i've seen it called and not called. one school of thought is that the trapping of the ball is not itself a deliberate kick to the goalie. if the goalie comes out to take the ball as kind of an afterthought, there should be no call. i know others have said that "intent" isn't part of the analysis, but i'm not sure how else you determine whether or not the ball has been deliberately kicked to the goalie. interestingly, there was a no-call in yesterday's final of the u20 youth world cup, probably around the 80th minute. the nigerian goalie had come out to the corner of the penalty area, and then been beaten by the argentine winger who pushed the ball past him toward the goalline. from a bad angle, he shot at the open net, but a nigerian defender from the other side came sliding back to kick the ball off the line. the kicked ball went directly into the stomach of the goalie who was racing back to his abandoned goal. while the argentinians put their hands up for a call, the goalie turned with the ball and punted it upfield. did they blow the call? the ball was kicked. it went directly to the keeper who caught it. the only reasoning for the call that i could come up with was that he didn't think the defender was kicking it to the goalie but rather that he was simply desperately kicking it away from the goal ... and that it just happened to go to the goalie. is that right? other explanations?
I just watched that play this morning. It looked like a deflection out of the goal. I definitely didn't think there was an infraction.
I just now viewed it as well. The NGR def made a desperate sliding tackle clearance of the ball off his own goal line. The cleared ball just happened to go straight back into the belly of the NGR keeper caught it and cleared with a punt. Absolutely no way that was an intentional pass to the keeper.
Intent is not part of things like fouls, however for this rule, intent has everything to do with the result. For this to be a call, it has to be intentionally kicked to the goalie, with the foot. Any other body part or a kick that happens to end up at the keeper is not an infraction. The mentioned play above is not called (sliding clear off the line) because the guy was not kicking the ball to the goalie, it just happened to end up there. You need to take lots into account, age, skill level, experience of players etc. By the way, do it very quickly and make or not make the call.
How about defender A kicks the ball deliberately with the foot to pass to defender B. GK runs up, moves defender B out the way (before defender B makes contact with the ball) and picks up the ball. Foul? No Foul?
Re: foul The foul occurs when the goalkeeper picks up the ball. The goalkeeper cannot pick up a ball that is intentionally passed by a defender's foot to a place where the goalkeeper can reach it. The fact that the defender thought he was passing to another defender is not relevant. The only safe balls for a goalkeeper to handle are the following: Balls played by a defender using a body part other than the foot, balls deflected without control by a defender or played in desperation to avoid a goal by a defender, and balls played by an attacking player. The middle two require the referee to exercise judgment about the intent of the defender, but the goalie also has to exercise the same judgment before picking up the ball. Hopefully the goalie and the referee are on the same page, because if they are not, it can be trouble.
This was asked during my Grade 8 class two years ago, the words of the instructor: "you have to read the players minds" If you think the passer and keeper had previously talked about this and did this to circumvent the pass back rule, then its an YC/IFK from where the pass originated. If you think the goalie did this without plan, then there's no penalty, but be prepared for the yells. It has to be an intentional pass to the keeper with the foot. Any part missing and its play on. At least that's how I understand it.
Would this also apply if a defender trapped a ball with his foot and left it for the keeper to pick up?
Guess I should have read the entire thread. That's the drawback to reading this thing at work. Not enough time to sort through three pages.
Yes. "It has to be an intentional pass to the keeper with the foot." The pass or kick must be intentional, not the receipt by the GK. So an intentional pass to a defender who is in the area of the GK is still a "pass-back" if the K grabs it.
Ack!!!! I'm choking on my lunch. I really hope that is not what your instructor said. We cannot read a player's mind, hence the replacement of the word "intentional" with the word "deliberate". Word semanticists will go on about how the two imply a cognitive act. The subtle difference between the two that FIFA wants us to consider is "deliberate" in terms of a mechanical sequence of events - A begets B begets C - regardless of how it was thought to work by the perpetrators, i.e., their "intent".
His point was that the law was the ball has to be a deliberate pass from the foot to the keeper, if either part was not deliberate, then it was legal. His mind reading comment was said in jest. I would really like to know if I have this one wrong, NSA seems to say so. What does "deliberate" in this context refer to: the kick being deliberate or the target, as in kicked TO the keeper deliberately? It clearly isn't any deliberatly kicked ball by a defender, cause they end up at the keeper on bad clears for example and are picked up, no call. I will agree that the line gets a bit fuzzy on how to call the "weird" ones we are now talking about, but you probabaly can get away with talking to the keeper after the first non-call and tell him that subsequent ones will be treated as a pattern and your opinion of it will change.
i have also heard similar "intent" discussions, and frankly i'm not sure that i understand the difference between "intent" and "deliberate" if, as i understand the case to be, "deliberate" applies to the "to the keeper" part and not just to the "kicking" part. deliberately to the keeper requires some assessment, difficult as it may be, of the intent, doesn't it? was the defender kicking it to the goalie or was he trying to clear it for a throw-in or corner and slice it inadvertently toward the goal? or did he mean to hit it to the goalie and disguise it as a slice? going back to the trap picked up by the goalie, the instructor that i spoke with about a similar situation also said that you have to look at the intent and when it arose. (a) defender on the edge of the goal box calls the goalie out to him as he is trapping the ball vs (b) same defender traps the ball and prepares to kick it up field, and then changes his mind and doesn't play it as goalie comes out to pick it up. in the first situation, the trap (assuming it is with the foot) is a deliberate kick to the goalie, where in the latter there was no kick after the intent was formed. the instructor i was speaking with suggested in the latter situation that there would be no call. obviously, the difficulty is that there is a lot of gray area in between the two, and at more sophisticated levels it could become harder and harder to distinguish. do others disagree with this? have suggestions for dealing with it?
A defender kicks the ball back to the keeper. The keeper picks the ball up. The pass to the keeper was "deliberate", even if the defender's "intent" of the pass was to have the keeper clear the ball with his feet, not to have the keeper pick it up. We as refs can see that the pass was "deliberate", but we have no idea what the true "intent" of the pass was.
well, no defender would ever intend that the goalie pick up the backpass, since that would result in a freekick. but your example doesn't really get to what i think is the tougher issue - was the ball being kicked deliberately to the goalie or was a deliberately kicked ball inadvertently going to the goalie? in the scenario above you've assumed that it was deliberate, but i'm not sure i follow how this question is resolved without an assessment of intent (where did the defender intend for the ball to go, as opposed to what did the defender intend for the goalie to do with it once it got there).
No, it doesn't really remove the subjectiveness out of the equation. It just explains why the wording was changed from "intentional" to "deliberate". As you said, what defender would "intentionally" kick a ball to the keeper to pick it up? We can't really judge "intent", as we would have to examine what was going thru the defender's head. But we can judge if something was "deliberate", as we are judging the action itself. It's basically the same thing, did the defender pass the ball back on purpose. Semantically, though, we judge the action and not the thought process. It's still our call as to what we think happened.
We are turning this into rocket science. Was the ball purposely played with the foot to your own keeper? If so then he/she cannot handle it. Period end of paragraph. Do I need to get a law degree now to referee?
95% of the time, you are correct. It's a pretty easy call. I think we are talking about the other 5% of the time when the play isn't so black and white. Like when a defender traps a ball and the goalie comes out and picks it up. Or when a defender is making a pass and the goalie "intercepts" it. Like "playing distance", the definition changes with the age and skill of the players. I find that as the players get older and more skilled, I give a little less leeway to the keeper, as most of the action is "deliberate". If a pro player traps or passes the ball to an area that the keeper can get to (versus a deflection), I see that as a deliberate action by the defender, and the goalie should know that. At younger ages, many of these plays are not "deliberate", and the keeper doesn't see them as deliberate, so I give a little more slack. There will always be some controversy with this 5% of the calls, but I guess that's why we get paid the big bucks.
I thought we had covered this….deliberate has nothing to do with the intent of the kicker or to whom they are kicking the ball! It has to do with whether or not the kicker deliberately kicked the ball. That is, not deflected. It doesn’t matter in what direct or to what player. If it was kicked (not deflected), and the keeper uses the hands – penalty! Let’s review: (1.) A defender deliberately kicks the ball towards the touchline (maybe to kick it out…but who knows since most referees I know can not read minds). The keeper runs out of the PA, intercepts the ball and dribbles back into the PA and picks it up…toot the whistle and call the IFK. (2.) A defender deliberately kicks the ball towards the goal line and, similarly, the keeper intercepts the ball and picks it up…toot time! (3.) A defender deliberately kicks the ball towards a teammate and the keeper runs over to intercept the pass and picks it up…toot time. Again, “deliberate” has to do with the action of the foot…was is deliberately kicked OR was it deflected…that’s all you need to decide when making this call.
just to confuse things more... the dc united ne rev game 6/15. defender near the 18 appears to try and clear the ball from the area by kicking it towards his own goalline, about half way between the end on the pa and the post. keeper runs over and intercepts the ball before it goes over the line, preventing a cornerkick. hall does not make a call for a "passback". personally, i would have made the call for the keeper handling the "passback". ball was deliberately played via foot to an area where the keeper could handle it. i don't know why hall let it go.
No offense intended here, but from what position of authority are you making this statement? It contradicts what I remember from my course and some others on this board have disagreed with it, as well as given anecdotal evidence contradicting this. Not trying to be a jerk, but if this is coming from a USSF official, FIFA ref etc, I am more likely to change my opinion, than if it is coming from another "lowly grade 8" such as myself.
Ref47 - It sounds to me like he made the right call since the defender did not deliberately kick the ball to the keeper.
From Jim Allen: USSF answer (October 29, 2004): If, in the opinion of the referee, the player deliberately kicked the ball to the goalkeeper or to a place where the goalkeeper could easily play it, the requirements of the Law have been met as soon as the goalkeeper handles the ball. We should add that "kicking" the ball with the knee would not truly fall within the realm of kicking, so this situation would not appear to be an infringement.
i agree with nj ref on this guys and gals. his examples are right on. atr 12.20 states - kicked = foot; kicked to = the play is to or toward a place where the keeper can legally handle the ball; deliberate = play on ball purposefull, not a deflection or misdirected kick. forget intent. it is simple. use foot to kick the ball (not a deflection or misdirected play on the ball) and the keeper touches it - call the infringement. this is why i found hall's no call confusing from the dc united match.