Green v. Red. 2-2 tie. We need a winner, so KFTM. Red keeper (who was cautioned earlier in the game) comes up to kick -- needing to convert to keep her team alive. Ball is about 6 feet away. Whistles blows. She approaches the ball, and, about 2 feet from the ball just stops, then slowly backs up a foot and stops. Whistle blows. She then approaches the ball and kicks it in. What should I have done? Here's my best guess: Don't whistle. If she misses, game over. If she makes it, card her (yellow, then red), disallow the goal, and allow a teammate to take the kick. Or perhaps nothing -- arguably it's not feinting after completing the run-up because of the distance from the ball (2 feet). Any opinions?
What you do? You referee, or assistent? I read whistle blow two time. One time to ready kicker. This correct start for me also. Then two time whistle blow. This is play stop. Then approach ball and kick not happen. No guess please. You make effort understand Law 10 proper. 2 feet for me is kick distance. Stop that range for me also unsporting. You write player go back, slow or fast no problem, when player go back, for me matter finish and become illegal feint. I make decide with whistle immediate. This clear mention in penalty kick law also. If decide wrong, then appeal possible. This major headache for league, yes? This what I do. In penalty kick scene, kicker see my yellow card first, second I signal indirect kick to goal keeper. Your scene for KTPM not difference much but only yellow card. Also kick become forfeit. You arguement not feinting after completing the run-up is you decide you understand. This problem you make. Now you solve. I write all what I do, you do also. I end opinion now.
Unless you had decided to stop the kick process, don’t blow the whistle a second time. 2ft for me is having completed the run. So at that point she either kicks or gets the 2nd caution and it’s marked as a miss.
You've got everything correct except the last part. When a player scores and is cautioned for feinting, they do not get a retake. It's very important to know the three situations in which the kick is never retaken. 1) Ball is kicked backwards, 2) Someone else besides a identified player takes the kick (obviously not a problem in KFTM), 3) The player illegally feints and is cautioned.
Once you whistled, no kick could be taken, so the kick was nothing. At a theoretical level I suppose you could caution for DR for kicking the ball after the whistle, but that would be pretty overly officious. I think you just need to take the kick. Was this an illegal feint? I really don't see how--two feet is not at the ball. Nor is this the spirit of that rule. That rule was put in for the feint at the ball that causes the GK to move, which is not close to what happened here. So I think the correct thing to have done was nothing. The kicker did nothing illegal here. Unusual, yes, but not illegal. Nothing in the description suggests that the kicker was taking so long as to be unsporting or delaying the restart. I'm curious--how did you handle and how did the two teams react? (Side note: I believe that in HS the stop during the run up is not permitted, but I don't do HS so I don't know if that is still the rule.)
This is correct. And I think the YC comes into play because the HS rules state that a violation of this rule is a YC offense. For me in this scenario, I feel like it could be perceived two ways. Did she walk up to the ball with what looked like an approach to kick the ball or was she walking up to the ball to count steps backwards to get her position right? Sounds like a scenario where reading how everyone around (including the GK) reacts to this and then responding accordingly.
Do you mean this for applying the HS rule? For applying the FIFA rule, none of this matters. FIFA only precludes a feint at the ball--in the OP the kicker stopped two feet in front of the ball and did not feint.
My son would walk up, not run, and just flick it, going for placement rather than power. Not to mention lulling the keeper to relaxing, thinking my son was just going to reposition the ball. (He scored every time but it made his coach so nervous that he had somebody else start taking penalties.) So, would that be feinting?
Hmm. I was about to say the answer is obviously "no," but wondered if there was a definition in our new handy (?) glossary: Feinting An action which attempts to confuse an opponent. The Laws define permitted and ‘illegal’ feinting So I guess walking up, in this context, would be a feint within the definition as it was an action intended to confuse. But Law 14 doesn't make it illegal to feint; what it makes illegal is feinting to kick the ball once the kicker has completed the run-up (feinting in the run-up is permitted);
Let's change the situation from the OP. Let's say a player runs up towards the ball at full speed and then suddenly stops just before getting to the ball. This results in the GK diving one direction because they expected the ball to be kicked after the kickers next step. I suppose as law 14 is written this is legal, but it doesn't feel like it should be.
We were applying FIFA LOTG. In real life, I deemed the kick to be forfeited, and ended the game. But I did not show a card -- seemed overkill (the game and season were over). Per Law 14, the chart seems to indicate that illegal feinting (feinting after the runup) results in a caution and an IFK regardless of whether a goal is scored. As applied to KFTM, it would appear the kick is simply forfeited. So I may have gotten it right, but it seemed a very harsh result at the time (and still does). It's also not obvious that an infringement prior to the restart (i.e. the ball being kicked and moving forward) would change the restart. In retrospect, I suppose I could have taken the position this was not a feint after the runup as the player was still some distance (2 feet) from the ball, and the goalie didn't move. Since my second whistle stopped the kick, disallow the goal, and take it again.
The language of Law 14 is not feinting after the runup. It is "feinting to kick the ball once the kicker has completed the run-up." Unless he feinted kicking the ball, there is no basis for penalizing the kicker. Stopping is not the same thing.
You got it mostly right, and I am not saying you did right or wrong in that situation but Law 10 clearly states the kicker is cautioned. You do not have to allow the kick so your second whistle once you determined the kicker illegally feinted is correct and therefore recording the kick as missed would be correct as semantically it isn't forfeited. Also as Law 10 is written you have the goal keeper and the kicker committing an offense at the same time as it doesn't differentiate that the kicker may be the goal keeper ^^^ just kidding, it does say "both" so it can't be the same person.
Oh look a rabbit hole, and a beaten dead horse, funny how we find these things close together so often. I seem to recall we had a philosophical discussion regarding this some time ago. That being “feinting” (with regard to the illegal variety, involving the act of kicking on a PK or KFTM) could mean to feint if you are going to kick or inversely, not to kick. Either way is meant to confuse the goal keeper after having reached the ball. I believe the video example had the player walk up to the ball and bend over with his hands stretched out like he was going to adjust the ball’s positioning, instead he toe poked it into the goal. Now continue while I prepare my horse beating implement.
camconay is correct. Law 10 now includes the process for KFTPM and unnecessarily repeats significant parts of Law 14. (I suppose they decided it was more clear to repeat than to simply say that when Law 14 calls for an IFK for the defending team, the kick is recorded as a miss.)
Well damn guess some of us need to read them before the season starts EDIT: Add I need to thank camconcay for his post otherwise I surely would have had a game go to kicks this season, but now I won't.
Most of the above responses seemed to have covered in response #2. Law 10 provides guidance for the OP's inquiry as was stated by many. Goalkeeper is the kicker is of no consequence. When illegal feint, whistle. Yellow card for unsporting behaviour. This is KFPM (or KTFM), ergo, no re-take. The OP's inquiry is quite understandable in the circumstances described. Why the second whistle happened is anyone's guess. Hopefully, it was not the OP's. The description stops, then slowly backs off ... is illegal feint. Full stop. Arguably does not even enter the scene. To keep it simple is of essence. Creating a situation when none existed is not good. Knowing the proper law is a must.
These types of unsupported bombastic statements aren't helpful. What do you base that on other than your personal view of what is right? Nothing in Law 14 or Law 10 refers to stopping before reaching the ball. The prohibition is very specific to feinting to kick the ball. Stopping two feet before the ball is not feinting to kick the ball. Whether it should be a violation is a separate question (high school has decided it should be and has a different rule). The Laws don't support a violation for stopping and backing off, and I am aware of no interpretations that suggest it would be a violation. This provision came in a few years ago to stop a particular practice in which players were taking the swing at the ball to make the GK dive,and then tapping the ball into the empty net. There is no reason whatsoever to extend to a stop before arriving at the ball to which the GK does not react.
No, as you have described it that is almost exactly what the law was brought in to prevent. It was a practice that had become prevalent in South America and was known as a 'paradinha'. It consisted of running up to the penalty spot then stopping and/or feinting, waiting for the goalkeeper to dive and then rolling the ball into the now-unguarded side of the net. While your description does not quite precisely and literally match what the current wording says, it is clearly against the spirit of the law and in my opinion, falls well with the scope of what the lawmakers intended for referees to penalise. In fact, here's an extract from a Reuter's article about the outlawing of this technique, which matches almost exactly what you describe: https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-s...ers-banned-for-feinting-idUKTRE64H4K320100518