Legal/Illegal Throw-in Question

[ctsoccer13]

As far as I know, the rules haven't changed, but in two of my games this year it's been argued by the opposing team (two different teams) that a rule change came that made it legal for the ball to not come directly over the player's head. As far as I know, that rule never changed. Sounds stupid, but was this changed? I checked both the FIFA and NCAA sites and both still say that the ball most come directly over the head with equal force from both hands. Thanks.

[nsa]

Originally posted by ctsoccer13
I checked both the FIFA and NCAA sites and both still say that the ball most come directly over the head with equal force from both hands. You didn't check the FIFA site very well. There is nothing about "equal force" on the FIFA site.

Specifically, the LOTG states in Law 15- faces the field of play
- has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside of the touch line
- uses both hands
- delivers the ball from behind and over his head

[Crowdie]

I can't comment on the US interpretation on this but in New Zealand and Australia (probably because of our British heritage) a throw can be ruled illegal because of a "leading arm/hand". There is nothing in the LOTG that specifies this but it has been enforced in Britain for a long, long time.

Basically, both of the thrower's arms should be level behind or beside the ball. This makes it a two handed throw. What some players do is have one arm/hand significantly infront of the other while throwing. This makes the throw one handed and the ball will go a lot further. The obvious sign of a one handed throw is excessive spin on the ball.

The LOTG, as nsa pointed out, specify that for a throw a player:

- uses both hands
- delivers the ball from behind and over his head

This hints at one handed throws being illegal but doesn't come directly out and say it. That is the funny thing about the LOTG - it doesn't cover every situation that can happen out there.

The golden rule is don't be too picky - if it is an obvious illegal throw then it should be called. If it is a nothing offence in a game that is being played in a sporting manner then let the game continue. People come to see soccer not how good a referee's whistle is.

Crowdie.

[ctsoccer13]

nsa, I did read it carefully, I was more or less trying to get the info from the two sites into one sentence. didn't mean to confuse the situation. i appreciate the feedback. i'm not reffing (i'm a player) or choosing to criticize the call made. In fact, it went our way. In both cases the player taking the throw had the ball come over the side of his head. The ball was released with both hands lined up in front of his head and the teams argued that it was a legal throw due to a rule change. Nobody had ever heard of it. In the leagues that I play in the spinning motion is rarely called as an illegal throw so it is never argued. Again, thanks for the input

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by ctsoccer13
nsa, I did read it carefully, I was more or less trying to get the info from the two sites into one sentence. didn't mean to confuse the situation. i appreciate the feedback. i'm not reffing (i'm a player) or choosing to criticize the call made. In fact, it went our way. In both cases the player taking the throw had the ball come over the side of his head. The ball was released with both hands lined up in front of his head and the teams argued that it was a legal throw due to a rule change. Nobody had ever heard of it. In the leagues that I play in the spinning motion is rarely called as an illegal throw so it is never argued. Again, thanks for the input

I teach social youth players who are being continuously penalised for illegal throws to throw the ball in this way:

1) Spread the fingers on both hands as far apart as you can
2) Move your hands together so the ends of each thumb meet
3) While keeping the ends of both thumbs touching pick up the ball and have your left hand on the left hand side of the ball and your right hand on the right hand side of the ball
4) While keeping the ends of both thumbs touching move the ball back over your head
5) When you are ready to throw move the ball in ONE MOTION over your head ensuring the ends of your thumbs are touching
6) Release the ball

This technique makes it almost impossible to be called for a leading arm/hand.

If the player threw the ball in a way that you cannot reproduce using the technique above (ensuring the thumbs are kept together) then it was most likely an illegal throw.

Hope that helps mate.

Crowdie.

[Keep]

The way I call it as a ref and the way I instruct players as a coach (even if I am just a 'measly' goalkeeper coach ;-) ) is that if one arm leads in the throw so that one arm provides more impetus to the ball, it'll get called. Will I give a bit of leeway if it's a borderline throw? Sure. I'll probably get myself as close to the player as I can within the minute or so after the throw and just tell them to watch their throws, they're getting close to sidearming it, or something of that like. If the player continues to sidearm the ball, I'll call it.

I wonder if some coaches are teaching their players to throw-in this way; we got a transfer player (high school level) from missouri this year that is a very skilled player, but about 3/4 of her throw-ins are this very hard, almost sidearm technique. Maybe it's just a little quirk this single player has picked up, though. ::shrug::

[stevieb]

I know this question came up almost a month ago but it's not clear that all of his questions were answered. One place to look for additional clarification on questions like this is the AtR.

First, there has been no change in the TI requirements in either FIFA LOTG or NCAA/NISOA so the coaches are blowing smoke. It is a requirement that the ball come from over the head so the side-of-the-head TI would be illegal.

15.3 PROPERLY TAKEN THROW-IN
A throw-in must be performed while the thrower is facing the field, but the ball may be thrown into
the field in any direction. Law 15 states that the thrower "delivers the ball from behind and over his
head." This phrase does not mean that the ball must leave the hands from an overhead position. A
natural throwing movement starting from behind and over the head will usually result in the ball
leaving the hands when they are in front of the vertical plane of the body. The throwing movement
must be continued to the point of release. A throw-in directed straight downward (often referred to as
a "spike") is therefore not correctly performed and may result in the restart being awarded to the
opposing team. There is no requirement in Law 15 prohibiting spin or rotational movement. Referees
must judge the correctness of the throw-in solely on the basis of Law 15.

15.5 TRIFLING INFRINGEMENTS OF LAW 15
Referees are reminded that the primary function of the throw-in is to put the ball back into play as
quickly as possible. At competitive levels of play, therefore, apparent technical infringements of Law
15 should often be deemed trifling or doubtful so long as an advantage is not obtained by the team
performing the throw-in and the restart occurs with little or no delay.

15.5 is also important to note in that a TI that looks ugly and in fact may be considered illegal may not justify having the TI retaken by the opponents. I don't know what age/level of soccer you play but when I ref the higher levels I seldom spend time watching the throw. Why? Because the players at that level don't generally make the kindo of mistakes which warrant the attention. I'd rather be watching where the ball lands and deal with possible fouls there.

[Keep]

Originally posted by stevieb
I don't know what age/level of soccer you play but when I ref the higher levels I seldom spend time watching the throw. Why? Because the players at that level don't generally make the kindo of mistakes which warrant the attention. I'd rather be watching where the ball lands and deal with possible fouls there.

Agreed 100%

[rcleopard]

I'll come right out and say it.

I think the throw-in police method of refereeing in youth leagues this day and age are trifling. I think it's a waste of time to flip flop throw ins because it wasn't done percisely perfectly. I watched a game once where the throw in went back and forth FOUR TIMES EACH. That's sick.

Look, we're refs. We know better. If a kid's not doing it perfectly by the book and one hand leads by a very small margin (say, an inch or less) then we shouldn't call it. If the right plant foot lifts up a little and we're not certain if it left the ground, we shouldn't call it. If he's not exactly one yard or less from where the ball went out, we shouldn't call it. If he's not perfectly still (some leagues have that rule where you must be planted and cannot lean back or forward) .. etc. Some refs, I swear, just like to hear their whistles. I know the LOTG say one thing.. but these are kids. Spending six minutes on a restart is criminal, and IMHO against the spirit of the game.

I don't mind calling the blatantly obvious illegal throwins.. but even when I was a player in youth leagues up to now, it sickens me to watch a good game get slowed down by something so menial as a restart.


Redcard Leopard

[Gary V]

Originally posted by rcleopard
I think the throw-in police method of refereeing in youth leagues this day and age are trifling. I think it's a waste of time to flip flop throw ins because it wasn't done percisely perfectly. I watched a game once where the throw in went back and forth FOUR TIMES EACH. That's sick.
In our u6 and u8 divisions, we allow a retake of a bad throw. While there's nothing that directly says the same player has to take the rethrow, I have the same kid do it to be able to learn.

I've found there's two types of bad throws in the u-littles. One is the kid that just doesn't know how to take a proper throw-in. They jump a foot off the ground, throw it side-arm, I've even seen a kid do a basketball-type push pass. When the play is called back and players are given another chance, they can be told how to do a correct throw. ("It has to be over your head" or "Keep your feet on the ground.")

The other type of bad throw is the kid that knows how to do it correctly, but in the excitement of the game or in zeal to get an extra-long throw, forgets the mechanics.

We don't have that many second throws that are still bad. In u6 we let play go on anyway; in u8 the ball is turned over to the other team.

At the older ages I tend to favor the "trifling" argument. That can get you some comments from the crowd - "Bad throw, ref!" Just like everyone knows what a "handball" is, everyone knows the mechanics of a throw-in, or at least they think they do. OK, maybe his trail foot came up 1" off the ground. Maybe when she decided to change directions the ball didn't go directly over her head. But did it really matter? Also, there can be some pretty ugly looking throws that are perfectly legal.

[uniteo]

Originally posted by rcleopard
I'll come right out and say it.

I think the throw-in police method of refereeing in youth leagues this day and age are trifling. I think it's a waste of time to flip flop throw ins because it wasn't done percisely perfectly.

As a coach, I've got to say that it seems that too much energy is spent on policing the throw in.

Especially given that...

Originally posted by nsa

- faces the field of play
- has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside of the touch line
- uses both hands
- delivers the ball from behind and over his head

I guarantee if a player of mine throws the ball in with without shoulders being square to wherever they throw, or with one hand leading the other it is called as a foul throw.

And if I'm reading correctly...there is no basis for calling a foul throw in those case so long as the ball goes behind the head and both hands are used.

But I also read people admitting that they'll call it illegal and have to ask why? And why is that attitude so prevalent among refs?

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by uniteo
I guarantee if a player of mine throws the ball in with without shoulders being square to wherever they throw, or with one hand leading the other it is called as a foul throw.

And if I'm reading correctly...there is no basis for calling a foul throw in those case so long as the ball goes behind the head and both hands are used.

Soccer is a game with a huge history and some of the rules have been passed down from generation to generation. Some of the rules come from combining several other rules. This is what makes refereeing soccer so much fun. To take a throw in with a leading hand is illegal as it is against the spirit of the game.

Originally posted by uniteo
But I also read people admitting that they'll call it illegal and have to ask why? And why is that attitude so prevalent among refs?

I find that I enforce the throw in rules stricter for competitive leagues and less for social leagues. In social leagues the objective is to keep the game flowing and making sure everybody has fun. In the competitive leagues players expect foul throws to be called. They know the rules.

Crowdie.

[rcleopard]

See, I disagree. The spirit of the game?

The purpose of throw in is to restart play.

The procedure is:

* facing the field of play
* has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside the touch line
* uses both hands.
* delivers the ball from behind and over his head

The spirit of the game behind this law is to restart play after the ball has crossed either touch line. There's nothing about leading or trailing hands , or equal force, or such behind this law. Any call for any reason outside of the four procedural methods is trifling. You have impeded the restart of play because of a reason not listed in the LOTG or an IFB decision. THAT is against the spirit of the game.

Redcard Leopard

[Alberto]

Originally posted by Crowdie
Soccer is a game with a huge history and some of the rules have been passed down from generation to generation. Some of the rules come from combining several other rules. This is what makes refereeing soccer so much fun. To take a throw in with a leading hand is illegal as it is against the spirit of the game.



I find that I enforce the throw in rules stricter for competitive leagues and less for social leagues. In social leagues the objective is to keep the game flowing and making sure everybody has fun. In the competitive leagues players expect foul throws to be called. They know the rules.

Crowdie.

In professional leagues you will find a great deal of latitude given to throw-ins. It really has to be a clunker of a bad throw to be called. The whole essence and beauty of the game surrounds it's flow. It is extremely important for players regardless of their age. Games with good flow are what I strive and hope for whether U14 or men's.

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by rcleopard
See, I disagree. The spirit of the game?

The purpose of throw in is to restart play.

The procedure is:

* facing the field of play
* has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside the touch line
* uses both hands.
* delivers the ball from behind and over his head

The spirit of the game behind this law is to restart play after the ball has crossed either touch line. There's nothing about leading or trailing hands , or equal force, or such behind this law. Any call for any reason outside of the four procedural methods is trifling. You have impeded the restart of play because of a reason not listed in the LOTG or an IFB decision. THAT is against the spirit of the game.

Redcard Leopard

Probably the best way to explain this is to give you another example:

An attacking player (A1) mistimes his run and ends up in an offside position. The attacking player with the ball (A2) passes the ball (A1 is still in an offside position) and it is intercepted by a defending player (D1) who is immediately tackled from behind by A1. A1 then runs on to score a goal. Should this goal stand or be disallowed?

Crowdie.

[rcleopard]

*blinks*

I do not get the analogy. Fifa's watchword of late has been "flow." A CR waving down an offside that didn't happen is way different than a referee blatantly disregarding the LOTG because of some outdated customs/rules.

This example more proved the point, that flow of game is more important than trifling infractions, then disproves it.

RC

[Crowdie]

Just humour me on this one mate.

Crowdie.

PS. This has nothing to do with the Ruud incident against Boltan if that is what you are hinting at.

[rcleopard]

Humour you. Kay :)

The offsides should be waved down as it never materialized. The advantage should be played on the tackle from behind, and quite possibly, depending on the severity/danger of the tackle, a red card should be issued after the play is stopped. The goal stands.

*grins* At least, in my world, the goal stands :)

Redcard

[Crowdie]

Originally posted by rcleopard
Humour you. Kay :)

The offsides should be waved down as it never materialized. The advantage should be played on the tackle from behind, and quite possibly, depending on the severity/danger of the tackle, a red card should be issued after the play is stopped. The goal stands.

*grins* At least, in my world, the goal stands :)

Redcard

Assume the tackle is legal (ie no contact is made is made with the defending player). How would you call it now?

Crowdie.

[kevbrunton]

Originally posted by Crowdie
Probably the best way to explain this is to give you another example:

An attacking player (A1) mistimes his run and ends up in an offside position. The attacking player with the ball (A2) passes the ball (A1 is still in an offside position) and it is intercepted by a defending player (D1) who is immediately tackled from behind by A1. A1 then runs on to score a goal. Should this goal stand or be disallowed?

Crowdie.

To me, this is not a goal. As the AR, when A2 makes the pass, I see A1 in an offside position. When D1 receives it, I wait. But as soon as A1 jumps into the play (by tackling D1 from behind), I pop the flag.

The only way this goal stands is if A1 does NOT immediately get involved -- i.e., stands their for a bit while D1 has possession and is looking around for options. Then A1 jumps him from behind and takes the ball and scores -- good goal in that case.

It's a matter of timing -- is A1's involvement part of the initial play or a separate play.

Once clarificiation about my answer -- I am assuming that when you say "tackles from behind" that it is a legal / clean tackle -- that is we are only talking about the offside situation, not a potential foul.