Greg Newberg (Santa Barbara, CA) asks...
I have a question about the wording, meaning, and application of some wording in Law 14. In the section about PKs taken during regulation time, it states that: "The penalty kick is completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play, or the referee stops play for any offense." There is similar wording for PKs taken in "additional time" (IFAB wording), along with a few other provisions.
The descriptions for the termination of PKs taken in additional time make perfect sense. The purpose of the description for PKs in regulation (non-additional time, during the normal course of the match) seems vague. Why is it necessary to define when the PK is complete? Moreover, other circumstances could ensue that we could reasonably presume to mean the PK is complete. For example, the kick is blocked by the keeper, and the defending team gains possession of the ball and advances toward the opponent's goal. There is no definition in the Laws that says the PK is over in that case, but we have no doubt that it is.
I searched around, and the only, somewhat vague, explanation I could find is that the definition is provided so that the referee can make the proper decision about offenses, sanctions, and restarts (parts 2 and 3 of Law 14). But any actions by the teams that would trigger such decisions occur in the moment immediately around when the kick is taken, not after, for example, the ball rebounds and goes out of play. Even if the ball is kicked over the goal and encroachment by either team had no impact, why does the referee need to know by definition that the PK is complete at that point?
So that description in the Law seems entirely superfluous. Again, the similar wording for PKs in additional times is recognizably useful. Not so for the wording in the description for PKs in regulation time. Your experience and insight here would be most welcome. And if you could provide an example or two of how the wording is applied to a real situation, that would be most helpful.
The descriptions for the termination of PKs taken in additional time make perfect sense. The purpose of the description for PKs in regulation (non-additional time, during the normal course of the match) seems vague. Why is it necessary to define when the PK is complete? Moreover, other circumstances could ensue that we could reasonably presume to mean the PK is complete. For example, the kick is blocked by the keeper, and the defending team gains possession of the ball and advances toward the opponent's goal. There is no definition in the Laws that says the PK is over in that case, but we have no doubt that it is.
I searched around, and the only, somewhat vague, explanation I could find is that the definition is provided so that the referee can make the proper decision about offenses, sanctions, and restarts (parts 2 and 3 of Law 14). But any actions by the teams that would trigger such decisions occur in the moment immediately around when the kick is taken, not after, for example, the ball rebounds and goes out of play. Even if the ball is kicked over the goal and encroachment by either team had no impact, why does the referee need to know by definition that the PK is complete at that point?
So that description in the Law seems entirely superfluous. Again, the similar wording for PKs in additional times is recognizably useful. Not so for the wording in the description for PKs in regulation time. Your experience and insight here would be most welcome. And if you could provide an example or two of how the wording is applied to a real situation, that would be most helpful.
Referee Peter Grove
Answered on
Hi Greg,
I'm not sure if I have a particularly satisfying explanation, but it I think it might be instructive to look at the history of Law 14.
Prior to 2016, the law simply said, "The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed." In 2016, it was changed to the wording used now, and which you have quoted above. Now at that time, there was no separate wording for a penalty taken in additional time, so I think it was intended to apply mainly to that scenario.
I seem to remember there being some discussion around the fact that the wording still didn't really clarify exactly what would happen when a penalty was taken in time added on at the end of the game, so perhaps that was why an additional section was put in for that specific situation, in 2017.
As I say, that's not a very cogent explanation but it's the best I can offer.
I'm not sure if I have a particularly satisfying explanation, but it I think it might be instructive to look at the history of Law 14.
Prior to 2016, the law simply said, "The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed." In 2016, it was changed to the wording used now, and which you have quoted above. Now at that time, there was no separate wording for a penalty taken in additional time, so I think it was intended to apply mainly to that scenario.
I seem to remember there being some discussion around the fact that the wording still didn't really clarify exactly what would happen when a penalty was taken in time added on at the end of the game, so perhaps that was why an additional section was put in for that specific situation, in 2017.
As I say, that's not a very cogent explanation but it's the best I can offer.
Referee Joe Manjone
Answered on
Greg,
I agree with you. More possible endings could and should be added. This rule was also adopted by the NFHS in the 26-27 rules book and reads exactly as you stated. See rule 14.1.6 on page 86.
Although you do not have the ability to change the IFAB rule, you can ask for the NFHS rule to be modified. To do this, you need to email Chris Fahey, the soccer coordinator for the California Interscholastic Federation and tell Chris about your suggested change and why it is needed. Chis will then pass it on to the NFHS.
You can email Chis at cfahey@cifstate.org or contact Chris by phone at 916-239-4477.
Thank you for this question and have a very successful high school season.
I agree with you. More possible endings could and should be added. This rule was also adopted by the NFHS in the 26-27 rules book and reads exactly as you stated. See rule 14.1.6 on page 86.
Although you do not have the ability to change the IFAB rule, you can ask for the NFHS rule to be modified. To do this, you need to email Chris Fahey, the soccer coordinator for the California Interscholastic Federation and tell Chris about your suggested change and why it is needed. Chis will then pass it on to the NFHS.
You can email Chis at cfahey@cifstate.org or contact Chris by phone at 916-239-4477.
Thank you for this question and have a very successful high school season.
Referee Joe McHugh
Answered on
Hi Greg
Law 14 has had many amendments over the years.
Back in 1989 it stated that ** in the circumstances described in paragraphs (2) (b) and (4) (c) the game shall terminate immediately the ball rebounds from the goalkeeper, the cross-bar or the goal-post. **
If we ask when does it matter when the penalty kick is completed and we have really only two meaningful circumstances. One is where play has been extended to allow the kick and the other is kicks from the penalty mark.
Where play has been extended Law 14 is perfectly clear and I quote ** When additional time is allowed, the penalty kick is completed when, after the kick has been taken, the ball stops moving, goes out of play, is played by any player (including the kicker) other than the defending goalkeeper, or the referee stops play for an offence by the kicker or the kicker’s team. If a defending team player (including the goalkeeper) commits an offence and the penalty is missed/saved, the penalty is retaken.**
In KFTPM there was an incident in the 1986 World Cup when France beat Brazil in a penalty shootout. One of the French penalties hit the post and then came back to hit the goalkeeper with the ball ending up in the goal. The referee correctly awarded the goal. Brazil protested the award of the goal and the result yet IFAB confirmed that the referee was totally correct and that the goal was good. IFAB amended the law at the next AGM to ensure that there could be no confusion about the matter although like all wording some still interpreted incorrectly that a ball was “dead” after a rebound which is not the case.
The current wording has its origins in that decision
** The penalty kick is completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play for any offence.**
In recent times we have had a couple of weird penalty kicks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c00b3876vHE
In all situations the goals were correctly awarded as per the wording of Law 14. In all situations the ball did not stop moving and there was no offence.
Law 14 has had many amendments over the years.
Back in 1989 it stated that ** in the circumstances described in paragraphs (2) (b) and (4) (c) the game shall terminate immediately the ball rebounds from the goalkeeper, the cross-bar or the goal-post. **
If we ask when does it matter when the penalty kick is completed and we have really only two meaningful circumstances. One is where play has been extended to allow the kick and the other is kicks from the penalty mark.
Where play has been extended Law 14 is perfectly clear and I quote ** When additional time is allowed, the penalty kick is completed when, after the kick has been taken, the ball stops moving, goes out of play, is played by any player (including the kicker) other than the defending goalkeeper, or the referee stops play for an offence by the kicker or the kicker’s team. If a defending team player (including the goalkeeper) commits an offence and the penalty is missed/saved, the penalty is retaken.**
In KFTPM there was an incident in the 1986 World Cup when France beat Brazil in a penalty shootout. One of the French penalties hit the post and then came back to hit the goalkeeper with the ball ending up in the goal. The referee correctly awarded the goal. Brazil protested the award of the goal and the result yet IFAB confirmed that the referee was totally correct and that the goal was good. IFAB amended the law at the next AGM to ensure that there could be no confusion about the matter although like all wording some still interpreted incorrectly that a ball was “dead” after a rebound which is not the case.
The current wording has its origins in that decision
** The penalty kick is completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play for any offence.**
In recent times we have had a couple of weird penalty kicks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c00b3876vHE
In all situations the goals were correctly awarded as per the wording of Law 14. In all situations the ball did not stop moving and there was no offence.
Referee Richard Dawson
Answered on
HI Greg,
For a game that's been around as long as soccer has it is undergone consistent meddling and tweaking of basic fundamentals. Your point is understandable, however, the Law’s “completed” wording is necessary because it creates a single, objective cutoff that tells the referee whether an act happened during the penalty sequence (so the special penalty sequence outcomes in Law 14 apply) or after the sequence (so ordinary Laws and restarts apply). That distinction affects whether the referee orders a retake, awards an indirect free kick, lets a goal stand, or treats an incident as normal play for disciplinary purposes. I would argue that the Laws need a single, objective trigger so referees apply the specific outcomes listed in Law 14 consistently (goal stands, retake, indirect free kick, or disciplinary action). The phrase “when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play” tells the referee when the special penalty sequence rules stop applying and ordinary play rules resume.
This is important for timing, for judging encroachment/goalkeeper-line breaches, and for whether a double-touch is punished as part of the penalty sequence.The wording as it is currently stated is their “completed” definition telling you when encroachment, goalkeeper?line breaches, double-touches, and added-time allowances are judged. It is an attempt to fix the exact moment the restart ends so the referee can apply sanctions, decide retakes, and manage time consistently. Our reasoned explanations of why the Law defines when a penalty kick is “completed” may or may not clarity sanctions and restarts as we will read into it our perceptions and biasis . The laws of the game are FIFA and IFAB attempst to apply consistency across outcomes. Different outcomes (goal, save, rebound, out of play) require different responses. Stating “completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play, or the referee stops play” gives a single, simple rule that covers the many possible sequences. The Laws must say when the penalty sequence ends so the referee knows whether an action happened during the penalty (which can trigger a retake, caution, or indirect free kick) or after it (which is treated as normal play). IFAB explicitly uses the completion point to decide whether to retake, award a goal, or restart with an indirect free kick.
Timekeeping and additional time. The Law also separates ordinary regulation from end of half/extra?time situations because additional time allows the kick to be completed even if play would normally have ended, IFAB therefore gives a slightly different completion test for those cases.
If we examine how that wording matters in practice, let's try these 2. examples
Example 1 : Keeper saves, rebound to defender who clears
Sequence: Kicker shoots keeper saves ball rebounds to a defender who clears upfield.
Application: The penalty is not “completed” the instant the keeper touches it it remains in play while the ball is moving and until it stops or goes out. If a defending player who had encroached then plays the ball and that action affected the outcome, the referee can order a retake or caution as appropriate. If no encroachment affected the outcome, play continues and no retake is required. This is the distinction IFAB and practical guidance stress.
Example 2 : Ball hits post and goes out encroachment occurred but didn’t affect the kick
Sequence: Kicker’s shot hits the post and goes out of play some players had encroached but did not touch or influence the ball.
Application: Because the ball went out of play, the penalty is completed at that moment. The referee then judges whether the encroachment “clearly impacted” the outcome minor encroachment with no effect is usually ignored, but if it did affect the kick the restart, be it a retake or disciplinary action follows IFAB guidance. FootyMetrics and IFAB explain that only encroachment that clearly changes the outcome forces a retake.
The completion clause is their idea of a practical takeaway giving the referee a clear trigger for applying the specific sanctions and restarts listed in Law 14, preventing ad-hoc decisions about whether an incident happened “during” the penalty or after. That precision is why the wording is necessary, not redundant. The debate whether it is clear or covers any and all situations lingers
cheers
For a game that's been around as long as soccer has it is undergone consistent meddling and tweaking of basic fundamentals. Your point is understandable, however, the Law’s “completed” wording is necessary because it creates a single, objective cutoff that tells the referee whether an act happened during the penalty sequence (so the special penalty sequence outcomes in Law 14 apply) or after the sequence (so ordinary Laws and restarts apply). That distinction affects whether the referee orders a retake, awards an indirect free kick, lets a goal stand, or treats an incident as normal play for disciplinary purposes. I would argue that the Laws need a single, objective trigger so referees apply the specific outcomes listed in Law 14 consistently (goal stands, retake, indirect free kick, or disciplinary action). The phrase “when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play” tells the referee when the special penalty sequence rules stop applying and ordinary play rules resume.
This is important for timing, for judging encroachment/goalkeeper-line breaches, and for whether a double-touch is punished as part of the penalty sequence.The wording as it is currently stated is their “completed” definition telling you when encroachment, goalkeeper?line breaches, double-touches, and added-time allowances are judged. It is an attempt to fix the exact moment the restart ends so the referee can apply sanctions, decide retakes, and manage time consistently. Our reasoned explanations of why the Law defines when a penalty kick is “completed” may or may not clarity sanctions and restarts as we will read into it our perceptions and biasis . The laws of the game are FIFA and IFAB attempst to apply consistency across outcomes. Different outcomes (goal, save, rebound, out of play) require different responses. Stating “completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play, or the referee stops play” gives a single, simple rule that covers the many possible sequences. The Laws must say when the penalty sequence ends so the referee knows whether an action happened during the penalty (which can trigger a retake, caution, or indirect free kick) or after it (which is treated as normal play). IFAB explicitly uses the completion point to decide whether to retake, award a goal, or restart with an indirect free kick.
Timekeeping and additional time. The Law also separates ordinary regulation from end of half/extra?time situations because additional time allows the kick to be completed even if play would normally have ended, IFAB therefore gives a slightly different completion test for those cases.
If we examine how that wording matters in practice, let's try these 2. examples
Example 1 : Keeper saves, rebound to defender who clears
Sequence: Kicker shoots keeper saves ball rebounds to a defender who clears upfield.
Application: The penalty is not “completed” the instant the keeper touches it it remains in play while the ball is moving and until it stops or goes out. If a defending player who had encroached then plays the ball and that action affected the outcome, the referee can order a retake or caution as appropriate. If no encroachment affected the outcome, play continues and no retake is required. This is the distinction IFAB and practical guidance stress.
Example 2 : Ball hits post and goes out encroachment occurred but didn’t affect the kick
Sequence: Kicker’s shot hits the post and goes out of play some players had encroached but did not touch or influence the ball.
Application: Because the ball went out of play, the penalty is completed at that moment. The referee then judges whether the encroachment “clearly impacted” the outcome minor encroachment with no effect is usually ignored, but if it did affect the kick the restart, be it a retake or disciplinary action follows IFAB guidance. FootyMetrics and IFAB explain that only encroachment that clearly changes the outcome forces a retake.
The completion clause is their idea of a practical takeaway giving the referee a clear trigger for applying the specific sanctions and restarts listed in Law 14, preventing ad-hoc decisions about whether an incident happened “during” the penalty or after. That precision is why the wording is necessary, not redundant. The debate whether it is clear or covers any and all situations lingers
cheers