2019-20 Laws of the Game

Discussion in 'Referee' started by code1390, Nov 13, 2018.

  1. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Heck, that's part of what makes it a good test question. The best test questions aren't solely about testing knowledge, but are also about helping the test taker learn something. And if "get the heck out of the PA" is what someone remembers from this question, that's not a bad thing.

    Overthinking: does the fact that the GK kicking the ball causes a change of possession on the IFK mean it should be a DB? Certainly would fit with the SOTG.
     
    Gary V and Bubba Atlanta repped this.
  2. MJ91

    MJ91 Member

    Jan 14, 2019
    United States
    That's answer 'E)'.
     
    Law5 repped this.
  3. Beau Dure

    Beau Dure Member+

    May 31, 2000
    Vienna, VA
    Ahhhhhhh ... I get it now. I didn't think of the "second touch" angle of it. Here I was thinking I was so smart for knowing that it's not a drop ball because there was no change of possession.

    Another question, maybe the next one, had an attacker getting the ball from the same situation off our poorly positioned center.
     
  4. Unnaturallybigger

    Unnaturallybigger New Member

    United States
    Jun 28, 2019
    Another handball question...I apologize if this has already been asked.

    So according to the LOTG (obviously paraphrasing) if a player gains control or possession of the ball after it hits his arm and it leads either directly to a goal or goal scoring opportunity then its a handball offense.

    However, in application I'm seeing that a deflected accidental handball where the player doesn't gain control but it deflects to a teammate which leads to a goal or goal scoring opportunity is being called a handball offense. I've seen it called this way quite a number of times this season.

    To me it is clear that the LOTG are very specific to the player that the ball hits the arm of gaining possession and mentions nothing of a teammate gaining possession.

    What am I not understanding?
     
  5. Kit

    Kit Member+

    Aug 30, 1999
    Herkimer, NY, USA
    Club:
    Everton FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The goal scoring opportunity doesn't have to be for the player that accidentally handles the ball. Just think of it if there was an intentional handling. A player handles the ball and it goes to his teammate who scores. A handling offense has still occurred.
     
  6. Dayton Ref

    Dayton Ref Member+

    May 3, 2012
    Houston, TX
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    @Unnaturallybigger, what you're missing is that the wording doesn't match the instruction from FIFA.
    I'm sure "gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched their hand/arm and then:" will be changed to something like "gains possession/control of the ball after it has touched a teammate's and then:"
     
    Unnaturallybigger repped this.
  7. Unnaturallybigger

    Unnaturallybigger New Member

    United States
    Jun 28, 2019
    #657 Unnaturallybigger, Nov 8, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2019
    I think you missed my point. I totally understand the GSO doesn't have to be the from the player that the ball hits the arm. But according to the LOTG of the game the Player whose arm it accidentally hits has to "gain possession/control" for it to be a handling offense (assuming it ends up eventually leading to a goal or GSO). If it deflects off the hand of a player, that is neither control or possession for that player. Now obviously it is being interpreted to extend to the possession/control by a team-mate despite the fact the LOTG does not say that.
     
  8. Ghastly Officiating

    Tottenham Hotspur
    United States
    Oct 12, 2017
    As Dayton Ref said, FIFA is operating in a do as we say, not as IFAB wrote
     
    Unnaturallybigger repped this.
  9. Unnaturallybigger

    Unnaturallybigger New Member

    United States
    Jun 28, 2019
    Thanks. Have these instructions been published by FIFA? Or is it more of an evolution of the application of the law?
     
  10. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    I think this is where FIFA/IFAB disagrees with you.
    If you consider the accidental touch as being what creates the GSO just the same as if he had kicked it after the accidental touch then how it is called in-game makes perfect sense (and seems to me to be in keeping with the SOTG)
     
  11. sulfur

    sulfur Member

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    According to the Law5 blog, the DFB (German GA) has published some clarifications from IFAB:

    1) A substitute next to the goal stops a ball, which comes from a missed shot on goal, on the line (i.e. in the penalty area).
    Even if the substitute's action has a possible game-changing character (penalty kick), the IFAB's view is that this is not one of the exceptional circumstances listed in the VAR Protocol, which justified an intervention of the video assistant, even if the technically correct decision is penalty.
    An intervention of the VAR in a comparable situation is therefore only in the sense of the VAR protocol, if the substitute (or team official) goes directly into a duel with an opponent or runs on the field and stops the ball before crossing the goal line or influences the game by intervention from outside (throwing objects, etc.).

    2) An APP (attacking phase of possession) ends when the opposing team has cleared the ball, is in controlled possession of the ball and therefore a new attack is built or if the attacking team interrupts the attack itself, for example, if the ball is played clearly backwards and thus the team newly forms in the construction of the attack.
    In the specific case the striker #10 reaches the ball from an offside position (i.e. he is offside) and then plays it to a teammate who shoots at the goal. The ball is defended and goes to the side line. The AR had missed the offside. On the sideline, a teammate of #10 now picks up the ball and plays it back about 20 yards, towards the center line, to another teammate. That player starts with the ball on the foot again in the direction of the goal and then plays it back to striker #10 (not offside anymore), who then runs a few meters with the ball before scoring a goal. The original offside position of #10 is not in the APP of the goal scored. The APP ended when the ball was cleared to the outside, taken by a player on the sidelines and clearly played backwards. The goal would therefore also count in a game with VAR.

    3) Goals after an undeliberate handball:
    The purpose and spirit of this law change is to prevent a goal that results directly from contact with the hand/arm or immediately thereafter. With regard to this rule change, the IFAB plans to incorporate this "immediate" into the LotG in order to provide even more clarity.
    In this respect, it is not considered immediate or direct in connection with the goal, for example, if a player undeliberately gets the ball against his hand in midfield or in his own half, the ball jumps from his hand to a teammate who receives the ball and plays out to another player, who then crosses the ball to an teammate at the goal area, who scores a goal at the end.
    In connection with the above description of the definition of an attacking phase (APP), it should also be pointed out that when assessing an undeliberate handball leading to a goal, it is not the APP that is relevant for the assessment by the referees, but the described immediacy.

    https://law5-theref.blogspot.com/20...howComment=1573243369700#c6038206453355992809
     
    Unnaturallybigger repped this.
  12. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    I get why this is here, it's a panicky reaction to what happened in recently.

    But it is just mind-numbingly stupid, both the idea and the wording. I mean come on...
    So if it comes from a stray pass/through ball/keeper deflection then it's still an offence???
    So it is the judgment of "runs on the field" that's the decider now? Because "on the line" and "before crossing the..." makes no material difference.


    Pretty sure this has been clarified before, at least I'm sure we've discussed it here long time ago.


    Not sure why this one was needed tbh. The law only has it as an offence when it's the one who scores or assists and thus it was never relevant to an APP discussion.
     
  13. sulfur

    sulfur Member

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    This last, I believe, comes from a recent question posed by a high level referee (UEFA I think?) as to what happens when a player in his own penalty area has the ball hit his arm, and the ball goes immediately all the way up the pitch to create a goal scoring opportunity.

    By the way the law is currently written, that play would have to come back for a... penalty kick.

    This was intended to correct that issue.
     
  14. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    Would have been nice if the clarification had covered such an incident then... :rolleyes:

    The clarification goes - (undeliberate)handling -> teammate -> pass -> teammate -> pass -> teammate -> goal

    I mean screw the APP discussion of own half/PA. If that sequence took place with all 4 attackers being in the opponents PA there's still no way the goal should be called off. There's 2 persons playing the ball between the one handling it and the one who scores ffs.
     
  15. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Just to be clear, we are talking about a translation to direct answers of questions which we haven't seen. Leaving aside the issue with sourcing (I believe in the veracity of the post, but it is true we don't have a primary source) I think there is more here than meets the eye.
     
  16. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    Yea I accept that, hopefully they'll word it better and put in the LotG for next year.
     
  17. sulfur

    sulfur Member

    Oct 22, 2007
    Ontario, Canada
    Related to this, Bobby Madley reported this on Friday (3 part tweet):

     
    Thezzaruz repped this.
  18. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    So it was Madley that got the IFAB to come out with a clarification? Cool. :D
     
  19. bothways

    bothways Member

    Jun 27, 2009
    #669 bothways, Nov 12, 2019
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2019
    with reference to the ball hitting the referee in the Penalty area- it should be dropped ball as the restart.
    here is a fun one to think about- Pk is taken., ball hits cross bar, comes back and hits the ref, and goes straight to the original kicker and touches them (please don't laugh!)- what is the restart
     
  20. DefRef

    DefRef Member

    Jul 3, 2017
    Storrs CT
    gotta think it would be drop ball to team that last possessed it at spot it hit the ref - fun
     
  21. threeputzzz

    threeputzzz Member+

    May 27, 2009
    Minnesota
    IFK for defending team.
     
  22. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Any dropped ball in the penalty area goes to the goalkeeper. So, no.

    The scenario is fanciful and it really doesn’t matter, but I think you’re on equally solid ground to do a dropped ball. IFK gets triggered once the touch occurs. Dropped ball is triggered once a team starts a promising attack. I could argue an attack can start before actual possession occurs (we can have OGSOs without possession ever being realized, after all). Again, really doesn’t matter but either option seems viable.
     
  23. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I agree with @threeputzzz -- I don't think you can have a promising attack if the only player involved can't legally touch the ball, so I think IFK is the better answer. But I also agree it doesn't matter.

    As far as being fanciful, well, it's fanciful if the R knows what he's doing. On the other hand, when my daughter was playing JV soccer, I watched a ref in a dual stand on the field of play right next to the goal post for a PK. If there are more clueless refs positioning like that, the scenario stops being quite as fanciful.
     
    IASocFan repped this.
  24. bothways

    bothways Member

    Jun 27, 2009
    with regards to the ball hitting on referee from goalkeeper..on Facebook, got a response from IFAB. they said deal with it in terms of the spirit of the Laws
     
  25. bothways

    bothways Member

    Jun 27, 2009
    and if you think the referee by accident got in the way.,call a dropped ball
     

Share This Page