Keeper takes control of a ball and in the process of returning the ball into play sprints to the top of the area and throws the ball down the field to a streaking forward. His feet were squarely inside the area. It's possible the ball may have been across the line in the process of being thrown before it was released. AR flags the throw and the CR awards a DFK at the edge of the area. Good call? Gotcha refereeing? What does the Law say? I've made this same throw hundreds of times and never had this called before. Curious for your input.
The keeper is entitled to handle the ball within his/her own penalty area. If, while returning thes ball to play, the keeper handles the ball outside the penalty area, the referee must judge whether this was accidental or deliberate . If accidental it is not a foul at all. If, in the referees opinion it was deliberate and did have an effect, then whistle to stop play and restart with a DFK for the opponent. The Laws punish only deliberate handling. Sounds like a gotcha call to me. Sherman
I agree with whpple's analysis. If his feet were still within the penalty area, I suspect he had probably released the ball, but the followt hrough was over the line. If as described, it was at best a trivial offense, which should not be whistled. Was it a club linesman?
It was a club linesman, unfortunately the AZ men's leagues don't normally have the best officials. I won't criticize more than that because until I'm ready to stop playing and get re-licenced, there's not much I can do about it. If the Laws only punish deliberate handling, then it was certainly a gotcha call. I tried to go over to the AR at halftime and clarify his call because I wasn't sure whether the Law was specific as far as if the 'keeper's feet need to remain inside the area or the ball or what but the CR told me to back off and that he was going to speak with him and that he'd let me know after halftime at which point I knew that the CR probably wanted to tell him he might have been over anxious w/ his flag....but at the same time, why did he choose to whistle it? At any rate, the opposing kick taker shot the restart over the bar (barely). No harm done. I might have protested more but the the CR threw a straight red for dissent about 7 minutes in (which with the teams in our league actually was a wise officiating decision as usually the games in our division turn into a bitch-fest--everyone knew to keep their yaps shut this day )
i'll disagree to a point. this certainly sounds trivial, and at best it ought to get a warning before being whistled ("keeper, watch your line") that said, it doesn't matter where the goalie's feet are, but rather where the ball is. just like we do for determining whether a goal has been scored, draw an imaginary line up from the penalty area. if the ball is outside that line, and the keeper is still handling it, i believe it is (at least technically) a handball. i also thought we discussed this in another thread recently (so maybe someone will now show me that i'm wrong), but i do not understand "intentional" handling to permit this. the keeper may not have known where he was, but he knew he was handling the ball. that is enough. as another example, imagine a slick field and a ball going out of bounds for a corner kick. the keeper races out and slides to stop it from going out of bounds, and after grabbing the ball continues to slide right out of the penalty area. it was an accident that the keeper slid out of the box, but not an accident that his hands were on the ball. i say that's intentional and should be called. again, here, i'd let it go with a warning myself, but it's not obvious to me that it's a "wrong" call.
Once the ball is outside the PA, the keeper is as any other player. He/she has no special privileges, nor restrictions. It is not the contact of the ball to the hand which we judge to be an offense, but the deliberate act of playing, parrying, punching, catching which must occur for us to determine if an offense occurred. Just as in a throw-in, where the players hands are often in contact with the ball after it enters the FOP, it is not because it is trivial (not worth bothering about?), or trifling (having no effect), but that it is doubtful (not an offense at all), that we do not call it. No foul:No call. This is not to say that we may permit the keeper, in the process of releasing the ball, to advance several yards up the field outside the PA, carrying the ball prior to releasing it, because this would be an offense. We must use common sense and judgement.
FYI, this thread is similar in nature to my question asked at: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=40109
If it were a club linesman then he stepped way over his authority in the match. A club linesman may only indicate to the referee when the whole ball has past over the touch line or goal line...nothing more. The CR was wrong to have taken his flag and should have gone over his role much more clearly before the match. I tell club linesmen to not even indicate direction when the ball is out..."just pop the flag straight over your head thank you" Anything more and you're giving them more control than they are allowed. Scott
Correct, but I think IA's point is that if the keeper halted his advance while his feet were still in the penalty area, it is a fair assumption that he intended to respect the confines of the penalty area. That's really the crux of the issue, in my opinion. As has been suggested, a word to the keeper is usually more than sufficient.
Let's not throw this red herring into the question. A player properly taking a throw-in may indeed have her hands in contact with the ball when it breaks the plane of the touch line. That is not an offense in any way, shape or form. Why? Not because it's doubtful or trifling. It's because the ball is not in play until it is released from the player's hands.
Please let me know if I'm wrong, but I have a different understanding of the laws here. My understanding is that it is a foul to deliberately handle the ball outside the area. But the foul is for deliberate handling, not for being outside the area. What I mean is that if the keeper happens to handle the ball, you need to determine two things in order to decide whether it is a foul. (1) Did the keeper intend the handle the ball? (2) Was the ball handled outside the area? If both answers are yes, it's a foul. You do not need to determine: (3) Did the keeper know he was outside the area? or (4) Did the keeper intend to handle the ball when he legally could not? Is this correct? I understand also the game management reasons for not calling the foul if it had no impact, and not having seen the play I can't make a comment there. Obviously if game management says not to blow the whistle you don't have to blow the whistle. But it seems to me that the standard people are proposing is more like (3) or (4) than the my combination of both (1) and (2). And I was under the impression that the laws of the game prescribed (1) and (2). Is that correct?
Ahhh, Gary, I was wondering who would catch me up on this. You are correct that the ball is not in play until released from the hands during the taking of a throw-in. When keeper has posession, tho the ball is in play, it may not be contested until the keeper returns the ball to play. Though not identical, the situations are comparable. My point is that it is not an offense in any way shape or form, for a keepers hand to be in contact with the ball if it accidentally crosses the plane of the penalty area as the ball is being released from the keeper's possession. In my view, it only becomes an offense if, in the opinion of the referee, the keeper deliberately carries the ball, prior to releasing it, outside the penalty area.
Somewhat better than my attempt above, I think you have focused on the issue. I am in complete agreement with you that it is an intent to handle the ball that is all that is required (plus being outside the box). It shouldn't matter that the keeper didn't "intend" to do it outside the area. Again, I'd give a warning (or possibly disregard it entirely given the degree of the infraction), but it is a handball. Clearly some people here disagree and have added an additional requirement of intent. I haven't seen anything authoritative either in this post or in the earlier one, nor am I aware of any such requirement in the rules. (Also, as noted above, the throw-in example has nothing to do with this).
To follow through on the posts above, do you have any authority for this, or this merely your own opinion? (I don't mean anything deragotory by that, I just want to understand if this has been formally adopted or even discussed). In my mind, there is intentional handling of the ball. That is all the rules require.
i don't know if it helps resolve this, but there was a fine example of this situation in today's champions league match between man.u. and real madrid. it sure looked like barthez handled the ball outside the box in the 20th minute even though his feet may have still been in the box. fyi, the announcers said handball, but the ref made no call. again, i'd let it go, but don't think it's wrong to do otherwise
Whipple, while I agree with this outcome, I don't agree with your reasons for getting there. When I see a keeper push the envelope to use every last inch of the PA before releasing the ball, sometimes using space outside the PA, I will warn him - "Keep, watch the line." Then everyone knows I've seen something. I would consider this a trifling offense, not to be called, but still an offense. If, despite the warning, the keeper continues to push it, he's liable for a call when the ball is clearly handled outside the PA - even if only by a foot. Too may trifles add up to a non-trifle. Else, you're risking game management issues with the opponents who think you're letting him cheat.
As far as I know, USSF has remained silent on this, though there has been some discussion. I feel it is similar to that slippery slope or slippery pitch where the keeper makes a save within the PA, but slides beyond the 18 with the ball in contact with his hands/arms. Here again we are faced with the dilemma of deciding whether the keeper deliberately played the ball outside the PA or was it accidental and no call. My opinion, in both the slippery pitch as well as the keeper accidentally handling the ball beyond the PA as it is being released from his posession, is that there has been no breach of the Laws. This has not, to my knowldege, been clearly defined via additional instruction or a memorandum. There are many others who do not share this opinion. It may be time to send Mr. Allen a note to see if we can get something more substantial, one way or the other. Sherman
4/8/03 The day I actually stimulated intelligent discussion on Bigsoccer. The apocolypse is near. Thanks for all the insight fellas. I know I have no life because right after the game I was trying to make sure I remembered everything to post here.
This was a topic of conversation several months ago. In my mind it remains trifling. So what if the keepers hands were outside of the penalty area when he released the ball. Where is the advantage? He's releasing the ball into play and no one is making a play for the ball. If it was a case where the keeper was coming out to prevent an offensive player from playing the ball and he handled it outside the PA, then be precise in the call and award a DFK. This is when we have to be firm and give no quarter on the position of the keepers hands with respect to the plane of the penalty area. No pressure just putting the ball into play, this is trifling. Where did the keeper gain any advantage from this?
On reacting to slippery field conditions: If a player attempts to tackle the ball away from an opponent, but because the field is slippery he ends up crashing into the opponent taking him out, wouldn't you call a foul (and maybe misconduct too)? If a keeper makes a save, but slips in the mud and falls across the line into the goal with the ball, wouldn't you call a goal? So then why, if the keeper slips over the edge of the PA with ball in hand, would you not call handling? Just because he had no intent to be outside the area? Neither did the keeper in the previous example have any intent to fall and score a goal. When field conditions are poor, players must simply be more careful. This includes the keeper. We don't make judgments on what the player wanted to do, but on what happened. Now of course, the keeper handling the ball just inches outside the PA line should probably be regarded as trifling - unless it somehow prevents the opponents from a fair play. A verbal, "Watch the line", and keep playing.
The difference in that case was, Barthez was in the process of leaving the area and playing the ball with his feet, whereas fiddlestick had no intention of leaving the area. In either case, a warning would suffice, imho.
Because in one case we are performing one of our primary functions as referees, providing a safe enviroment for the players. In the later example, we are not applying v8. Scott