This is what happened in my game the other day....You be the judge.

[kelliott31]

The other day, the keeper on the opposite team had the ball in her hands on the ground. My player kicked the ball out of her hands (not having touched the keeper) and into the net but the goal was called back. The AR signalled to the ref that it was a foul. We ended up tying 0-0. Should the goal have stood? I've heard both sides of the call so I was just wondering if there is anything definite about it.

[USSF REF]

The other day, the keeper on the opposite team had the ball in her hands on the ground. My player kicked the ball out of her hands (not having touched the keeper) and into the net but the goal was called back. The AR signalled to the ref that it was a foul. We ended up tying 0-0. Should the goal have stood? I've heard both sides of the call so I was just wondering if there is anything definite about it.

Easy.

The AR was right. The goalkeeper had possession of the ball, as it was in her hands, your player kicked the ball, which is the same as preventing the goalkeeper releasing the ball from her hands, an indirect free kick offense. Good call.

[refmedic]

Easy.

The AR was right. The goalkeeper had possession of the ball, as it was in her hands, your player kicked the ball, which is the same as preventing the goalkeeper releasing the ball from her hands, an indirect free kick offense. Good call.

Agreed. The ball is considered to be in the GK's possession when it is in the GK's hand, or pinned between and part of the GK and another surface (i.e. the ground or the post). I would assume that this was a youth game, and the referee, or in this case, the AR is right to error on the side of caution when it comes to this issue. This was an excellent call.

[scref]

Easy.

The AR was right. The goalkeeper had possession of the ball, as it was in her hands, your player kicked the ball, which is the same as preventing the goalkeeper releasing the ball from her hands, an indirect free kick offense. Good call.


Well said

[IASocFan]

... I've heard both sides of the call so I was just wondering if there is anything definite about it.

I find that surprising. No goal; free kick coming out. See reasons above.

[Emmet Kipengwe]

Yes, good call.

If the keeper's hand or arm was on top of the ball with the ball on the ground, same thing. It's in her possession and you can't kick/knock it away.

[boylanj64]

Agree with all above. Keeper has possession, you cannot challenge, and it does not matter how cleanly you kick the ball. Depending on the nature and timing of the challenge, kicking a ball in the keeper's grasp can be UC, even if you never touch them.

[nonya]

FIFA-Laws of the Game

Page 111

When a goalkeeper has gained possession of the ball with his hands, he can not be challenged by an opponent.

[Sandcrab Margarita]

Beyond Law 12 (& Decision 2 under that Law), many youth leagues have a rule which makes any attempt to play a ball in the GK's possession or to challenge a GK who has possession a cautionable offense. This is done strictly for safety of the young'uns.

[Ref Flunkie]

No debate, easy and correct call.

[kelliott31]

I find that surprising. No goal; free kick coming out. See reasons above.

The other arguments that I've heard are the fact that it was a close call between her having possession and not having possession (it could have gone both ways) and also that keepers are taught to keep strong arms behind the ball in case someone kicks it while they're in possession (I mean why train for it if it's illegal?). I work with a couple of refs who
"claim" to know the game well and said that it was a goal but I don't really think that they're as knowledgeable as they believe:P. Thanks for clearing that up!

[refmedic]

One more quick thing to think about. This is one of those situations that in a youth game, could end up in an injured player, and irate coach, and potentially an even more livid parent. In a higher level youth game, amateur game, and more than likely not in a pro game, mass confrontation, as the players want to protect their GK. If you aren't on top of this one, you're game report has the potential to get very long and complicated. Error on the side of caution and lay on your whistle, call the goal back, and be there to diffuse any heated moments. It's nearly impossible to sell the goal, even if it's technically correct, and will create more problems for you in the long run. Just about everyone on the field expects you to blow it dead and award the FK coming out.

[scref]

If the ref shows no intent of protecting the keeper in that situation, the game could get out of hand fast.

As a referee that is a great opportunity to send a message to all the players to let them know what you will not tolerate it.

[kelliott31]

I just wanted to point something out. It is youth soccer but it's not with club teams. This happened in an under 18 national level game so it's not just a house league or club game. Just wanted to clarify.

And I was the keeper for the other team and from experience, I wouldn't have been very happy if he'd called it a goal against me.

[IASocFan]

The other day, the keeper on the opposite team had the ball in her hands on the ground. My player kicked the ball out of her hands (not having touched the keeper) and into the net but the goal was called back. The AR signalled to the ref that it was a foul. We ended up tying 0-0. Should the goal have stood? I've heard both sides of the call so I was just wondering if there is anything definite about it.

The other arguments that I've heard are the fact that it was a close call between her having possession and not having possession (it could have gone both ways) and also that keepers are taught to keep strong arms behind the ball in case someone kicks it while they're in possession (I mean why train for it if it's illegal?). I work with a couple of refs who
"claim" to know the game well and said that it was a goal but I don't really think that they're as knowledgeable as they believe:P. Thanks for clearing that up!

The two bolded statements are somewhat inconsistent. The first was given as a statement. The second shed doubts on whether the first was a fact. In a fast moving game with lots of players between the officials, it's sometimes difficult to determine that the keeper is touching the ball or about to touch the ball. Sometimes a touch of the ball is a deflection not a possession. It's the opinion of the CR and potentially the AR concerning whether possession occurred. But yes, your arm on top of the ball is possession. To help the referee ascertain that you have control of the ball, both arms around the ball in your midsection is much more convincing than putting your arm on top of a moving ball.

[gosellit]

I found this article from JA.

Playing the Ball in the Goalkeeper's Possession

By Jim Allen, National Instructor Staff

This article is designed to help make referees and players aware of what constitutes goalkeeper possession and what opponents may and may not do when the goalkeeper has possession.

* Watch an Application of This Law From a World Cup Qualifier Between Trinidad and Bahrain

What Does "Possession” Mean?
While the ball is in the possession of the goalkeeper, it cannot be played by an opponent. Any attempt to do so may be punished by a direct free kick. "In the possession of the goalkeeper" is defined as the goalkeeper having the ball trapped between one hand and a surface (which may include the other hand, the ground, a goalpost, or the keeper's own body). International Board Decision Two of Law 12 emphasizes that the hand includes any part of the hand or arm. However, as stated in the Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game (Advice 12.16 and 12.17), the goalkeeper is also considered to be in possession of the ball while bouncing it on the ground or while throwing it into the air. Possession is given up if, while throwing the ball into the air, it is allowed to strike the ground.

Once the goalkeeper has gained possession (also known as "control") of the ball, an opponent may not interfere with or block the goalkeeper's distribution of the ball. For example, players have a right to maintain a position achieved during the normal course of play, but they may not try to block the goalkeeper's movement while he or she is holding the ball and trying to distribute it. Nor may opposing players do anything to hinder, interfere with, or block a goalkeeper who is throwing or punting the ball back into play. The goalkeeper has already gained possession and is granted up to six seconds to release the ball back into play by other players. A goalkeeper in the act of distributing the ball may not be challenged under these circumstances. (This includes trying to head a ball out of the goalkeeper's open hand or playing a ball being bounced or tossed into the air by the goalkeeper.) An opponent does not violate the Law, however, if that player takes advantage of a ball clearly released by the goalkeeper directly to him or her, in his or her direction, or deflecting off him or her nonviolently.

[blech]

Does a flag getting thrown at some point for piling on in response to this question? Oops, my bad, wrong sport. :) At best, it's discretionary as to whether the keeper had possession. That's the most you're going to get to support an argument that the goal should have been allowed, with the caveat that's the opinion of the referee that matters (in this case the AR who the CR is listening to). And, with the point above that your original post seems to suggest that the use of that discretion was spot on.

Of course, it's not a bad practice for a goalie to take additional precautions just in case the ref doesn't make the call - a belt and suspenders approach. But my view of the keeper being wise to keep hands at least partially behind the ball is to prevent the ball from slipping through, not to act as some kind of blocking tackle for a forward kicking it after the keeper gets possession.