|
Post by JD on Apr 8, 2013 19:02:22 GMT 10
Attacker A kicks the ball at goal from just outside penalty area.
GK cannot reach across but Defender A comes to the corner of the goalposts and saves a certain goal, by kicking the ball.
The kick goes straight back to GK lying on the ground midway between the Penalty Spot and the edge of the Goal Area.
The kick to the keeper, the shot at goal all happen quickly.
The GK instinct is to catch the ball. There is not much else the GK can do except catch it or let it smack him in the head, or, an Attacker will come through most likely and score.
Ok, I think that sets the scenario I had on the weekend. I awarded an IFK to the Attackers for the Gk handling the ball after it was deliberately kicked to him.
Would you agree? I think it is one of those...you had to be there moments and I had to err on the side of caution to give the IFK.
|
|
|
Post by fatdev33l on Apr 8, 2013 20:41:36 GMT 10
JD, it is definitely open for interpretation. If the player has not had a reasonable amount of control of the ball when clearing it off the line (for example they slice the ball upwards) then I would play on. Your description implies it was intentional as the player has directly kicked the ball towards the goal keeper.
Ultimately though this would definitely be open for interpreation. I have seen instances where you would award an IFK and others where common sense suggest you do not.
From an assessors point of view, I would in most situations be happy with either interpretation as long as the referee could adequately explain how they came to their decision and that they understand the LOTG.
|
|
|
Post by JD on Apr 9, 2013 23:25:40 GMT 10
There was no slicing of the ball. Straight from defender to GK.
The defender and his other 10 teammates and, everyone else on the team bench thought it was not deliberate.
I just could not agree with that idea from my initial impression of a ball being kicked straight at a GK. I don't think you could ever really say that is not deliberate. There seems to be reasonable enough control in that situation.
One of the defenders did help me out when complaining - he said to me...it was instinct for the GK to just catch it...I said...exactly!
|
|
pj
50 Posts + Member
Off the beaten track
Posts: 72
|
Post by pj on Apr 10, 2013 10:06:52 GMT 10
For me, I'd have to be comfortable that the "deliberate pass" was intended for the keeper to pick up. IMO this Law was introduced to stop defenders passing it back for the keeper to pick up to delay play and stop the ball being challenged (by the opposition).
If the pass/kick was intended for the keeper to pick up (usually kicked gently), IDK simple. However, if the kick was a clearance of some sort (kicked fairly hard) or even a shanked clearance, play on.
While it was a deliberate kick and could be argued as a pass back, I think the intent has to be considered in this type of instance.
Two scenarios to consider: 1. A defender plays the ball hard to the other side of the PA for another defender. The keeper reads the play and sees the 2nd defender will be challenged real quick so he runs forward a few meters, intercepts the ball and picks it up. 2. A defender runs the ball into the penalty area (unchallenged), not directly at the keeper (maybe across his path), stops the ball a few meters from the keeper and keeps running. Keeper runs forward and picks up the ball.
|
|
|
Post by fatdev33l on Apr 14, 2013 15:48:46 GMT 10
Two scenarios to consider: 1. A defender plays the ball hard to the other side of the PA for another defender. The keeper reads the play and sees the 2nd defender will be challenged real quick so he runs forward a few meters, intercepts the ball and picks it up. 2. A defender runs the ball into the penalty area (unchallenged), not directly at the keeper (maybe across his path), stops the ball a few meters from the keeper and keeps running. Keeper runs forward and picks up the ball. I believe both would be cases where if the goal keeper handled the ball would be consider an offence. Although now removed from the interpretations, a number of years ago it included these situations, where a player and goal keeper deliberately attempt to circumnavigate the law. To me this along with the defender flicking the ball up to himself/herself or a teammate to head back to the keeper are perfect examples of the times it would still be an offence.
|
|
|
Post by 1 on Apr 22, 2013 18:44:07 GMT 10
Ok now that i have seen this i might aw well respond with my thoughts.
I agree with fatdev on the last two questions. On the OP, I'd ask myself "did the defender deliberately kick the ball to the GK?" If i am reasonably sure then its an IDFK. If I have any doubts, I'd give the benefit of the doubt to the defender on the principle of innocent until proven guilty. This scenario is definitely a case of you'd have to be there.
|
|