Drop ball (new rules)

[Joey]

Some things have changed now, after the new rule changes have taken place.

I have been told that a player, who gets the ball after a drop ball, has only one touch to play the ball. Is that correct?

I hope this is a misunderstanding.

Here's a situation that takes place quite frequently:

A keeper jumps up to grab the ball from a cross. He catches it and falls down awkwardly and gets slightly injured. No foul took place. You stop play to check up on him and after a quick help from a physio he gets up and is ready to play again.

Here comes the drop ball. If you drop it, he can only kick it away or pass, using only one touch.

That can't be the right outcome. I have read the rules a few times (Law 8) and I can't see anything about the player only having just one touch.

Discuss.

 

[Peter Grove]

have been told that a player, who gets the ball after a drop ball, has only one touch to play the ball. Is that correct?

No it is not correct. The new law on this is that the first player to touch the ball after a dropped ball, is not allowed to score a goal (until or unless a second player has touched the ball).

The actual wording is as follows:

If a dropped ball enters the goal without touching at least two players play is restarted with:
• a goal kick if it enters the opponents’ goal
• a corner kick if it enters the team’s goal

 

[Goldfish]

Hi
The new wording quoted by PG tidies up a problem that existed with the current law wording interpretation. Questions were posed about the situations were there were a number of touches by the same player at a DB such as the tee it up touch plus the kick. The new wording now requires a second player to be involved. Previously the referee could decide that only one touch was allowed and allow the goal as the wording just said "kicked directly". A referee could also interpret that multiple touches was also kicked directly. Much clearer now.

 

[jdmesp]

A good change in the wording for a drop(ped!!) ball. Definitely clears up a few things.

 

[TopCat]

No it is not correct. The new law on this is that the first player to touch the ball after a dropped ball, is not allowed to score a goal (until or unless a second player has touched the ball).

The actual wording is as follows:

Wasn't aware of this until it came up other day in conversation. So just to clarify, it's a 'sporting' drop ball player who is 'supposed' to kick ball back to keeper dribbles with it shoots, comes off keeper and goes in that is a goal? Doesn't touch keeper it's goal kick?

 

[Peter Grove]

So just to clarify, it's a 'sporting' drop ball player who is 'supposed' to kick ball back to keeper dribbles with it shoots, comes off keeper and goes in that is a goal? Doesn't touch keeper it's goal kick?

Correct as per the law.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Wasn't aware of this until it came up other day in conversation. So just to clarify, it's a 'sporting' drop ball player who is 'supposed' to kick ball back to keeper dribbles with it shoots, comes off keeper and goes in that is a goal? Doesn't touch keeper it's goal kick?

A player trying that usually ends up being scythed down (or at very least chased up the park Benny Hill style) then you have a RC to give that you kinda don't want to give....maybe it should be a YC though for self policing USB

Just off topic, if someone said "drop it I will I out it back", then tried to go on a run fro half way line, could you justify a caution for "actions deemed to be imflammatory"?

 

[Peter Grove]

I'm not sure about "actions deemed to be inflammatory" as that phrase does not appear in the Laws of the Game (the only reference to actions that could be inflammatory is in relation to the celebration of a goal, as far as I'm aware) but in previous discussions about this scenario, various people have said it could be seen as USB under the heading of "shows a lack of respect for the game." As I recall, opinions were divided as to the merits of such a call but I could see a case for it.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

In Scotland we have a caution code for ADTBI. Would that cover, say, Souness planting his Galatasary flag on his rivals turf, or whatever it was that he did?!! (yes am aware he was manager and could not have been shown a card as such but still....)

 

[Goldfish]

Hi CM
The infamous Adriano goal for Shaktar Donetsk springs to mind. It was for that type of reason that the law was changed so that multiple touches did not nullify direct. Now two players have to touch the ball. However even in the Adriano incident the ball was passed to him so under the amended law it is still legal. UEFA suspended and fined Adriano with no complaint so the game wants it eliminated.
Now the player that says that he will give it back to both the referee and the opponents and decides not to by running off with the ball then very simply he has " verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart" which is a caution and an IDFK.
We have no issue around the caution for a player that shouts LEAVE IT to an opponent in an unsporting way so here the same can apply. We can also caution him for attempts to deceive the referee (not limited to simulation)or showing a lack of respect for the game or whatever USB we want, the important part is that it is a caution and an IDFK

 

[TopCat]

Hi CM
The infamous Adriano goal for Shaktar Donetsk springs to mind. It was for that type of reason that the law was changed so that multiple touches did not nullify direct. Now two players have to touch the ball. However even in the Adriano incident the ball was passed to him so under the amended law it is still legal. UEFA suspended and fined Adriano with no complaint so the game wants it eliminated.
Now the player that says that he will give it back to both the referee and the opponents and decides not to by running off with the ball then very simply he has " verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart" which is a caution and an IDFK.
We have no issue around the caution for a player that shouts LEAVE IT to an opponent in an unsporting way so here the same can apply. We can also caution him for attempts to deceive the referee (not limited to simulation)or showing a lack of respect for the game or whatever USB we want, the important part is that it is a caution and an IDFK

I like that, verbal distraction it makes sense