Probably, yes. But if we're talking about a play where the goalkeeper already has the ball at his feet and can't be challenged, that justification doesn't really seem to apply here. I mean, maybe this is the first (inadvertent) step down the path of having "goal kicks" start in the goalkeeper's hands. I've never lost sight of that. My first real experience was WC90 and it's hard to overstate how revolutionary the change was by WC94. But I think that's also part of the point here. The game was revolutionized by simply instating the new rule. Punishment has been rare, really since the get-go, because referees have not punished doubtful offences. Referees don't go looking to punish this now. You could argue, as I'm sure you do, that it's so extreme that referees look for excuses not to call true violations (and to an extent I think that's true). But we've gone from the tactic being a plague on the game wholesale in every match to being an incident we discuss (at the top levels) a few times a season. That would be fine with me. I actually think this is a good idea for all attacking IFKs in the area that are closer than 12 yards to goal. It would eliminate the farcical IFKs from the top of the goal area. Hey, you should write the IFAB on this! Meh. I don't disagree with your sentiment. But I really think we're talking about something that will be so rare and so inconsequential (the goalkeeper already has the ball) that this particular hill is not one to die on.