Referee 101

[cajunref]

forthofficial wrote on another thread:
"There was an interesting call a few weeks ago I heard players speaking of where a keeper came out and jumped to get a high ball but the opposing striker jumped higher and met the ball sooner then the keeper did. As I understand it the keeper’s forehead hit the striker in the chest when gravity pulled him back down and the ball went in back of net off a header by the striker. Later the players were talking about some new rule (which I can't find) that no matter what it’s a foul if you touch the keep prior to their hitting the ground. It sound like an interesting debate to me especially if there is some new unpublished rule.

In other words the striker had made contact with the ball and sent it toward the back of the net (playing the ball) way before the keeper collided with him.

Perhaps no one is interested in this type of debate but without checking how else can I find out?

I feel that the younger refs needs a place where they can get together wiht their peers and chat."

[cajunref]

While good referees always try to have the keepers safety as top priority, they are still considered a field player. From the description of what happened, there doesn't seem to be a foul. The attacker was merely taller or could jump higher. Making contact with a keeper while making a play for the ball does not constitute a foul. Both players had the same opportunity to possess the ball.
There is no new Law (rule) concerning this situation.

[uncsoccer]

If an offensive player is even with the defenders and makes a run as soon as the ball is struck thus beating the defense is he/she offsides? There seems to be confusion amongst refs as to when the player can run.

Offside is ALWAYS judged when the ball is played. Attacker even with the defender when the ball is played...onside. regardless of where the attacker receives the ball. To properly judge, the AR must be in correct alignment with the second to last defender and focused.

[ronaldo11]

The first post reminds me of Wayne Bridge's goal for Chelsea against Wycombe.



There is no foul whatsoever. The player has touched the ball, and an inevitable clash has followed.

In the clip, the referee may have decided there was a foul. I thought there was....But the referee should allow the ball to be played through, see what happens and indeed a goal materializes. Classic "advantage". The GK initially was not hurt, he watched the ball enter the goal. From one of the angles, you see the referee reach in his pocket. My intial thought was he is reaching for a card (yellow in this case) But since most players know you dont card a player on the ground, he now stays down. Hoping the card goes away. Now I may be reading something into it not there but that was my thought.

The next question a referee may ask, what if the ball doesnt enter the goal? If the referee judged a foul by the keeper, then he has to be sent off.

[PutMeInCoach2]

I do believe there was a foul committed by the goalie has he clearly did not get any ball, but has taken out the player. However, you are right, advatange was properly played and the goal counted.

[ronaldo11]

ronaldo11 said:

There is no foul whatsoever.

I meant from the attacking Chelsea player Wayne Bridge - there is no foul whatsoever.

[defendermom]

If a player kicks the ball to his own goalie is the goalied allowed to grab the ball? This happened tonight and the ref did not call anything but did give the goalie a free kick. I am confused.....................

[forthoffical]

Defender mom,

I think the elements involved would be:

First an "own goal" scored by a team against itself is vaild and is given to the opposing team when a goal is scored when the whole of the ball passes over the goal line, between the goalposts and under the crossbar, provided that no infringement of the Laws of the Game has been committed previously by the team scoring the goal into consideration first. But following that if for some reason the goal was disallowed the next issue would be an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own penalty area, touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate.

Perhaps I have the reasoning out of order and one of our really experienced refs will step inhere and bail me out.

[ronaldo11]

I dont think defendermom is talking about an own goal....

[forthoffical]

OK,
lets see if I can clear up the miss direction I started. First looking again and reading very carefully I now see:

1. player kicks the ball to his own goalie
2. is the goalied allowed to grab the ball?

Okay calling the goalkeeper a goalie is okay but the use of "goalied" threw me to thinking she was saying a goal had been scored. I think she meant to use the word Keeper or goalkeeper in this case the rule is simple.

Answer: NO!

An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own penalty area or a direct free kick if offense is elsewhere on the pitch, commits the offense of touching the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate. However, subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper
using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball
is in play in order to circumvent the Law, the player is guilty of unsporting behavior. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and
an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.

[defendermom]

Sorry I didn't type well.. that clears it up. The last game we played the player kicked the ball to his own keeper, the keeper picked it up and the ref gave the ball to the goalie and allowed him to kick it. Wasn't sure the rule.
Thanks

[brhsoccer14]

I was confused... I watched the clip and I think everything went perfectly... I dont see anything for discussion...

defendermom,
Please also take into consideration that there are certain events that must happen to call a 'passback to the keeper':

1) A player from the keeper's team must be in possession of the ball.
2) The said player must intentionally pass the ball back to the keeper with the foot. Anything above is legal (actually, make sure about shins, Ive always had a problem with that)
3) Said keeper must pick the ball up.

Most people scream at the referees for passback when it is obvious that the defender did not intend to pass it back to the keeper or mistouched it back to the keeper. In these cases (at the level of soccer that is within the state), it is not an infraction of the law. Also, do not get intentional confused with deliberate.

[lather]

From the clip:

Allow the goal. Apply the advantage. Book the Keeper for misconduct. Your choice, depending on the tone of the match. Caution for UB, of Send-Off for SFP.

Other item - Playing the ball directly to the keeper from the foot is not allowed, if the keeper uses hands to play the ball. A deflection, or inadvertant play from the foot allows the keeper to use hands. You have to judge it on the field.

[lakeview]

key word in the law is is "deliberate" kick

br ref: explain difference with the term "intentional". Thanks.

[brhsoccer14]

Hahahaha. It's quite funny how I am a hypocrit... it is deliberate, not intentionally, as I put it...

Thanks!

[misltek]

brhsoccer14 said:

3) Said keeper must pick the ball up.

The GK only has to place his hand on the ball for it to be a violation. Picking it up is an extended action of the illegal touching.

[brhsoccer14]

Arg, you and your technicalities
Yeah, yeah. That's what I meant! ;D