goal kick or handling

[rippingood]

The following situation occurred in a U14B match today. It dealt with an AR decision. Attacking team plays ball far forward but the attacking forwards do not give chase as it appears that it is going to be picked up by the GK or going beyond the goal line in the penalty area but not in the goal. As the ball is going over the goal line, the goalkeeper picks it up. He tosses the ball forward to a defender – he takes the goal kicks for that team–who picks up the ball in the PA to place it in the goal area. The opponents are moving in response to a goal kick as well. Now, consider that the AR hustled back and was on the goal line when the ball approached it. The AR observes that the GK picked up the ball while it was on the goal line.

First, play the part of AR. Do you signal the foul of handling by the kick-taking defender (resulting in a PK for the opponents) or do you take up position for a goal kick.

Second, play the part as the referee. You see the AR signal for a foul in the PA and gain the information included above. Do you continue with a GK or a PK?

In either case, what is your justification?

[boylanj64]

You give the PK, or, if feeling kindly, blow your whistle, declare it inadvertent, and restart with a drop ball to the GK. It is the goalkeeper's fault for assuming, and not knowing the rule; the situation is identical to a handball for picking up a ball on the line. For USSF's opinion on the matter, see this quote from "Ask A Soccer Referee:"

"'The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players.' The referee should either drive this point home to the goalkeeper by calling deliberate handling or, if feeling kindly at that time and perhaps a bit embarrassed, the referee could whistle to stop play, declare that the whistle was inadvertent, and restart with a dropped ball.

( http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/?p=788 )

[rippingood]

might as well include the entire quote:

USSF answer (November 12, 2008):
The principal error here was the mistake was made by the player — taking the assistant referee’s signal as an indication that play has stopped (particularly given the “U 17 higher level” of the competition). We can apply these ancient words of wisdom to the situation: “The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players.” The referee should either drive this point home to the goalkeeper by calling deliberate handling or, if feeling kindly at that time and perhaps a bit embarrassed, the referee could whistle to stop play, declare that the whistle was inadvertent, and restart with a dropped ball (because of the stoppage with no accompanying infringement or, as in this case, a trifling violation.

In that case, the real issue is that the GK followed the AR signal.

Another Jim Allen gem that may be used to shed light on this is the following:

*********************************
Recognizing your answer on this question from the archives (Oct. 12, 2007), I have always considered the goalkeeper perhaps carrying the ball a tad too long in his hands before punting as committing a doubtful or trifling offense (after all, what difference is 1 foot or so on a kick of perhaps 40 yards?).

...

My question therefore is two-fold –

1. Am I indeed correct that this offense can be doubtful and/or trifling, even at “a whole yard,” when absolutely nobody on the field except the AR even notices?
2. If I am correct, do you have any advice for how the wise referee can recover some sense of credibility with the players after such a call is made? Having been burned twice, I want to be really ready next time.

USSF answer (October 20, 2008):
Answer 1: While recognizing that the offense by the goalkeeper of crossing the penalty area line with the ball still in hand is never doubtful, but often trifling, we must also recognize that it is certainly an infringement of the Law and must always be treated as such. The referee will usually allow the first such act to go unpunished, but must then clearly warn the goalkeeper to observe and honor the line and the Law. If it occurs again, the referee should call the foul and no later than the third offense caution the goalkeeper for persistent infringement of the Laws of the Game.

************
So, in this case where the AR is the only one who notices and it has no impact otherwise, the advice is to recognize it as an infringement and treat it as such... which means, according to USSF, that the first instance should go unpunished with merely a warning.

Finally, keep in mind that the keeper hasn't violated any LOTG. It is the defender who touches the ball. If the keeper were the one taking the kicks, no one would be any the wiser. While there would not be a goal kick signal from the AR or center, the opponents are treating it as a goal kick, the keeper carries the ball and sets it down in the goal area, steps back and kicks it. Carry on...

[boylanj64]

I get what you are saying, and in practice I would like to treat it as a "trifling" offense, so I suppose it has to depend more upon the context. Reading the quote, it appears the ball was going out of bounds, so the keepers picking it up on the line really has no impact; I'd agree with you that any action, especially a PK, would be overreacting to a trifling matter. However, I have also had situations where, either as an AR or CR, the ball stops on the line; it is not going out on its own, and the players picking up the ball in this situation is clearly a FK infringement; in order to be consistent in the box, a ball stopping on the goal-line and then handled must be a PK.

In summation, I'd say the nature of the reaction depends upon whether the ball will continue out of play regardless, or is clearly stopping on the line.

[rippingood]

OK - so as AR you go along with a GK?
As referee, AR signals, you go over for a chat, hear his decision that he flagged for handling on the goal-kick taking defender, what do you do? You have a dead ball so have the luxury of going for goal kick or going for PK.

[Wahoos1]

Anyone in soccer knows that a team would rather have a goalie kick from the 18 than a goal kick from the 6. The keeps decision in no way benefits the team by taking a harder kick 12 yards back.

As an AR, this would go to trifling and I would let the goal kick be taken and then once the ball was a way, would mention to the keep to be careful and why.

As a CR, I would have told my AR's no trifling PKs, they need to be earned by the defense clearly doing something to stop an attack. This would not reach that bar and so they better keep that flag from going into both hands level at waist and call me over to discuss it first. Then I tell them good call, let the keeper know the break you gave him after the goal kick.

[Sport Billy]

Goal Kick - this is exactly why some people hate officials.

There was no challenge on this ball.
Keeper just trying to keep the game moving.

Goal kick and move on.

To be over technical will:
1. Have a major influence on the game.
2. Destroy any relationship/respect the officials have with the players.
3. Create unneeded tension between the teams.

If the ball was being challenged, it would be completely different. But, since there was no challenge, it's trifling at best.


And seeing it's U-14, walk up before the goal kick and say "keeper, next time let the ball completely leave the field of play before picking it up."

You'll gain a huge amount of respect from the player.

[Alberto]

Goal Kick - this is exactly why some people hate officials.

There was no challenge on this ball.
Keeper just trying to keep the game moving.

Goal kick and move on.

To be over technical will:
1. Have a major influence on the game.
2. Destroy any relationship/respect the officials have with the players.
3. Create unneeded tension between the teams.

If the ball was being challenged, it would be completely different. But, since there was no challenge, it's trifling at best.


And seeing it's U-14, walk up before the goal kick and say "keeper, next time let the ball completely leave the field of play before picking it up."

You'll gain a huge amount of respect from the player.

Agreed. If the keeper is "under no pressure" it's trifling and to award a PK for this is not fair to the players or the spirit of the game. Your comment to advise the keeper to be mindful of the ball in or over the goal line is all that is called for.

[intechpc]

As and AR, I deem it trifling and probably mention to the goal keeper after the goal kick is taken that he has to make sure he lets the ball get all the way out before he picks it up. Calling this and giving a PK is not going to help you with game management in any game. Use your verbals and give them a warning the first time, if it happens again, flag it.

As referee, if the AR flagged for the handling offense I'd probably be going to him/her to find out what was going on since from the description I'm not sure I'd realize that the ball hadn't gone out either. From there it's really easy to still go with the goal kick.

I'm sitting here thinking about this and i can't come up with a single reason for giving the PK in the situation as described above.

[dadman]

An excellent conversation. Thank you to all the contributors. (Take this in the place of individual reppage, though I did get the thread-starter. ;) )

[IASocFan]

Agree, excellent discussion.

A PK would definitely be GOTCHA refereeing.

It does remind me of a call I had many years ago. I'm the center in a U16 boys game on a wet field with numerous puddles on the field. The ball goes bouncing to the keeper, but hits a puddle and stops a few feet just short of the PA. The Keeper, realizing that it's not going to continue to the PA picks it up, backs up, and punts upfield. I started to turn and follow the flight of the ball and notice my ARs flag. I had assumed he fielded in the PA and all was kosher. My AR, doing his job and popped his flag, so we restarted with a FK just outside the PA.

I think in this situation it was the "right" call.

[OldAndNew]

I'm sitting here thinking about this and i can't come up with a single reason for giving the PK in the situation as described above.

That's easy:

The single reason to give a PK is Law 12

The single reason to NOT give a PK, but to give a GK (or a DB) is Law 18!
18 > 12 so 18 wins out! :D

I agree with both Moderators - for the reasons they (and others) have given. No harm done by the premature pick-up. Remind AR (of that part of your pre-game talk) about NOT flagging trifling things - especially by defense in their PA. Find an opportune (and discreet) time to let GK know that 'out is not out, until it is all out'! ;)

[rippingood]

thanks all for the responses. Alas, most of the gang at our 'ref tent' thought otherwise. Their consensus was PK. I'm glad this forum is here for my 'reality' check as I thought - no way, go with the GK. I even brought up the idea of 'gotcha' refereeing. I didn't think of the logical issue of punt vs GK as a benefit for the keeper's team but I like that as well.

Now for the 'rest of the story'. No embellishments, etc.

The score was tied 2-2 in a playoff match. This event happened with less than 2 min remaining in the match (may have been even less depending on who was relaying the story). If match ends tied in regulation, it's straight to KFTPM.

The PK was given and converted so the match ended 3-2. Technically correct perhaps but - yuck!

[refmedic]

The only reason for awarding a PK for this, IMO, is that it is technically the correct decision. In that situation, with the score and the time in the match, taking all of that into consideration, I would have let the GK proceed as well, especially if no one from the opposing team even noticed. Hopefully, depending on the situation that you're in, such as an assessment or a really top level match that might be on TV, the AR putting his flag up doesn't stick you with the PK. The teams may not know the difference, but the referee administration and/or the assessor will. From the description of the incident, the handling wasn't doubtful, and if the opposing team knew what happened, they certainly wouldn't think it was trifling. You couldn't even apply advantage, because the team against which the offense occurred would be gaining an advantage by not whistling for handling. That being said, it's not in the spirit of the game, IMO, to take a tied match in the waning moments and make that decision. THe GK wasn't trying to cheat, it sounds like he made an honest mistake.

[Rufusabc]

Absolutely horrible decision. I don't care if you have a tent ful of anal refs who think the right call was made. That is about the single cheapest way a team can win a game. Jim Allen's comments are always about if a rule is broken the punishment is x, but there is always a caveat thrown in. I think if I was coaching that team in that situation where a referee nailed players for an UNCHALLENGED ball going out for a GK and it got turned into a penalty, I don't think I would have gotten off the playing field without being thrown out. Sorry, guys, I've watched too many gotcha refs this past weekend at a tournament, and saw guys who didn't move out of the center circle, and mismatched uniforms, and one AR starting the match while the other got warmer clothes on, and so on and so on. I'm just a tad upset at our profession from this past weekend.

IF YOU TAKE THE MONEY DO A PROFESSIONAL JOB!

Rufe

[boylanj64]

I think the central point running through is the charachter of the offense; so what if he picked it up a second early, as long as it was going out early. I hope we can all agree the call is not "gotcha" refereeing if the keeper is under pressure, however.

[rippingood]

IF YOU TAKE THE MONEY DO A PROFESSIONAL JOB!

Rufe

Well - this is AYSO so I suppose we get what we pay for. With that said, the call was made by someone who was not a beginner, so there remains some gentle education to be done.

This year, I'm working on my colleagues at the lower badge levels to let go of the necessity to call the keeper for handling when / if he has the ball just over the line before the punt. This is one I 'always' remind my ARs about but I can tell a few are a bit uneasy with simply giving a warning or perhaps they also remember the referee who made that call against their kid's team at some tournament in Ranco Cucamonga three years ago so now it is their turn for vengeance (I guess, I don't have a more logical explanation).

[Sport Billy]

Now for the 'rest of the story'. No embellishments, etc.

The score was tied 2-2 in a playoff match. This event happened with less than 2 min remaining in the match (may have been even less depending on who was relaying the story). If match ends tied in regulation, it's straight to KFTPM.

The PK was given and converted so the match ended 3-2. Technically correct perhaps but - yuck!


Some one just got homered. ;)

[NHRef]

Jim Allen was the instructor at an advanced clinic over the winter here in NH. One thing he continued to go back to is "don't create problems for yourself". This is a great example. EVERYONE involved was ok with a goal kick and its trifling, would have gone out etc. By overrulling everyone involved, players, fans, coaches, for a trifling infringement, you are creating a problem.

Why do that to yourself?

[rippingood]

except that both were "home" teams...