The Ref Stop

Paris Vs Arsenal Ladies

The Ref Stop
First, this is a side effect of the change on GKs not leaving the PA, which is the only reason this confusion is even possible. Ultimately, we have a construct where the question is whether the GK’s kick was an effort to put the ball in play or not. We’ve seen other scenarios where a player clearly took the kick to put it in play, and the R ignored it when. Player picked it up.

Second, there is no way to evaluate this without the context of the game. Was the GK usually taking them with a pass inside the GA? Was the player who “handled” the one who was usually taking the kicks? Was the Rs count running down? (I couldn’t tell from the clip.)

third, this is going to recur every now and then with our current rules—and the R is damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. Ever since the Law change, I’ve advocated for at least a requirement the ball leave the GA to be in play to reduce the risk of confusion. (And I’ve argued for the same thing for CKs—must leave the arc to be in play.) I really hate the box the R is put in on plays like this
 
socal lurker said:
First, this is a side effect of the change on GKs not leaving the PA, which is the only reason this confusion is even possible. Ultimately, we have a construct where the question is whether the GK’s kick was an effort to put the ball in play or not. We’ve seen other scenarios where a player clearly took the kick to put it in play, and the R ignored it when. Player picked it up.

Second, there is no way to evaluate this without the context of the game. Was the GK usually taking them with a pass inside the GA? Was the player who “handled” the one who was usually taking the kicks? Was the Rs count running down? (I couldn’t tell from the clip.)

third, this is going to recur every now and then with our current rules—and the R is damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t. Ever since the Law change, I’ve advocated for at least a requirement the ball leave the GA to be in play to reduce the risk of confusion. (And I’ve argued for the same thing for CKs—must leave the arc to be in play.) I really hate the box the R is put in on plays like this
Click to expand...
In England we have had a clear directive that this situation now has to be a penalty.

So looks like that has gone further as well.
 
Interesting--what are the criteria you are being told to use to decide that the GK was in fact taken?

(I really hate that the law change created this scenario that a bit of confusion on the restart can turn an innocuous GK into a PK.)
 
socal lurker said:
Interesting--what are the criteria you are being told to use to decide that the GK was in fact taken?

(I really hate that the law change created this scenario that a bit of confusion on the restart can turn an innocuous GK into a PK.)
Click to expand...

"As part of our ongoing support around the recent Laws of the Game updates, we wanted to share some additional guidance regarding situations where a player deliberately handles the ball immediately following a goal kick.



Following a recent late clarification and change in approach adopted by UEFA and PRO REF and with a desire to ensure greater consistency across the football pyramid, The FA Refereeing Department will be adopting the same interpretation with immediate effect.



We recognise that over recent seasons there have been a number of incidents where match officials have taken differing approaches to situations involving a teammate deliberately handling the ball immediately after a goal kick has been taken. Whilst referees have often been encouraged to adopt a pragmatic approach, this has at times resulted in inconsistent outcomes across very similar incidents.

The guidance below is intended to provide greater clarity and consistency for clubs, players and match officials alike.

Guidance

Following the award of a goal kick by the referee, when the ball is stationary within the goal area and is kicked by the goalkeeper or a teammate of the goalkeeper, the goal kick will be considered to have been taken.

If, following the taking of the goal kick, a player deliberately touches the ball with their hand or arm, this will be penalised as handball.

The restart will therefore be:
A penalty kick if the player handling the ball is a teammate of the goalkeeper within their own penalty area.
An indirect free kick if the player handling the ball is the goalkeeper.
Where the goalkeeper wishes for a teammate to take the goal kick, it is recommended that the goalkeeper uses their hands, rather than their feet, to provide the ball to the teammate.

This avoids inadvertently taking the goal kick themselves."



The Ref Stop​
 
JamesL said:
Criteria in law.
Ball stationary, inside goal area, kicked and clearly moves.
Click to expand...
I get that you are saying this in the context of the OP but ultimately it is a judgement call of what the intent of the kick was. Even you have allowed a little kick that move the ball to set up the kick without calling the second kick as a double touch right? (Roll of the ball with the bottom of foot counts as a kick)

For me, the referee calling the OP as a penalty was a good judgement call. What was the defender thinking?

Even the FA's guideline somewhat supports my view by using the word "recommended" for goalkeepers.
 
Last edited:
ARF said:
Hm, I'd argue that the sentence after that pretty much scuppers that view though - if the goal kick can be taken inadvertently, then no judgement is required on the intent of the kick.
Click to expand...
Fair point, that's why I used the word "somewhat" and I also do note you used the words "pretty much".

Love an FA who only recommends, inadvertently, players not to comit an offence.

So am I correct in saying in England we don't need judgement on if a goal kick is inadvertently taken but we do for all other kick restarts?
 
one said:
Fair point, that's why I used the word "somewhat" and I also do note you used the words "pretty much".

Love an FA who only recommends, inadvertently, players not to comit an offence.

So am I correct in saying in England we don't need judgement on if a goal kick is inadvertently taken but we do for all other kick restarts?
Click to expand...
In the absence of any contrary guidance from the FA, I’d suggest English referees should simply follow law on all other kick restarts. The most obvious example being that free kick restarts from within the goal area should be treated exactly the same as the advice recently given for goal kicks.
 
Remember you can apply advantage for rolling ball restarts in general ;).

It's very clear to me that the goalkeeper never intended to take that as a goal kick, the match situation alone would tell you they aren't going to want to take it quickly. Apparently we can't consider that.

The OP is very close to DOGSO, the attacker is moving forward and the goalkeeper about the same distance away isn't moving.
 
Russell Jones said:
In the absence of any contrary guidance from the FA, I’d suggest English referees should simply follow law on all other kick restarts. The most obvious example being that free kick restarts from within the goal area should be treated exactly the same as the advice recently given for goal kicks.
Click to expand...
I don”t agree at all this is simply “following law.” If applied literally, we are going to be calling double touches all the time. Players routinely kick still balls to set them up for restarts. This is an interpretation designed to get Rs out of the “did she or didn’t she” game with respect to a specific scenario. But in a way that leads to draconian punishment for a misunderstanding, does anyone really want a game decided by whether the ball was still barely moving or stopped when a player kicked it to another for a GK?
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
socal lurker said:
I don”t agree at all this is simply “following law.” If applied literally, we are going to be calling double touches all the time. Players routinely kick still balls to set them up for restarts. This is an interpretation designed to get Rs out of the “did she or didn’t she” game with respect to a specific scenario. But in a way that leads to draconian punishment for a misunderstanding, does anyone really want a game decided by whether the ball was still barely moving or stopped when a player kicked it to another for a GK?
Click to expand...
This is slightly different as they are being kicked to, not from, where the restart should be taken.
 
socal lurker said:
I don”t agree at all this is simply “following law.” If applied literally, we are going to be calling double touches all the time. Players routinely kick still balls to set them up for restarts. This is an interpretation designed to get Rs out of the “did she or didn’t she” game with respect to a specific scenario. But in a way that leads to draconian punishment for a misunderstanding, does anyone really want a game decided by whether the ball was still barely moving or stopped when a player kicked it to another for a GK?
Click to expand...
For restarts being taken from anywhere outside of the goal areas, referees can legitimately choose to decide whether any kick of the ball has occurred from the correct location of the free kick.

That option is not appropriate for restarts within the goal area as the allowed kick location is much more flexible. Players will simply need to adjust and understand that kicking a stationary ball inside the goal area puts the ball in play .. fairly recently they’ve already adjusted perfectly well to a couple of far more radical changes to the goal kick process.
 
Russell Jones said:
For restarts being taken from anywhere outside of the goal areas, referees can legitimately choose to decide whether any kick of the ball has occurred from the correct location of the free kick.

That option is not appropriate for restarts within the goal area as the allowed kick location is much more flexible. Players will simply need to adjust and understand that kicking a stationary ball inside the goal area puts the ball in play .. fairly recently they’ve already adjusted perfectly well to a couple of far more radical changes to the goal kick process.
Click to expand...
Outside the area, "choosing the kick was not in the correct location" is a cop out, well probably not a cop out but a replacement for ball kicked, moved but not intended to take the kick. What if he intended to take the kick to a teammate 1m away but the team mate thought he is asked to take the kick and stops it with his hand. Just using a different excuse to use a jusdment call doesn't make it different to a goal kick.

That excuse wouldn't work for corner kicks though, what do we do there if ball was kicked twice inside the arc and in our judgement the first kick was to set it up?
 
one said:
Outside the area, "choosing the kick was not in the correct location" is a cop out, well probably not a cop out but a replacement for ball kicked, moved but not intended to take the kick. What if he intended to take the kick to a teammate 1m away but the team mate thought he is asked to take the kick and stops it with his hand. Just using a different excuse to use a jusdment call doesn't make it different to a goal kick.

That excuse wouldn't work for corner kicks though, what do we do there if ball was kicked twice inside the arc and in our judgement the first kick was to set it up?
Click to expand...
To be clear, if I believe that a free kick anywhere on the pitch has been correctly taken from a good enough approximation of the correct location, then the ball is in play and what will be will be. I was referring to those occasions where the ball is kicked from obviously the wrong location to roughly the right one.

Similarly on corners, if I believe that the ball has been kicked and has clearly moved, it's in play.

At the end of the day, we can't blame the authorities for choosing to clarify the GK situation. There have been top level, high profile instances where FIFA officials have decided on different outcomes for broadly the same situation. Way better to be clear up front about the desired outcome and give officials the reassurance that they will be backed if they correctly award a penalty.
 
Russell Jones said:
if I believe that a free kick anywhere on the pitch has been correctly taken from a good enough approximation of the correct location, then the ball is in play and what will be will be.
Click to expand...

Russell Jones said:
Similarly on corners, if I believe that the ball has been kicked and has clearly moved, it's in play.
Click to expand...
Even if you are clear the only intent of of the taker was to set up the ball for the kick by moving it with his foot 10 or so inches?

I honstly think taking the "kicked and clearly moves" that literally without judgement on thebintent is a recepie for disaster of a game management for the rest of that game.
 
one said:
Even if you are clear the only intent of of the taker was to set up the ball for the kick by moving it with his foot 10 or so inches?

I honstly think taking the "kicked and clearly moves" that literally without judgement on thebintent is a recepie for disaster of a game management for the rest of that game.
Click to expand...
Understand where you are coming from. When I'm acting as an AR at higher levels, players use their hands to ensure the placement of the ball is as perfect as possible. If I was a lone referee on a grassroots game and a player used his foot to do the same, then from 30 metres away, with my eyesight, I probably couldn't be sure the ball had "clearly moved" :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top