A&H

Keeper Dropping and Picking up the Ball

Dan1882

New Member
Had this one yesterday and it was a joy to give. 2-1 up at half time, taking their sweet time every time the ball went out and clearing the ball as far as they could away from the FoP, 8 minutes added on at the end.

Cross comes in, 4 minutes to go, keeper catches the ball and quickly relinquishes it to his feet. 2 attackers close in and he picks the ball. I was shocked. Blew up and jogged over explaining the decision to the midfielder who thought I'd given handball. Attacking team wanted to go quickly from the 6 yard line and the captain got himself booked for trying to go a second time before the whistle.

Scored from the IDFK and finished 2-2.
 
The Referee Store
I nearly had an incident with this at the weekend - a weak-ish shot came in towards the keeper and he half-caught it and then knocked it down to the ground. Appeals came in from the attacking side ("Can he pick that up again ref?") and I decided that he had enough control behind it that he couldn't. Gave a loud "No hands!" shout and fortunately, he listened and punted it out, but wasn't very happy with having to panic-clear it.

I'd be interested to know how much control people think the keeper has to have for it to count as controlled? He certainly never had it properly caught, but he absolutely could have done if he wanted to, and made a conscious decision to pat it down when he could otherwise have used his chest, as he did at other times in the game. Was I a little too strict here?
 
Rare, but was AR earlier this season when GK in WPL put ball down (after being told to by a team mate) then when pass to defender wasn't on, picked the ball up again!
 
I nearly had an incident with this at the weekend - a weak-ish shot came in towards the keeper and he half-caught it and then knocked it down to the ground. Appeals came in from the attacking side ("Can he pick that up again ref?") and I decided that he had enough control behind it that he couldn't. Gave a loud "No hands!" shout and fortunately, he listened and punted it out, but wasn't very happy with having to panic-clear it.

I'd be interested to know how much control people think the keeper has to have for it to count as controlled? He certainly never had it properly caught, but he absolutely could have done if he wanted to, and made a conscious decision to pat it down when he could otherwise have used his chest, as he did at other times in the game. Was I a little too strict here?
There has been some recent word changes on this (used the word 'parry' in the past) but even in the new wording the word 'control' is not used explicitly. For the offence to occur the keeper must 'release' the ball and one assumes in order to release it you would have to be in control of it. Control is defined fairly clearly.

The first question is, did you consider the touch a save?
upload_2017-10-17_16-19-7.png
If the answer is yes then he never had control of it so i'd say he could have picked it up later.

If the answer is no then he did control it "by touching it with any part of the hands or arms" (the touch was not an accidental rebound). The next question is did he released it after controlling it? I would have said no if he picked it up quickly after he knocked it down with his foot. But from your description it sounds as though he did't pick it up quickly and in fact released it.


upload_2017-10-17_15-52-23.png
 
I would probably have gone it was a parry and no control in that situation, they pat it down, but have no control of where it will land etc....I would suggest control is when the ball is stationery at some point i.e. he caught it but 'let' it drop rather than an action of the hand where it could be construed as a punch/parry. @GraemeS you say he did it a number of times during the game did you punish him every time? IMHO yes you were harsh but I am guessing it's a YHTBT scenario.
 
Yes, this can be tricky. There have been a couple of instances recently where I have given young keepers the benefit of the doubt after they have sort of fumbled the ball and regained control. No appeals and no attackers prevented from playing the ball, although they are of course not considerations. Maybe I was too generous, but I felt neither had properly 'released' the ball.
 
There has been some recent word changes on this (used the word 'parry' in the past) but even in the new wording the word 'control' is not used explicitly. For the offence to occur the keeper must 'release' the ball and one assumes in order to release it you would have to be in control of it. Control is defined fairly clearly.

The first question is, did you consider the touch a save?
View attachment 1454
If the answer is yes then he never had control of it so i'd say he could have picked it up later.

If the answer is no then he did control it "by touching it with any part of the hands or arms" (the touch was not an accidental rebound). The next question is did he released it after controlling it? I would have said no if he picked it up quickly after he knocked it down with his foot. But from your description it sounds as though he did't pick it up quickly and in fact released it.


View attachment 1453
So the second use of hands can depend on if the first use was a save or not, and that decision can depend on if the ball was on target or not? That doesn't seem massively intuitive to me to be honest.

In this case, if the keeper had done nothing, then it would have gone in the goal. But the shot was so weak that it was in no way a difficult save and in my opinion, it was at a comfortable height and speed that he could have used his chest/stomach to control the ball with very little danger of it going in. Or alternatively, he could very easily have caught the ball - which in my opinion, he did for a split second, before realising that he could just kill some time by patting it down.

He didn't risk it again to be honest, from then on he either caught it normally or chested it down and didn't get his hands involved.
 
The sensible approach is to only penalise if they catch the ball, then release it, then handle it again. I've seen referees penalise keepers when they have parried it and then picked it up again, and on every occasion it caused them all sorts of problems as they surprised everyone, including the opposition

It's difficult for the referee to accurately determine whether the keeper should have been able to catch it. Additionally, if you penalise one keeper for parrying and then handling again, what do you do if the other keeper goes to catch an easy ball, makes a mess of it and drops it, then handles again?
 
The sensible approach is to only penalise if they catch the ball, then release it, then handle it again. I've seen referees penalise keepers when they have parried it and then picked it up again, and on every occasion it caused them all sorts of problems as they surprised everyone, including the opposition

It's difficult for the referee to accurately determine whether the keeper should have been able to catch it. Additionally, if you penalise one keeper for parrying and then handling again, what do you do if the other keeper goes to catch an easy ball, makes a mess of it and drops it, then handles again?
Yeah, I think you're probably right to be fair. I think it was an instinctive decision at the time - perhaps influenced by the fact he was already trying to waste time and we weren't even at 35 minutes by that point!
 
I've given Parries but to say they aren't aware of the rule is an understatement. Unless its absolutely blatant then give them the benefit of the doubt however don't be afraid to act on the stonewallers!!
 
My one he had parried a few times earlier in the game from long balls and always made a point to keep his hands away from the ball when using his upper body. This time was from a cross and he held the ball for hardly any time before patting it down. He spoke to me after the game about it and I told him that as his hands were around the ball rather than over it I believed he had caught it. He understood my reasoning but did let me know that I was wrong as per usual.
 
This time was from a cross and he held the ball for hardly any time before patting it down.
Even if it was only for a short length of time, I think that as @RustyRef alludes to, this is the deciding factor - did the keeper clearly hold the ball in both hands for a length of time (even a short one) first, then release it or did he let it just rebound off his hands immediately? On any immediate rebound (even if it's one that you think he should have been able to hold onto if he'd really tried) I'd be inclined to let it go, subject to pattern and repetition but if it's been held between the hands and then released I'd be thinking really hard about giving it (maybe a quick warning on the first occurrence, just to allow the benefit of the doubt).
 
Even if it was only for a short length of time, I think that as @RustyRef alludes to, this is the deciding factor - did the keeper clearly hold the ball in both hands for a length of time (even a short one) first, then release it or did he let it just rebound off his hands immediately? On any immediate rebound (even if it's one that you think he should have been able to hold onto if he'd really tried) I'd be inclined to let it go, subject to pattern and repetition but if it's been held between the hands and then released I'd be thinking really hard about giving it (maybe a quick warning on the first occurrence, just to allow the benefit of the doubt).

One of the examples I referred to was in a supply league game where I was on the line last season. It was an over hit cross that was heading on target, the keeper easily parried it down, dribbled to the edge of the area then picked it up. Not a peep from anyone, then the referee, who to that point was having a fantastic game, blew his whistle and penalised it. It was in front of me, and at the time even I was struggling to work out what he had given, and the players were just not getting it at all. Thankfully I was junior (usually the case after you drop back down to L5 as you are on the way down and the other AR is on the way up ..!) as the defending team's bench went absolutely ballistic and it took a lot of sorting out.

I can just about understand why the referee gave it, but as I said to him after, no one expected it and he managed to turn an easy game into a very difficult one for him. Refereeing is difficult enough as it is without making it more difficult.
 
One of the examples I referred to was in a supply league game where I was on the line last season. It was an over hit cross that was heading on target, the keeper easily parried it down, dribbled to the edge of the area then picked it up. Not a peep from anyone, then the referee, who to that point was having a fantastic game, blew his whistle and penalised it. It was in front of me, and at the time even I was struggling to work out what he had given, and the players were just not getting it at all. Thankfully I was junior (usually the case after you drop back down to L5 as you are on the way down and the other AR is on the way up ..!) as the defending team's bench went absolutely ballistic and it took a lot of sorting out.

I can just about understand why the referee gave it, but as I said to him after, no one expected it and he managed to turn an easy game into a very difficult one for him. Refereeing is difficult enough as it is without making it more difficult.
If the ball was "on target" and heading for the goal - or close to the goal - then by the LotG surely the GK "parry" qualifies as a save and therefore that was an error in law?

"Save
An action by a player to stop or attempt to stop the ball when it is going into or very close to the goal using any part of the body except the hands/arms (unless a goalkeeper within their own penalty area)"

"A goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball when:
• the ball is between the hands or between the hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body) or by touching it with any part of the hands or arms except if the ball rebounds accidentally from the goalkeeper or the goalkeeper has made a save"

We have to decide if:
a) the GK controls the ball
b) the ball accidentally rebounds from the GK
c) the GK has made a save
...There is no parry or blocking a cross in the LotG. We have to decide on one of these, right, there's no other alternative in these double touch scenarios, right?
 
Maybe it is the way I read, but I am not sure the keeper being in control of the ball actually appertains to the IFK offence. It looks forward to the clause regarding when a keeper can be safely challenged. For me the crucial phrase that should dictate whether an IFK is awarded is 'release the ball'. The keeper could potentially have control of the ball--even from a parry like this--without having released it.
 
I've said this before but I'm not quite sure why we need to talk about parrying the ball. Parrying is not a term that appears in the laws and has no meaning within them. According to the laws, when the keeper touches the ball with the hands it's either an accidental rebound, a save or it's control. Those are the only possibilities and the only thing the referee has to decide is which one of those three it is. For me, talk about parrying is just an unnecessary complication. Yes, it used to be mentioned in the laws but it isn't there any more so as far as I'm concerned we don't need the added complication of considering it.
 
Back
Top