A&H

“Charging” a free kick

RefJef

RefChat Addict
Free kick to whites, just inside their half. He’s obviously going to lump it forward into the mixer.

Nearest defender, a sole player, is some 20 yards or so from the ball. All other players are lined up on the edge of the penalty area.

As white defender runs to take free kick, the sole red defender runs towards the ball - think Rugby Union, players charging the ball from under the posts at a conversion attempt. He never got close to being (less than) 10 yards from the ball before it was kicked.

Ball headed harmlessly behind for a goal kick, and I ignored the sole shout of you can’t charge a free kick ...

But it’s got me thinking. Just want to check there was nothing wrong with his actions. After all, you don’t have to remain static at a free kick.

Any thoughts?
 
The Referee Store
I’ve long thought that everyone has got it wrong when setting up a wall.

Instead of linking arms and pulling everyone in for a nice tight wall, you’d be be better off leaving a gap just less than a ball’s width between players. The ball can’t pass through such a gap, so you get a wider wall using the same amount of players.
 
I’ve long thought that everyone has got it wrong when setting up a wall.

Instead of linking arms and pulling everyone in for a nice tight wall, you’d be be better off leaving a gap just less than a ball’s width between players. The ball can’t pass through such a gap, so you get a wider wall using the same amount of players.
But you have to consider that players will shy away leaving a gap for the ball to pass through. Also if arms aren't linked, there's a temptation to lift/stiffen/wave one at the ball as it passes, thus conceding a free kick (penalty?)
 
If I was gk, I would not have a wall. I think I would have more chance of saving the ball if I could see it from start to finish.
Not sure on that. The power and accuracy of players these days would probably leave keepers well stranded. At the very least the wall means there has to be an element of getting over the wall and back on target whilst the keeper is optimally positioned to defend the his side should the kicker wish to bypass he wall.
 
An ex-pro GK I follow on twitter hates the standard idea of walls for central FK's, thinks they just block the GK's view and mean the GK only ever has to get involved to make exceptional saves in either top corner. He always touts the idea of two smaller walls to try and block the two sides of the goal, leaving a central channel for the GK to cover, that also gives him a clear view of the ball. Would love to see that tried!
 
I just think without a wall the gk would see more of the ball for longer, instead of only seeing it when its arrowing mid air, i of course understand the concept of a wall blocking one side, leaving the keeper to cover the other but as long as the kicker clears the wall with reasonable pace, the gk is getting half as much time to see it as they would without a wall.
 
I just think without a wall the gk would see more of the ball for longer, instead of only seeing it when its arrowing mid air, i of course understand the concept of a wall blocking one side, leaving the keeper to cover the other but as long as the kicker clears the wall with reasonable pace, the gk is getting half as much time to see it as they would without a wall.
Your logic makes sense and I am not suggesting you dont understand the concept of the wall. I think more goals would be scored without walls. Sometimes as a keeper you just have to say well done kicker. Doesnt matter how long you can see the ball when Hirsty's smacked one at 113mph.
 
Your logic makes sense and I am not suggesting you dont understand the concept of the wall. I think more goals would be scored without walls. Sometimes as a keeper you just have to say well done kicker. Doesnt matter how long you can see the ball when Hirsty's smacked one at 113mph.
They had a decent team back then, Hirsty was a decent striker who allegedly turned down Man Utd in his pomp. His son seems to be following in his fathers mould.
 
They had a decent team back then, Hirsty was a decent striker who allegedly turned down Man Utd in his pomp. His son seems to be following in his fathers mould.
Almost. Sadly he has had his head turned and wont sign a new deal. So he isnt getting a look in at thr minute, youth or 1sts
 
Almost. Sadly he has had his head turned and wont sign a new deal. So he isnt getting a look in at thr minute, youth or 1sts

Probably didn't help that his old man left his role as a coach in March, seemingly under something of a cloud, and the only action Hirst Junior has had at any level since has been for England U19s. So he'll be off for nowt at the end of the season.
 
Probably didn't help that his old man left his role as a coach in March, seemingly under something of a cloud, and the only action Hirst Junior has had at any level since has been for England U19s. So he'll be off for nowt at the end of the season.
Not sure he was a coach. Think it was a more upstairs role. iirc his father is his agent as well. Rumours of a falling out with the club/Mr chansiri lead to his departure
 
Not sure on that. The power and accuracy of players these days would probably leave keepers well stranded. At the very least the wall means there has to be an element of getting over the wall and back on target whilst the keeper is optimally positioned to defend the his side should the kicker wish to bypass he wall.

Not so sure, no requirement to stay bang on his line, so that helps. Clearly its a help to have a wall though, otherwise professional GKs WOULD dispense with it!
 
If I was gk, I would not have a wall. I think I would have more chance of saving the ball if I could see it from start to finish.
As a former goalkeeper and goalkeeping coach, I would say it's better face a free kick with a wall in the way protecting the keeper and the goal. Except at the highest level (top professional leagues or internationals) the vast majority of players cannot put a ball into the "postage stamp" area of the goal. From my experience and observations if you have a wall, the vast majority of times the ball will miss the target or hit the wall and even if it is on target it's not always with enough speed/accuracy to particularly trouble the keeper. On the other hand, most decent forwards would be able to hit the target 9 times out of 10 if there were no wall, certainly from 20 yards or so.

I wonder if people's perceptions are being influenced by the marvellous free kicks that we see from time to time at the highest levels of the game and which are then replayed over and over again. There is still only a relatively small number of players who can regularly score such kicks. If you dispense with the wall then as far as I'm concerned you'd be catering for the exception rather than the rule.
 
Back
Top