I dont understand why we got the indirect free kick in the box. Could someone explain the rule to me?
You cant directly pass the ball back with your foot to your keeper. You can pass it back with your head, chest, belly, ass, shoulder, eye, nose, yam bag, but not your foot. If the rule is broken then you get an indirect kick from whereever it happened. I didnt see the play so I dont know what really happened. All I saw was Magee taking the ball away and putting it on the floor and I was like "WTF did he just do?".
Mathis passed the ball to Magee. A Dallas defender (Gbandi I believe) put his foot on it. Countess came out, trying to prevent Magee from getting it. Hence, a back pass since Gbandi was the last to touch it before Countess handled it.
from MLSnet.com Rules of the Game: "..an indirect free kick will be awarded to the opposition if the `keeper commits any of the following offenses while inside his own penalty area: ... - Touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a teammate" Was the ball deliberately kicked by Gbandi to Countess? Well, it was deliberately kicked, and it did go to Countess. Similar to the incident three minutes later. Did Clark intentionally handle the ball? Maybe not, but he did intentionally raise his arm, and the ball hit it. Either way, they're judgment calls for the ref. Looks like it just about evened out. Could it be the call on Clark was compensation for the call on Countess?
You can use your knee if I remember correctly. Distinction being thet it's impossible to kick the ball with your knee. According to an interview with an EPL ref in WSC anyway.
I brought up this point in the post-game thread. There was no intent by Gbandi to play the ball back to Countess. If you watch the replay, the ball was actually in front of Magee as he was on his way for a breakaway. The defender was simply trying to poke the ball away ANYWHERE he could. It wasn't like he was being chased down by Magee and passed the ball back. A horrible call that even a high school ref wouldn't have made.
Well, the mistake then, was Countess handling the ball, as there is nothing wrong with passing back to the keeper. For all we know, Gbandi was thinking "If I can just poke it back to Countess, he can boot it out of here." I actually thought Magee touched it, but when I saw the replay, it was clear that Gbandi did. For all the stick that MLS refs get, this was one tough call they got right.
Just for your info. Here's what the Laws of the Game say: Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct An Indirect free kick is awarded to the oppposing team if a goalkeeper inside his own penalty area commits any of the following four offenses: -touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate. I saw the highlight and I think that Gbandi tried to poke it back to Countess on the sly and the Referee saw it and made the right call. Also this is kinda funny, this is the International FA Board decision on this rule (which is condsidered part of the Laws but not really a part of the Laws) IFAB Decision 3 Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is in play in order to circumvent the Law, the player is guilty of unsporting behavior. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.
So he intended to poke the ball forward, but he didn't intend for the keeper to have it? How do you know for sure? I agree it's a tough call because the intent was not easy to judge, so it could go both ways. However, why was Countess trying to play ref here? He's not the ref, and the safe play is just booting the ball away. I think Countess' inexperience cost him in this case.
It was a harsh call, but hardly one of the great injustices in the history of the game. If the resulting free kick doesn't go through about 40 guys on its way into the goal, then I doubt that we're even talking about it.
This is one of the toughest rules for the referee to administer. Nothing in the law calls for the ref to determine the kicker's INTENT other than that he wanted to kick the ball somewhere toward the keeper. This call should never be made if the ball goes to the keeper as a result of a miskick. But if the ball generally goes where the kicker intended it (as in this case) and that happens to be anywhere in the penalty area, the keeper is not allowed to use his hands. The foul is committed by the keeper, not the kicker; thus if there is any question, the keeper should use his feet, not his hands. (And yes, kicking means striking the ball anywhere below the knee.) It was a great call by Prus; many refs would not have made it. Hope this helps.