#1 - Girls HS JV - Ball is out of play for a throw in. Blue player picks up the ball to take the throw. A blue teammate runs toward the thrower because she wants to take the throw. Girl with ball steps up to the line and executes a textbook two hand thrown from behind the head to the approaching teammate. The approaching teammate catches the ball on the bounce and walks towards the line to take the throw. What I did --> Whistled the girl for handling and awarded a FK to white. Blue coach threw a little bit of a fit claiming that the girl was simply giving the ball to her teammate. In my mind I figure I've got too many things to worry about without having to consider when a legal throw is an effort to put the ball in play and when it is a handoff. #2 - This is more of a hypothetical. While I was doing the line for a Boys U11 match, I watched the keeper punt the ball. He was doing a drop kick where he he would let the ball bounce and then kick it. Except he was letting it bounce 2 or 3 times before kicking. It was an unusual style. My question is... at what point, if ever, can he be challenged for the ball and at what point can he no longer pick the ball back up? Once it has bounced twice? Three times? I raised the issue to the center at halftime, but it became moot because the team changed out keepers. I figure I'll probably see this again eventually in my lifetime and I want to know ahead of time how to deal with it.
(1) If it quacks like a duck . . . As you describe it, I agree with you. I think we have to be careful to not play "gotcha" (e.g., when it is a throw that is obviously not a throw in but goes to the teammate on the field, calling an improper throw in is nonsese). But just because the other player wanted to take the throwin doesn't mean the first girl didn't. As described,I'd call handling as well. (2) If it bounces more than once, it isn't a drop kick. When it bounces a second time, as far as I am concerned, the GK has deliberately released the ball into play. That means he cannot use his hands again and that opponents may challenge him.
#1) I agree with you. The ball was thrown in, then handled by her teammate. I don't think I've ever seen a player use the throw-in motion to hand it off to a teammate. #2) If the goal keeper has dropped the ball, he is no longer considered "in control" of the ball, and thus may not pick the ball back up and may be challenged by a defender. If he was bouncing the ball (basketball style), he can still pick the ball up after releasing it, and if someone were to challenge him for it the proper restart would be an Indirect Free Kick.
I disagree on the second count. 2. A goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball when: • the ball is between the hands or between the hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body) or by touching it with any part of the hands or arms except if the ball rebounds accidentally from the goalkeeper or the goalkeeper has made a save • holding the ball in the outstretched open hand • bouncing it on the ground or throwing it in the air A goalkeeper cannot be challenged by an opponent when in control of the ball with the hands There is no theoretical limit on the number of times he can bounce it. If it became obnoxious or over the top, have a word, but it still doesn't mean someone can challenge him
You're not reading this the way they're describing it. Not a dribble. From hands to ground and multiple bounces without any touches with hands between them.
From the sounds of it, this wasnt a controlled bounce bounce bounce kick. It was a drop that just happened to bounce 3 times (or not settle completely). IMHO the GK no longer has control as they put it on the deck.
I see the throw in to teammate at least once per season. Always call it handling. If they execute the throw in properly - it's a throw in. Imagine if we all ignore it, then a team gets smart and comes up with the trick play - " Hey Jim - I will take the throw! Jim throws to Steve with proper technique and the players do not react. At last second Steve takes throw off chest, turns and off he goes - uncontested throw in.
I have a similar question with new PDI rules. When goalkeepers are not allowed to punt or drop-kick the ball, how many bounces does the ball have to take so it is not considered a drop-kick?
If it quacks like a duck, it's a duck. This is a developmental rule, which means it needs to be applied with common sense in the context of the intent of the rule. If its a cutesy way to avoid the no-punting rule, then its a punt. If the ball is clearly released into play and then passed, its a pass. In practical terms, very few 10U kids are going to be able to finesse this in a way that isn't reasonably easy for a referee to tell if it's a duck or not. And in practical terms, if it bounces more than once, it probably isn't a punt--unless you've got a turf field, its hard to have a ball controlled after a second bounce.
A developmental winter league I worked had the rule that the ball had to bounce three times before the GK could kick it. So when would opponents be able to challenge for the ball? After the fourth bounce? Fortunately I think the coaches told the kids not to challenge the GK at all for the ball.
"Coach, if it looks like a throw in I'm calling it a throw in." Implied but not explicitly stated is "in this type of situation, teach your players to turn the ball over a teammate in a way that clearly isn't a throw in." In the second situation, no one does a multi-bounce drop kick. I'd judge that the keeper has put the ball into play when they have deliberately released it and it hits the ground a second time.
The throw in motion is almost literally the least efficient way to get a ball to someone. The players have almost infinite other options to use if they want to let another player take a throw. Pick one of those.
I think your duck thing says it all for a lot of things when we referee (including the answer to the OP), good clarification, thanks!
Really? Everyone on hear is calling handing? Sounds like a case of one guy applying the exact letter of the law to prove he’s in control. Did anyone else think the ball was in play? Did anyone rush to challenge for ball? Or did 22 players and 2 coaches know what was going on and you’ve proved a lack of reading the game? Referees started in this game to settle disputes that teams could not agree on. It sounds to me like you involved yourself in a situation that didn’t need intervention. Technically right but practically wrong. And for all those saying to underhand toss instead - why aren’t you calling illegal throw? Is it not thrown into the field without being delivered from behind the head with both arms?
Judgmental much? What pray tell from the OP suggests that 22 players and coaches knew it wasn't a throw-in? I'll give you a hint: nothing. The only indication is that one player wanted to take the throwin and another girl did take the throwin. If there were facts to suggest, at the moment of the throw, that everyone thought she was just giving it to her teammate to take a throw, I would agree that it should not be called (and the player advised that it wasn't the best way to get the ball to her teammate. But nothing in the facts presented suggest that. (Hmm. Does HS have the same rule that it is delaying the game and should be cautioned if one player squares up to do the throw and then lets someone else take it instead . . . )
The trend in recent years is to bring more clarity to restarts. See last years emphasis on the corner kick and the addition of “clearly” to when the ball is in play. If you want to hand off the throw to someone else choose a method other than the 1 option that constitutes a legal throw in.
I suppose I am. I get tired of watching referees cause More problems than they solve. And what in the original post suggest no one had a problem? Maybe 25 years of playing, watching, and refereeing has given me some sense of how the game is played. But go ahead...keep pissing off players and coaches and then throwing them out because you’re supported in LOTG. Hide behind your inability to use common sense and come back here to get your pats on the back that the coach or player had it coming. The players don’t want this call...the fans don’t want it...the coaches don’t want it...if you dont know that then just do it your way.
When I see this, I just tell the initial thrower "Let's not throw the ball to a teammate like you are putting the ball in play. I may get confused and I get confused enough. Just drop the ball on the ground so your teammate can pick it up for a throw in." Then again, 90% of my games are U12 and under, and I've seen this in maybe 1% of all my games.
Maybe I am reading into this too much and maybe you're just upset about all of this for some reason... But are you suggesting that a referee pissing everyone off but to do something because the laws support it is wrong? I mean call me a simpleton but we're literally there for the sole purpose of applying the laws. And to be perfectly honest, I do not give a single care at all if I am 'pissing' players and coaches off. There has been this sort of.. I'm not the best with words so forgive me, I will do my best... But this sort of attitude I hear (hear it with commentators and pundits in the PL all the time) where referees are expected to 'adapt' to caveats that players acquire (reference: when pundits talk about 'contact' and an attackers 'right' to go down for a penalty because of contact). At the heart of it all, we are referees who are there to apply the laws of the game, simple as that.
And are you any different here? You’re hiding behind a methodology over 200 years old saying referees were there to settle disputes among the teams. Clearly the game has evolved beyond that. In the modern era we are meant to be the neutral party in a sport know for having dishonest and disreputable behavior among all participants. The role of the referee is to be above the politics and to apply the laws fairly and justly. The argument that it is unjust to call the handling against the offending team is just as easily spun to say it is unjust to not give the free kick to the non offending team.
I considered it at first, but what this really came down to was ONE player deciding that regardless of the actions of her teammates, SHE was going to throw the ball in. Screw that. Would you ever let a player catch a DFK because HE wanted to be the one that took it? This is no different. If the teammate was in agreement, there are many ways to do it without executing a legal throw in.
Maybe I should just get off your &$%# lawn. As tone deaf as your posting is, I'm hard pressed to believe you have the feel you claim to on a soccer field. From the OP, you envision what happened, and in what you envision, everyone on the field thought it wasn't' a real throwin. But the one guy who was there didn't see it that way. Maybe instead of making didactic pronouncements about the person who saw the play, you could actually post something designed to help and to point out cues that could have indicated that he made a mistake. Here in the real world, this can happen both ways. It can happen (usually younger than HS) that a TI technique is used and everyone knows it isn't a TI. And it can happen that the only player who doesn't want it to be a TI is the one who wanted to take it heself (and the coach after the fact when he sees what happened). Being a good referee isn't knowing in advance which it must be, but recognizing the cues on the field to tell one from the other.