http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/...orst-free-kick-ever-chelmsford-corcoran-video what if it is pk- since it hits the knee- has it been kicked?
I think there is a legitimate question here of whether that ball was properly put into play. Does using your knee constitute "kicked" and moved? How about getting on all fours and heading the ball?
IMHO, no foot = no kick = ball not in play -- at any level. I'm not going to let a player deliberately take a FK with anything other than a foot, so I'm not going to deem the ball in play if he inadvertently moves the ball with anything other than a foot.
With SoCal. Ball not put in play properly. Retake. Was not trying to bend the rule, so no punishment for the kicker. Now, if he slips after he kicks it, balls live, at any age. I think I'd even bring it back if he slips and slides his foot to the ball. We all know what a kick looks like. Ball must be kicked.
There is absolutely no question about this. The ball is not in play in the video, nor may a player get down on all fours and head a free kick. I can't recall where I saw it right now (perhaps ATR, perhaps FIFA Guidelines), but I've seen it in print that a free kick must be played with the foot. Unfortunate that the referee in the video either didn't see the restart clearly or didn't know the proper ruling.
A kick with any part of the lower leg is fine with me, but this player slipped and fell and did not play the ball intentially at all.
From the USSF ATR: 13.5 THE BALL IN PLAY The ball is in play (able to be played by an attacker other than the kicker or by an opponent) when it has been kicked and moved. The distance to be moved is minimal and the "kick" need only be a touch of the ball with the foot in a kicking motion or being dragged with the top or bottom of the foot. Simply tapping the top of the ball with the foot or stepping on the ball are not sufficient. When the restart of play is based on the ball being kicked and moved, the referee must ensure that the ball is indeed kicked (touched with the foot in a kicking or dragging motion) and moved (caused to go from one place to another). The referee must make the final decision on what is and is not "kicked and moved" based on the spirit and flow of the match .
Kicked = foot Keep it consistent. Think about the intentional pass rule to the keeper, what if the ball comes off the head? Not "kicked" so it's ok, we all agree there. What about off the knee? I think we can all agree there, not a kick. Shin, ankle same. kicked= foot
The point of "kicked and moves" is that the ball must move, so "tapped and stays put" doesn't put the ball into play. What would be the point of stopping play if the ball is struck with a kicking motion a little higher on the leg?
Similarly, the point of the "passback" infraction is to prevent the ball under control from being passed to the keeper - that's why you can't flip it up to your head and head it to him. Why would playing the ball with a kicking motion a little higher on the lower leg be allowed?
Perhaps you should direct that question to USSF rather than ask what appears to be a rhetorical question. USSF instructions are quite clear that kick means foot (and only foot) with respect to the pass back rule.
Then your answer is probably embedded in your post: leg is less likely to involve control than another part of the leg. The goal of the rule was never to create IFKs, but to eradicate a deeply ugly style of play involving extended time-wasting by returning the ball -- repeatedly -- to the GK so he could pick it up. A one-off knee/shin/anything doesn't offend the concept.
The challenge is, there are so many teams that are under the impression that and IFK can still be put in play by a "tap/stays put". It is not our place to tell them any differently during the course the match. That would be coaching, so unless the free kick enters the goal directly and is disallowed, there is no real opportunity for them to learn that it is not proper and they will continue to do it. A good percentage are not successful, so I have not had to disallow a goal on these grounds in a long time. One day, however, it will be a game critical goal that gets disallowed, and a bunch of kids are going to be very disappointed. I've tried telling coaches at half or post game, but they're usually so busy rounding up players and equipment, it goes over their heads.
With teams that do the "tap" you usually get your first shot at it during a kickoff. Take the opporatunity then and you won't "suprise" them later. Plus if you allow it at the kickoff, you are implying it's ok and will be allowed later.
I get it. You could make a point by doing this, but in a vast majority of cases isn't this really trifling? Unless the second player touches the ball twice and the second touch ends up in the goal, which is unlikely, it really doesn't equate, either in magnatude or learning association by the players (especially younger ones ). A kick-off is not an indirect free kick.
Absolutely on everything you say. If the "second" guy on the kickoff touches it once and kicks it forward, then yes it's legally put in play. However, the "normal" thing is the tap is the 1st touch, then the second guy double touches or kicks it backwards. This is when you get your chance to "educate" the players. My point was, if you let this go here, you really can't call it later. You've set the expectation that it's legal. As for trifling, it's not trifling, the ball isn't legally in play - unless you consider the whole play the ball forward a silly rule (which I do).
Its trifling till you run into the team that has a player that knows the laws and let's the IFK go in the goal because he knows the first touch didn't put the ball in play, or the team that doesn't defend the attacker on the kick off that starts dribbling because they know the same thing. Don't call this at your own risk. If this happens and a player calls you out then your excuse better be something better than, its in the opinion of the referee because they are going to know you are full of BS.
"Fingerspitzengefühl" What's "Fingerspitzengefühl"? Read 15.3 of the Advice to Referees on the LOTG. It covers how to handle this scenario quite nicely. Tough call but my thinking is that it should be kicked with the foot.
I think you need to read my earlier post, because the situation in your first paragraph is exactly what I was referring to. Getting players to understand that, although it used to, a tap of the ball no longer constitutes putting the ball in play on an IFK. The contention is whether strictly enforcing the "kicked" standard at a kick-off educates the players that the same standard also applies at the taking of an indirect kick (two different amimals IMHO, and probaly in their minds as well, that have vastly different impacts on the match). I would like it if the players knew what is proper without it costing them a goal just because the coach failed to educate them as to what is the proper procedure.
As refs we are sanctioned to keep the beautiful game moving, stopping play only when necessary to maintain the integrity of the match. With this in mind I see no trouble with reminding the players that a "tap" will not suffice as a 1st touch rather then waiting for a foul to occur. Especially at younger ages. I agree completely that we are not there to coach tactics, but we have some leway when it comes to informing players of the LOTG. Pulling the ball out of the net especially for something that is rather difficult to explain like an inadequate 1st touch is never good for match control and should be avoided I have had to disallow goals for this even after this advice was given to the kicker, but at least everyone in the area knew that, "hey, I told you so."
That is simply just not something the referee should do, unless they are asked the question. I agree that if a player asks you a question about something you can answer but you can't go out of your way before the kick and say "Just so you know, the tap the ball play is going to result in a free kick to the other team and doesn't put the ball into play." That is unfair to the other team even if you do it for them later. They missed out on getting a free kick because they other team didn't know the laws because you directly influenced how an opponent's free kick was going to take place.
I agree but how are you going to say, "Well it was trifling that time but now that a goal was scored I am going to enforce this." I know that this is the definition of trifling to an extent but that pill is not going to be easy to swallow for the "offended" team. I while an IFK is slightly different than a KO in atmosphere and generally result it is still a way to stamp out this practice and then reference it later if the behavior repeats itself.
I understand your point but there are a few times that we do somewhat directly influence players according to the LOTG, and there is some gray area there. A kicker taking a PK can be cautioned for kicking the ball before the whistle but you can be sure that I will remind the kicker to wait for the whistle every single time. I don't think that is unfair to the other team. Now if we tell a player, "hey buddy, do you know you're offside" then yes, that would be going way too far. Forgive me if I misunderstood but just tapping the ball on an IFK would not result in a FK for the other team, it would just mean that the ball has not yet met the 1st touch requirement. But what if the ball does go directly in the goal after this? Well then it is a goal kick and they have wasted a GS opportunity, but this other team NOW knows how you are going to enforce this and has greater knowledge about how to approach the kick when it is THEIR turn to take an IFK. That seems unfair IMO. But that's the thing about soccer reffing, it allows different styles of officiating, not so much like most American sports where everything is so cut and dry, so I'm not insinuating that there is anything wrong with calling a game in the manner that you do. Perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree.