A&H

preventing the keeper from releasing?

The Referee Store
Does the keeper not kick his own defender in the back of the leg? The red defender starts limping away
 
george.g said:
Does that change whether the attacker is impeding the GK?
Click to expand...
Well yes because did he prevent the keeper from releasing the ball? No. The defender did.
Did the attacker attempt to kick it whilst in the process of releasing. Also no. Therefore no offence is committed by the attacker.
I think angles are funny here to, the ball easily clears the "interfering" attacker, so I don't think he is actually impacting as much as first appears.
 
For me the player with the orange boots is shadowing the keeper and follows him when he (the keeper) changes direction. I though this was not allowed.

Does the attacker impede the progress of the keeper? Yes.

Does the attacker attempt to kick the ball? No.

Has the goalkeeper been challenged when in control of the ball with his hands? Possibly.

Pages 100-101 LOTG.

I'm giving a fee kick here.
 
Kent Ref said:
For me the player with the orange boots is shadowing the keeper and follows him when he (the keeper) changes direction. I though this was not allowed.

Does the attacker impede the progress of the keeper? Yes.

Does the attacker attempt to kick the ball? No.

Has the goalkeeper been challenged when in control of the ball with his hands? Possibly.

Pages 100-101 LOTG.

I'm giving a fee kick here.
Click to expand...
For which offence are you giving an idfk?

We can't say the release was prevented because it wasn't. And the attacker hasn't challenged the GK for the ball. And he hasn't attempted to kick it either so I'm at a loss as to why we would stop play here.

The only reason what happens, happens, is because his own player impeded him. Seems very unfair to then penalise the opposition.
 
Is the attacker allowed to follow the keeper when he is trying to kick the ball into play?

For me the attacker is doing this so the goalkeeper's progress is being impeded. That's my reasoning.

Why is the attacker doing this? To stop the keeper releasing the ball into play or at least slow him down. That's my logic.
 
Kent Ref said:
Is the attacker allowed to follow the keeper when he is trying to kick the ball into play?

For me the attacker is doing this so the goalkeeper's progress is being impeded. That's my reasoning.

Why is the attacker doing this? To stop the keeper releasing the ball into play or at least slow him down. That's my logic.
Click to expand...
Turning it round a bit, what specific part of law could you quote to justify that decision? That isn't me being picky or saying you are wrong by the way, but as an observer I will sometimes ask referees what specific law they followed to come to the outcome they did.
 
RustyRef said:
Turning it round a bit, what specific part of law could you quote to justify that decision? That isn't me being picky or saying you are wrong by the way, but as an observer I will sometimes ask referees what specific law they followed to come to the outcome they did.
Click to expand...
As i stated above.

Page 101 LOTG "Impeding the progress of an opponent without contact" - that paragraph in the middle of the page.
 
Kent Ref said:
As i stated above.

Page 101 LOTG "Impeding the progress of an opponent without contact" - that paragraph in the middle of the page.
Click to expand...
OK, but that same section states " ... when the ball is not within playing distance of either player". I would therefore argue that it doesn't apply here, as the keeper had the ball is his hand it was therefore clearly within his playing distance.

It wouldn't necessarily affect the mark / grade, but I would probably be offering advice around what the game expects. If the defending team felt their keeper had been unfairly impeded they would be a lot more agitated than they were here, and their complaints seem to be more around the referee not stopping play. They would almost certainly have known, as would the opposition, that the keeper had kicked his own team mate, from the contact noise and inevitable yelp from the player he kicked, and I don't think anyone is expecting a free kick here.

That said, my opinion on first viewing, as it seems was @JamesL's, was just give a safe free kick, but that was because I didn't see him kick the defender. Once that is clear I am finding it very difficult to support an impeding offence.
 
RustyRef said:
OK, but that same section states " ... when the ball is not within playing distance of either player". I would therefore argue that it doesn't apply here, as the keeper had the ball is his hand it was therefore clearly within his playing distance.

It wouldn't necessarily affect the mark / grade, but I would probably be offering advice around what the game expects. If the defending team felt their keeper had been unfairly impeded they would be a lot more agitated than they were here, and their complaints seem to be more around the referee not stopping play. They would almost certainly have known, as would the opposition, that the keeper had kicked his own team mate, from the contact noise and inevitable yelp from the player he kicked, and I don't think anyone is expecting a free kick here.

That said, my opinion on first viewing, as it seems was @JamesL's, was just give a safe free kick, but that was because I didn't see him kick the defender. Once that is clear I am finding it very difficult to support an impeding offence.
Click to expand...
I have just re-read the section.

So are attackers allowed to follow the keeper which hinders them from kicking the ball in to play? For me it's a no.

Are you saying you would give a free kick if the attacker makes immediate contact with the ball but no free kick if the keeper somehow manages to eventually kick the ball? Seems inconsistent.

I asked myself is it fair that the keeper is being prevented from releasing the ball? If the answer is no then a free kick can be the only answer unless you can play advantage. Kicking his own player is irrelevant to me as the offence happened before this.
 
Kent Ref said:
I have just re-read the section.

So are attackers allowed to follow the keeper which hinders them from kicking the ball in to play? For me it's a no.

Are you saying you would give a free kick if the attacker makes immediate contact with the ball but no free kick if the keeper somehow manages to eventually kick the ball? Seems inconsistent.

I asked myself is it fair that the keeper is being prevented from releasing the ball? If the answer is no then a free kick can be the only answer unless you can play advantage. Kicking his own player is irrelevant to me as the offence happened before this.
Click to expand...
For the reason I stated, it can't be impeding.

The law you actually want is under indirect free kick offences on page 100, specifically ...

prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from the hands or kicks or attempts to kick the ball when the goalkeeper is in the process of releasing it

The attacker certainly didn't kick or attempt to kick the ball, so you can only ask if he prevented the keeper from releasing the ball. I don't think he was anywhere near close enough to be penalised for that, and it is actually the keeper kicking his own player that has affected him releasing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top