Question Number: 31345

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/14/2017

RE: Amateur / youth competitive Adult

Jim McEleny of Greenock, Inverclyde Scotland asks...

This question is a follow up to question 8924

Am I right in saying that if a keeper and an attacker running towards each other at the edge of the penalty area and ther keeper dives on top of the ball, thinking / hoping that he's inside his area, but it transpires that he wasn't. The decision would be a direct free kick to the attacker and the keeper would be sent off for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity? harsh possibly, but that's my understanding.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Jim
It is certainly deliberate handling punished by a direct feee kick restart.
Now as to whether it is a dismissal for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity the referee must decide that all the conditions of a DOGSO are present which are referrred to as the 4Ds. These are
# The Distance between the offence and the goal
# The likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball Distance to the ball.
# The Direction of the play
# The location and number of Defenders.
All four need to be present and there may be times when one is missing such as say the offence happens while the players are moving away from goal - direction of play or the attacker was well away from the goalkeeper and it was simply a misjudgement of location - distance to the ball in which case there is no DOGSO.
In your example it is most likely that the handling by the GK did in fact deny an obvious goal scoring opportunity and while possibly harsh that is what the law demands. The GK needs to ensure that the risk is eliminated by perhaps kicking the ball or ensuring he is inside the area when the ball is caught.
If say the GK caught the ball inside and his momentum on a wet surfaces caused him to slide outside the penalty area that might not be a DOGSO depending on what the GK attempted to do as he slides out.
This video was shown on another question
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=52YhAcSK8As
While most are red cards one or two could go to yellow

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Jim,
The keeper has the right to use their hands INSIDE their own PA unless they were restricted by a direct teammates pass or throw in. . A handling inside could result in an INDFK if restrictions were in place. OUTSIDE the PA the keeper is treated as just another player and a deliberate handling is a penal offence punishable by a DFK . NOW depending on any number of factors the keeper maybe held accountable for a cautionable action or a send off action if the handling denies an attack or a goal. What I find irritating is FAR too many referees reach for a direct red when it is not necessary for either the match or by the LOTG as a MANDATORY action.
As my colleague Ref McHugh has outlined the guidelines it is always an opinion if these are 100% met and the act CLEARLY denied the goal or opportunity of the goal. There was a recent video of ten red card send off of keepers that I saw several deliberate hand-lings that could have been easily placed into cautonable mode rather alter the game by reducing the team a player. It is a BIG deal and a referee MUST be 100% sure the game and the LOTG DEMAND it not that the keeper simply touched the ball deliberatelywhile outside the PA. Yes it certainly can be a direct red send off WHEN the conditions are CLEARLY in evident but think first before reaching for red automatically!
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Jim,
As my colleagues have stated this might or might not require a dismissal for DOGSO. Your question seems to reflect a common myth that any time a keeper handles the ball deliberately outside the penalty area, a red card is automatically required. If that is indeed what you are saying, then your understanding is not correct. Now, in the specific scenario you describe it does sound possible that a DOGSO offence could have occurred and if the referee judges that this is in fact the case then a dismissal would be in order - but it is by no means automatic. Seeing as in the example you give the keeper has clearly got to the ball first, the factor of whether the forward had 'the likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball' might be an important factor to consider.