chance that an onrushing ball would not result in a valid goal and let it pass him by into the net. Further I firmly believe that the vast majority of players think this is a valid way to put the ball into play .

Unfortunately, many American referees still believe that a tap on the top constitutes kicked and moves even though USSF has made it clear for over 2 years that in order for the ball to be kicked and moved, it must go 'from here to there'. And Advice To Referees specifically states tapping the top of the ball does NOT put the ball into play. Even worse, some USSF INSTRUCTORS still teach that to tap the ball on the top will put the ball into play. I had an instructor teach this at a recert over a year after Advice forbid it. He hadn't read a copy of Advice in a long time, didn't believe me when I told him he was wrong, didn't have a copy of Advice with him and didn't want to look at my copy. Fortunately the other instructor at least had the integrity to read my copy and make the needed correction.

For all these reasons I can't see this as an illegal feint as the same logic applies to situations outside the USA

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Apologies for the late arrival of this answer. There was considerable debate about what is allowable, what is fair, what the Law requires and what is the best solution under the circumstances. My colleagues have outlined the parameters for a good decision very well.