PK in extended time...

[Wreave]

Hey guys, on the NC soccer board someone posed an interesting question that I thought you might want to take a shot at. It's a hypothetical, but seems quite possible for a real game:

A foul is committed by the defense in the PA in the closing seconds of a tie game. The referee points to the spot and announces that the PK is being taken in extended time. He also reminds both teams that after the kick is taken, the only player that may touch the ball is the keeper, and that after the kick is finished, the game is over.

The kicker takes the kick, which is deflected by the keeper up into the air. At the taking of the kick, the keeper was on his line, and all other players remained outside the PA/behind the ball until the ball was kicked – that is, all the requirements for a legal kick appear to have been satisfied, and the only question is whether or not the ball will enter the goal. However, the keeper loses the ball in the sun, and it bounces off his back towards the goal. By all appearances it will enter the goal, however, a defender who rushed in after the kick performs a goal-line clearance.

What is your call?
-Game over/Retake PK/other restart?

Just to set a baseline, ATR 14.8 says: PKs, once awarded, are taken regardless of the amount of time remaining in the half. If time expires or will expire before the restart can occur, the referee should announce this fact and indicate clearly that the PK is being taken "in extended time". No player other than the goalkeeper can can participate in play after the penalty kick is taken. All players must remain on the field until the PK has been completed. The referee has no authority to make players leave the field or the vicinity of the PA for the taking of a PK in extended time.

I have an opinion, but rather than start the thread with discussion of my answer (which I am not even remotely sure of), the floor is open for all comers...

[Ref Flunkie]

I have an opinion, but rather than start the thread with discussion of my answer (which I am not even remotely sure of), the floor is open for all comers...

My opinion:

1. You can not retake it, as the kick was taken properly with all participants remaining outside of the area.

2. I would say the game is over. IMO, if the ball does not enter the goal before a point where an attacker or defender could reach the ball, then it is beyond the normal "PK phase" and has progressed back into normal play. Since we are extending time only in order for the "PK phase" to complete, I would say the game is over.

[Wreave]

IMO, if the ball does not enter the goal before a point where an attacker or defender could reach the ball, then it is beyond the normal "PK phase" and has progressed back into normal play. Since we are extending time only in order for the "PK phase" to complete, I would say the game is over.

I quoted the ATR but should add LOTG as well:

When a penalty kick is taken during the normal course of play, or time has been extended at half-time or full time to allow a penalty kick to be taken or retaken, a goal is awarded if, before passing between the goalposts and under the crossbar:
• the ball touches either or both of the goalposts and/or the crossbar, and/or the goalkeeper

In my example, the ball would clearly have entered the goal, but for the illegal interference by the defender. Would you have disallowed the goal had the defender not have interfered?

[PVancouver]

This seems to be another case of inventive refereeing to me.

Why does there need to be a special rule for PKs in added time?

The referee should be allowed to decide when the PK is over as always.

Kicks from the penalty mark are similar to this case but are not part of Law 14.

It is silly to not allow a PK to be played out normally while every other free kick in added time is.

Defenders should be allowed to defend a PK as always and attackers attack. Time should be called when the immediate threat to goal has ended.

Or perhaps the ATR should say that a corner kick can be taken with no time left but only the goalkeeper can play it?

[Ref Flunkie]

This seems to be another case of inventive refereeing to me.

Why does there need to be a special rule for PKs in added time?

The referee should be allowed to decide when the PK is over as always.

Kicks from the penalty mark are similar to this case but are not part of Law 14.

It is silly to not allow a PK to be played out normally while every other free kick in added time is.

Defenders should be allowed to defend a PK as always and attackers attack. Time should be called when the immediate threat to goal has ended.

Or perhaps the ATR should say that a corner kick can be taken with no time left but only the goalkeeper can play it?

I tend to agree with this. There really is no set determination for when a PK is "over", so why not just let the referee decide how it plays out? Any referee worth his salt would not blow his whistle to end the match after he makes a PK call but before the kick is taken, so why is it written into the ATR/LOTG (other then to prevent coaches from saying "Stoppage time is up!" while a PK is occurring)?

As to your question Wreave, I would have to judge the situation while seeing it. In theory, a GK could punch a ball out as a save and if no one else touches it, the wind could blow it back into the goal in 5 minutes....do we need to wait that long? I understand this is a far fetched example, but you get my point of how long does one wait for a ball to potentially make it into the goal? The only other option I can see you having in this particular case is to caution the defender for USB, but as you extended time for just the PK, you can't really give the attacking team the IDFK, so really, I can't see any possible way, within the laws as they are written, that you could either give the goal or retake the kick.

[Gary V]

This seems to be another case of inventive refereeing to me.Huh? Inventive refereeing, when it clearly states the procedure in the Laws and Advice? Since when is following the correct procedure "inventive"?

Why does there need to be a special rule for PKs in added time?Because it's not in added time. The game is over. Time is being extended to facilitate the taking of the penalty kick.

Back on track ...
What is your call?
-Game over/Retake PK/other restart?
I can see no remedy except to caution the defender for Unsporting Behavior and do a retake of the PK. And I'd really like to send him off for DOGSO, but I can't say that his actions will be punished by a free kick.

[NHRef]

PV the problem with you scenario is that the game is over when the CR says it is, in other words, time has expired. However we also know that the LOTG allow a PK to be taken after time has expired. So your "inventive" solution is outside the LOTG, either time has expired or it hasn't.

In your CK example, if you allow the CK to happen you are saying that time has not expired. There is/was (haven't seen this years) a question on the Grade 7/8 exam about "time expires when the ball is in the air from a CK, what should you do" Now by the book the answer is "game over", while we all would probably use our ability to add time to allow the kick to continue until the threat is over, as PV suggests.

The PK was never taken to completion, the PK is "in progress" until the ball can no longer get into the net. Therefore, in this scenario, the PK has NOT been successfully taken, re-take the kick after carding or dealing with, the defender.

Now, what are we carding for? UB? Possible he brought the game into disrepute. DGF/DGH depending what he did? Possible, but don't these imply the ball was in play?

I am very interested to see how this works out AND what some of our higher ranking and educated refs have to say????

[Ref Flunkie]

The PK was never taken to completion, the PK is "in progress" until the ball can no longer get into the net. Therefore, in this scenario, the PK has NOT been successfully taken, re-take the kick after carding or dealing with, the defender.

Ok I can buy this one (eeehhh maybe not, still thinking), but I still question how long we want until we consider the kick to be completed. Tell me this then. Why do the LOTG/ATR simply not say that we move all players that are on the field to the midfield circle, a la kicks? I find it a bit odd that in one breath we are saying that a player can not play a ball that, in reality, he has every right to play but in the next breath, we won't take on the responsibility (we as in the royal we of soccer) and simply say that in this particular case, we move everyone to midfield to prevent this from happening? If you are going to make a special procedure for a PK after full time, then do it completely and not half-butted.

[NHRef]

Ok I can buy this one (eeehhh maybe not, still thinking), but I still question how long we want until we consider the kick to be completed. Tell me this then. Why do the LOTG/ATR simply not say that we move all players that are on the field to the midfield circle, a la kicks? I find it a bit odd that in one breath we are saying that a player can not play a ball that, in reality, he has every right to play but in the next breath, we won't take on the responsibility (we as in the royal we of soccer) and simply say that in this particular case, we move everyone to midfield to prevent this from happening? If you are going to make a special procedure for a PK after full time, then do it completely and not half-butted.

Can't answer that last part, honestly my gut said "put all players away from the PA for this, then someone quoted the ATR/LOTG above that said we don't have this right. Hmmmm.....

[MassachusettsRef]

Gary, please take this as a compliment when I say that I didn't expect to see this response from you.

On the one hand, I do think you're absolutely correct that it's not "inventive refereeing" when you follow the Laws and instructions. I also find it ironic that PVancouver seems to be complaining when something very detailed like this is actually spelled out with documentation.

That being said, as to your conclusion...

I can see no remedy except to caution the defender for Unsporting Behavior and do a retake of the PK. Really? Let's say, for the moment, that it is a form of unsporting behavior (I do NOT agree, but I'll stipulate for the sake of this counterargument):

Under what provision of Law XIV are you ordering a retake?

And I'd really like to send him off for DOGSO, but I can't say that his actions will be punished by a free kick.I'm glad you decide there's no chance for DOGSO, but it concerns me that you want to send him off! It's a last second chance (if it matters this much, we're presuming a tied or one goal game, right?) and a defender is trying to clear the ball out during what is, for all intents and purposes, dynamic play.

Look, there are two simple common sense solutions to this. One is prohibited by the ATR, the other isn't:

The first is to not allow anyone near the PA (or even order them off the field). Since technically nobody can play the ball other than the kicker and goalkeeper, this makes some sense. But it is prohibited by the ATR so it's not an option.

The second possibility is to just never announce that time is being extended for a PK in the first place. What in the world are you EVER gaining by making such an announcement? If you added a minute and you call a PK at 91:30, set the ball, allow the kick and end the game either with a goal kick, corner kick, cleared ball, or right after the kickoff. So you end the game at 92:30 instead of 92:15 or 92:00. Big deal. You avoid the "what if" scenarioes like this where, because of the way the Laws and ATR are written, you have referees contemplating giving out cautions for defenders clearing the ball off the line with their feet.

This happened to me once at regionals. 1-0 game in the second extra time. There had been long injuries and timewasting and I announced to my fourth official that I would put 3 minutes on. At 1:22.45 there was an OBVIOUS penalty (believe me, despite the circumstances there were no protests). Should I have announced that that was going to be the last kick of the game? Possibly. But I couldn't think of anything I'd gain. Instead I did the kick normally, the goal was scored, I set up for the kickoff and blew the whistle. Probably at 1:24.15 or so. No harm, no foul.

[PVancouver]

Huh? Inventive refereeing, when it clearly states the procedure in the Laws and Advice? Since when is following the correct procedure "inventive"?

Where is this in the Laws?

Because it's not in added time. The game is over. Time is being extended to facilitate the taking of the penalty kick.

I figured someone would say this.

Look. The foul ostensibly occurs before time expires. Theoretically, the amount of time needed to take a PK is minimal. The ball needs to be placed on the spot. The offense needs to get outside the penalty area and behind the ball, except for a kicker. The goalkeeper has to have enough time to get to his goal line. There is usually no need for this to take more than a few seconds. Certainly, if there was a threat that time might be called by the referee, the attacking team would generally move very quickly. All of the rest is artificial delay, for which time should be added. Usually, a penalty kick is awarded when a defending team is under significant pressure from the attackers. Few referees would call a game in the middle of a dangerous attack by one team or another, even if, under other circumstances, they would call the game. So why isn't a PK given the same extension normal attacking play would be? It doesn't make any sense to me.

In the NCAA college game, play is controlled by a public clock, so penalty kick timing must be more restrained:

If a penalty kick is taken after the expiration of time, only the kicker and the goalkeeper may play the ball.

A.R. 179. A penalty kick has been awarded at the close of a period without any time remaining. When shall the period end? RULING: The extension shall last until the moment the kick has been completed, which is when one of the following occurs: (1) The moment the whole of the ball crosses the goal line; (2) The ball deflects into the goal from the cross bar and/or goal post(s); (3) The ball touches the goalkeeper and enters the goal; (4) The ball clearly is saved by the goalkeeper; (5) The ball passes over the goal line outside the goal post(s); or (6) The movement of the ball has ceased.

A.R. 180. When shall a penalty kick that has been awarded at the close of a period without any time remaining be retaken? RULING: (1) When the ball is stopped by an outside agent; (2) If a defending player encroaches and a goal is not scored; or (3) If a goal is scored after encroachment by a teammate.

I'm not sure what "(4) The ball clearly is saved by the goalkeeper;" means. If the goalkeeper deflects the ball so that it is no longer heading toward goal, is this "clearly saved"?

The NCAA seem to be in a predicament. Only the kicker and the goalkeeper may play the ball, but none of the six reasons given for the penalty kick being over include another player touching the ball, and there does not appear to be a penalty for playing the ball. It is also not clear if the kicker can play the ball after it has been touched (but not saved) by the goalkeeper. If I had to guess, I would say no, but technically, no rule appears to be broken.

[MassachusettsRef]

What is your call?
-Game over/Retake PK/other restart?As I say above, I take the fourth option. Never announce that you're extending time for the PK to begin with.

[PVancouver]

PV the problem with you scenario is that the game is over when the CR says it is, in other words, time has expired. However we also know that the LOTG allow a PK to be taken after time has expired. So your "inventive" solution is outside the LOTG, either time has expired or it hasn't.

Actually, the Law says:

"Additional time is allowed for a penalty kick to be taken at the end of each half or at the end of periods of extra time."

It does not say:

"If time expires after a penalty kick is awarded, the penalty kick is allowed to be taken with the following restrictions..."

[code1390]

Maybe you should send it to ask a soccer referee and see what Jim Allen has to say about it.

[Wreave]

It's not an easy question. You'd like to move the players away, but the ATR says you can't. You'd like to do DOGSO, but it's not an offense punishable by an FK or PK. You'd like to do a retake, but the kick appears to have been taken properly.

Flunkie, your 5 minute scenario is obviously not even close to realistic. In the case I stated, the ball was deflected up, came back down, and bounced off the keeper's back toward the goal. It's a matter of a couple of seconds, max, since the ball was kicked. Would you have called time/end of game before the ball entered the goal, if not for the defender's interference?

That's actually kind of a key question to the issue. Should the PK be ended when the ball is deflected up? I would suggest that the PK is still active at this point, and that if the ball deflects off the keeper's back and enters the goal, the goal should stand. If you believe the goal should not stand, then that's an obviously different answer... but I too wait for some of the more experienced folks to weigh in.

[Nesto]

It's not an easy question. You'd like to move the players away, but the ATR says you can't. You'd like to do DOGSO, but it's not an offense punishable by an FK or PK. You'd like to do a retake, but the kick appears to have been taken properly.

Flunkie, your 5 minute scenario is obviously not even close to realistic. In the case I stated, the ball was deflected up, came back down, and bounced off the keeper's back toward the goal. It's a matter of a couple of seconds, max, since the ball was kicked. Would you have called time/end of game before the ball entered the goal, if not for the defender's interference?

That's actually kind of a key question to the issue. Should the PK be ended when the ball is deflected up? I would suggest that the PK is still active at this point, and that if the ball deflects off the keeper's back and enters the goal, the goal should stand. If you believe the goal should not stand, then that's an obviously different answer... but I too wait for some of the more experienced folks to weigh in.

Your corrolary scenario was answered by Jim:
http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/?p=79

Ball is live - goal is good.

[Nesto]

As I say above, I take the fourth option. Never announce that you're extending time for the PK to begin with.

Ahhh... the Kobayashi Maru response. :D

[DadOf6]

Only the 'keeper can participate in the kick. The kick lasts from the time the ball is struck until the referee stops it.

The ATR says that violations of Law 14 occur between the time the referee blows his whistle and the ball is struck (exception: second touch by kicker), so there technically the defender did not infringe Law 14.

But wait! It gets better. ATR.14.9 says that "All restrictions on player positioning and movement imposed by Law 14 end when the ball is properly put into play."

The ATR contradicts itself because ATR.14.8 restricts a player from positioning himself and moving so that he plays the ball if the PK is taken in extended time.

Law 14 does not say that players cannot participate in a PK if time is extended. It is not in the Additional Instructions. For what it's worth. The LOTG do not carve out a big difference between added time and extended time. In fact, Law 14 states "Additional time is allowed for a penalty kick to be taken at the end [of a period]"

At first read I leaned toward a caution for USB and a retake, but after having read the LOTG, Additional Instructions, and the ATR I would now probably just end the game.

Nothing the ref can do is right because the ATR contradicts itself. Whichever way the ref decides one team will have a legitimate gripe. If a team wants to protest I would not be offended. I might even be glad for the chance to get it clarified.

[Fweebles]

As I say above, I take the fourth option. Never announce that you're extending time for the PK to begin with.

So when the PK is hammered off the goalkeeper's gloves and the PK-taker puts the rebound right into the back of the net, it's a good goal, even though we've actually extended time for the PK and the PK is very definitely now over?

I mean...I think that we shouldn't penalize the defender for playing the ball as there's nothing that says he can't, but I think players from both sides should know that as soon as anyone besides the keeper touches the ball, the PK is over and thus play is dead.

So in the original scenario, I guess my answer is "whistle the play dead, the game is over, since the PK is over once another player has touched the ball."

[DadOf6]

The second possibility is to just never announce that time is being extended for a PK in the first place.

I think this is best.