Search results

At the risk of extending this discussion about a very rare occurrence, others have pointed out that the text you have quoted is now elsewhere in law, and relates to the 8-second law. Control is not now mentioned in the law relative to the goalkeeper handling after releasing the ball.

But control is not mentioned in this section either . . . (?)

One issue in the UK is the number of multi-pitch venues. If they don't fetch the ball quickly when it goes out of play, they never see it again🙁

Competition rules should/must follow what the Laws of the Game say: "The referee should include in the temporary dismissal period any time ‘lost’ for a stoppage for which ‘additional time’ will be allowed at the end of the half (e.g. substitution, injury, goal celebration, etc.)"

@Peter Grove will be able to guide as to whether "deliberate parry" was in the Laws, and if so when it was removed. In 1995, for example, the guidance was: "with Law XII (o) . (15) The International F.A . Board is of the opinion that a goalkeeper, in the circumstances described in Law XI 15...

As a group we are considering the changes in law wording, which I suspect has inadvertently opened this as a balanced discussion. Unless IFAB tell us otherwise, my opinion is that the goalkeeper is releasing the ball in the OP description. That said, the point about whether this is a hill to die...

You have the right to disagree, as members will know only too well.

You can't insist that they run to get the ball, but you need to show clearly that you are willing to reach for a card if they don't stop consuming time by going too slowly. Use the captain publicly if the captain is going to be any help, or a direct and public shout to the player. A shout of (e...

The understanding on this issue has always been that if the ball rebounds from the goalkeeper when they make a save or need to parry a shot, they may handle again, but the OP describes the goalkeeper handling the ball with no pressure, electing to put it into play, and then handling again, which...

Good question. "Football expects" will feature in the responses somewhere. Meanwhile, I consulted a dictionary for the definition of "release" and found "to set someone or something free, make something public, or stop holding onto something" so I will go with "make public" in your scenario.

Do you want the FA to discontinue female-only courses also? Your last question is too silly to deserve an answer.

Indirect free kick.

You may also consider whether a card for the manager would have been appropriate, either during or after the game. Sounds as though he deserved one.

When we run female-only courses, many participants report that they feel more comfortable than they would in an open course. If we can make course members comfortable, learning will follow.

Such a good response, it appeared three times after a server glitch😕😁 The legislation includes: Positive Action: This is lawful and involves taking steps to improve equality and representation in the workplace. For example, employers can implement targeted recruitment strategies to attract...

As he handled deliberately, the arm position is irrelevant.

It's a story that resurfaces every now and again. Perfectly legal in England, but always a subject which splits opinions.

We are conscious of the fact that more than 50% of our newbies start in mini-soccer, where anticipation is impossible and proximity/viewing angles are the aim.

Law says "for the goalkeeper" so you need the goalkeeper present and they can play it or allow a team-mate to do so (as you say, coming in from 4 metres away) Presumably the defender was about to hoof it upfield? Another scenario would be an attacker running from 4 metres and getting to the ball...

Understand his approach, but the armband is a potential deterrent to abuse as any penalties/sanctions are at least doubled when the referee wears their Under-18 armband. If they don't wear it, the sanctions are not increased, even if the club know that the referee is under 18.