Keeper change for PK?

[Hattrix]

In Law Three, Fifa says any player may change places with the keeper provided the ref is informed and it occurs at a stoppage. Does this mean teams have the option to change keepers in the event a PK is awarded?

I don't see why not, frankly. Anyone know what the random and illogical high school rule is?

[GKbenji]

In Law Three, Fifa says any player may change places with the keeper provided the ref is informed and it occurs at a stoppage. Does this mean teams have the option to change keepers in the event a PK is awarded?

I don't see why not, frankly. Anyone know what the random and illogical high school rule is?

Yes, without making a substitution, you can always swap a field player for the keeper at a stoppage in play, such as before the PK is taken. It happens, even in professional matches, every so often.

High school (NF) allows the swap "whenever the clock is stopped or a substitution takes place." Since the rules also specify that "The clock shall be stopped for a penalty kick...", The answer is again yes.

[PirateJohn]

Does this mean teams have the option to change keepers in the event a PK is awarded?Yes, and this isn't uncommon. If a GK gets sent off in the commission of a foul in the penalty area, then the team will take a field player off the field so they can bring in their sub keeper to try to stop the PK.

[Wreave]

Yes, and this isn't uncommon. If a GK gets sent off in the commission of a foul in the penalty area, then the team will take a field player off the field so they can bring in their sub keeper to try to stop the PK.

This one might depend on your associations rules for subs. For example, ours allows subs on your own throw-in, any goal kick, any kick-off, or injury for the injured player. NOT a PK. The team can still exchange a field player for the goalkeeper, but not sub in a new keeper from the sideline.

I better check our rules on this one to be sure before the next tourney...

[refmike]

I think there should be a goalie swap so the player who committed the foul has to defend against the PK.

[PirateJohn]

This one might depend on your associations rules for subs. For example, ours allows subs on your own throw-in, any goal kick, any kick-off, or injury for the injured player. NOT a PK. The team can still exchange a field player for the goalkeeper, but not sub in a new keeper from the sideline.

I better check our rules on this one to be sure before the next tourney...True, association rules may differ, however it's worth checking out since making a non-GK have to save a penalty shot is a pretty big deal.

I'm pretty sure most associations also allow substitutions after a red card, though, since the whole dynamic of the team is changed when you lose a player, especially if that player is a goalkeeper.

[macheath]

This one might depend on your associations rules for subs. For example, ours allows subs on your own throw-in, any goal kick, any kick-off, or injury for the injured player. NOT a PK. The team can still exchange a field player for the goalkeeper, but not sub in a new keeper from the sideline.

I better check our rules on this one to be sure before the next tourney...

Our substitution rules are the same, as are most youth rules that allow "unlimited" subs. The LOTG allows substitution on any stoppage of play, which is standard FIFA practice, but it also only allows a limited number of subs (3 at the international level) and the substituted player cannot come back on. In unlimited substitution games, limiting the situations in which a sub can be made is a compromise with allowing more subs, and allowing players to come back on. That's why the unlimited rules usually prevent a team from subbing on the other team's throw-in--they shouldn't be able to exploit the sub rule to disadvantage the other team.

IMHO, there shouldn't be an exemption for a goalkeeper substitution when a red card for the original GK is involved, unless the rules specifically permit it. Why should the defending team get a benefit by allowing this substitution, when they are at fault for the initial foul? It's a principle of the game that teams should not benefit from fouls--that's the basis for advantage, among other parts of the law.

[tmaker]

Good grief, what a bunch of uptight referees.

It's hardly an "advantage" situation, when a foul has already been called, a defender is sent off and a penalty kick is "awarded," particularly if the first string 'keeper has just been sent off. While the basis of advantage, as I read it, is that the offending team should not benefit from a referee stopping play ("allows play to continue when the team against which an offense has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalizes the original offense if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time", cf. Law 5). It is clear in this instance that not only has the original offense been penalized (the penalty kick has been awarded and the player has been sent off), but also that play is not continuing; it is stopped. Furthermore, advantage is not realized in terms of scoring a goal, according to our own ATR.

Let's not be so Procrustean with the Laws. Common sense should apply.

[PirateJohn]

IMHO, there shouldn't be an exemption for a goalkeeper substitution when a red card for the original GK is involved, unless the rules specifically permit it. Why should the defending team get a benefit by allowing this substitution, when they are at fault for the initial foul? It's a principle of the game that teams should not benefit from fouls--that's the basis for advantage, among other parts of the law.As tmaker mentions, I would hardly call this a benefit. The defending team has already been duly penalized twice -- a PK and a sending off. I don't see how it is an advantage to allow a team to put an actual goalkeeper in a goalkeeper's role. After all, I see no law in FIFA's LOTG stating that forcing a non-GK to play as a GK is an apt punishment for any offense.

[billf]

While I agree with the common sense applied to the last two posts, if the modified rules do not allow for a sub in such a situation and the game is protested, the match will can be ordered replayed. Its important that you know the rules of the competition. If this is a youth state cup or a regional match and the rules did not allow for a sub in this situation (I'm not saying this is the case, I'm working on a hypothetical), you just created a huge headache for the cup committee when a smart coach knows the rules. Not only that, but you create a problem for yourself as a refere in that competition. You can bend a rule that isn't specific but you can't ignore a rule that is.

[macheath]

Good grief, what a bunch of uptight referees.

It's hardly an "advantage" situation, when a foul has already been called, a defender is sent off and a penalty kick is "awarded," particularly if the first string 'keeper has just been sent off. While the basis of advantage, as I read it, is that the offending team should not benefit from a referee stopping play ("allows play to continue when the team against which an offense has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalizes the original offense if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time", cf. Law 5). It is clear in this instance that not only has the original offense been penalized (the penalty kick has been awarded and the player has been sent off), but also that play is not continuing; it is stopped. Furthermore, advantage is not realized in terms of scoring a goal, according to our own ATR.

Let's not be so Procrustean with the Laws. Common sense should apply.

Well, I feared this sort of response when I mentioned advantage. I wasn't saying (and did not say) that the situation in question was an advantage call--it wasn't--only that advantage calls are one (but not the only one) of the parts of the Law that do not allow a fouling team to benefit from misconduct. Failing to give the ten yards is another one. Time wasting. Etc.

In a regular FIFA match, no question that a substitution could be allowed in the situation mentioned, assuming the defenders had a substitution left (if they used their three prior to that, too bad--should a ref allow an extra sub if the GK is involved?). Allowing substitutions at any stoppage is balanced in the general LOTG by the limit on the number of subs.

But in the specific competition in question, the substitution rules were clearly described and modfified--unlimited substitutions and re-entry for players, BUT only on a team's own throw-in, goal kick to either side, restart in the center, one-for-one injury subs. (This is a pretty standard set of rules for unlimited subs.) The situation described--sending off a defender--isn't covered by those specific substitution rules. Don't like it, talk to the league, not the refs.

[macheath]

While I agree with the common sense applied to the last two posts, if the modified rules do not allow for a sub in such a situation and the game is protested, the match will can be ordered replayed. Its important that you know the rules of the competition. If this is a youth state cup or a regional match and the rules did not allow for a sub in this situation (I'm not saying this is the case, I'm working on a hypothetical), you just created a huge headache for the cup committee when a smart coach knows the rules. Not only that, but you create a problem for yourself as a refere in that competition. You can bend a rule that isn't specific but you can't ignore a rule that is.

That's right. What's to prevent we goofy referees from modifying other rules during play, or even other sub rules (sure, sub on the other team's throw-in, etc.)? We're charged with using the rules of the competition, which sound pretty clear in this case. May be an omission that the leagues with unlimited substitutions want to change, specific to GKs.

[Jerlon]

My favorite situation happens in the NCAA rules. You cannot make a substitution normally during a pk situation. You can, however, sub out a player who receives a yellow card after he is given the yellow card. So picture this.

Keeper gets a red card for tackling a player who is on a breakaway. Keeper is off. PK for attacking team. Keepers team has a backup goalie they want to get on the field. What do they do? They have a player get a yellow card for dissent and sub him out for the backup goalie who gets in net for the PK.

[ref47]

this situation is not covered in most modifications of the lotg because it hardly ever is an issue. the leagues do not even think about the seldom seen things that can happen on the pitch. this is in the spirit of the game issue for me. the lotg allow a sub for a rc'd keeper (presuming a sub is not limited in number or that all subs have not been exhausted).

i am going to let them put that backup keeper on the pitch prior to the pk.

[macheath]

this situation is not covered in most modifications of the lotg because it hardly ever is an issue. the leagues do not even think about the seldom seen things that can happen on the pitch. this is in the spirit of the game issue for me. the lotg allow a sub for a rc'd keeper (presuming a sub is not limited in number or that all subs have not been exhausted).

i am going to let them put that backup keeper on the pitch prior to the pk.

You're the ref in charge, so you're right, if that's the way you see it.

[refmike]

Allowances are made for keepers. Even in top level professional play, if a keeper is injured and play must stop, he is not required to leave the field.

Allow a sub for the keeper who has been sent off & pull someone else off the field so they still play short.

[Law5]

While I agree with the common sense applied to the last two posts, if the modified rules do not allow for a sub in such a situation and the game is protested, the match will can be ordered replayed. Its important that you know the rules of the competition. If this is a youth state cup or a regional match and the rules did not allow for a sub in this situation (I'm not saying this is the case, I'm working on a hypothetical), you just created a huge headache for the cup committee when a smart coach knows the rules. Not only that, but you create a problem for yourself as a refere in that competition. You can bend a rule that isn't specific but you can't ignore a rule that is.
My work in refereeing/competition administration makes me absolutely agree with billf here. #1. Please, please, please know the requirements of the rules you are using today about when subs are allowed. That includes the rules of competition in a USSF/FIFA game. #2. Do NOT attempt to do something different in the name of what you consider "fairness." "Fairness" is following the rules that were agreed to by the teams before the game started. This is not a judgment decision! You will create immense problems for yourself and the league/tournament if you allow a substitute to enter if the rules do not provide for it, particularly in this situation. If the PK is saved, the kicking team will have a valid protest for your error in law. If you are being assessed, you will automatically fail. One of the biggest beefs I hear from coaches is referees "making up rules." It is not up to referees to change the rules. If you think the situation is unfair, contact the league/tournament to tell them why you think the situation is unfair, so they can change the rule for next time.

[macheath]

My work in refereeing/competition administration makes me absolutely agree with billf here. #1. Please, please, please know the requirements of the rules you are using today about when subs are allowed. That includes the rules of competition in a USSF/FIFA game. #2. Do NOT attempt to do something different in the name of what you consider "fairness." "Fairness" is following the rules that were agreed to by the teams before the game started. This is not a judgment decision! You will create immense problems for yourself and the league/tournament if you allow a substitute to enter if the rules do not provide for it, particularly in this situation. If the PK is saved, the kicking team will have a valid protest for your error in law. If you are being assessed, you will automatically fail. One of the biggest beefs I hear from coaches is referees "making up rules." It is not up to referees to change the rules. If you think the situation is unfair, contact the league/tournament to tell them why you think the situation is unfair, so they can change the rule for next time.

Amen, brother. Creating lots of individualized variations also means that the next ref who gets a match with these teams hears "but the last ref let us do it/didn't call that."

[Statesman]

Suffice to say I'm a little unnerved by the responses suggesting the referee purposely not follow the rules of the competition authority out of their own personal sense of fairness.

You see this happen mostly in U16-U19B and amateur matches where the keeper commits DOGSO in taking on a rushing attacker. And, I have also given a caution for dissent specifically designed to receive the caution so that they may sub on their backup goalkeeper.

I think I'll pull a few strings and see to proposing the ability to sub after any misconduct in youth matches. This change would also help coaches manage their players after mass confrontations. They could swap out two or three players if need be to get them to settle down before sending them back out.

It doesn't happen often, but when it does there certainly is a problem.