A&H

Back pass

J

jnwright71

New Member
Hi All,

A little advice please.

i ref’ed a fairly bad tempered U15 game today. In the second half, a player from the home team touched the ball within his goal area. There was no opposition player close by.

The ball travelled about 2 metres from the player and the goal keeper picked the ball up. i called for an indirect free kick on the edge of the goal area nearest the offence.

The home players, coaches and CAR go nuts stating it wasn’t deliberate. However, the ball wasn’t miskicked, nor did the player try and move to the ball to clear it. In fact, I think he moved away.

My question relates to the ‘deliberate‘ pass element of LOTG. I decided that the element of control exerted over the ball was deliberate, but accept that it could have been very unfortunately knocked down to the keeper by mistake. However, in the circumstances, the distance between the player and GK, lack of follow up action from the player and there being no evidence of a miskick aided my decision.

So, thoughts please. A good call or an error.
 
The Referee Store
The law requires that the ball be deliberately kicked to the goalkeeper. So there are three elements to consider.

1. Was the ball kicked (i.e. with the foot).
2. Was the kick deliberate (not an accidental deflection or rebound etc).
3. Was it intended to go to the goalkeeper?

Based on the OP saying, "it could have been very unfortunately knocked down to the keeper by mistake," it sounds very much to me as if this fails on point 3.

There's a phrase I like to quote here, which was used in FIFA circular 488.

What it says is, "the referee must only be convinced that this was the player's motive."

While this was not actually written with the deliberate kick to the goalkeeper scenario in mind (it was used for the tangentially-linked "deliberate trick to circumvent the law") I think it nevertheless fully encapsulates the intent of the part of the law we're discussing here.

Based on my understanding of the law, this offence should only the penalised if the referee is sure that player deliberately kicked the ball to their keeper. If there's any doubt about where the player intended the ball to go, then I would say it should not be penalised - at least not on the first occurrence.

However if this player or others on the same team start to repeat this in a way that suggests a ploy to kick the ball to where the keeper can get it, then you should be much more ready to call the offence.

But again, and especially in the first instance, I truly feel the referee needs to be convinced what the player's motive was, before taking action on this.
 
Hi Guys,

Thanks for the feedback.

I also took into consideration proximity and the pace of the ball. All the pace came off the ball, the goalkeeper was in close proximity to the incident and the ball moved in his direction. ‘Deliberate’ is very hard to determine and often so subjective. My opinion was it was deliberate, the player, CAR and coaches thought otherwise.

You can’t get things right every time, although I am one to self-reflect on mistakes/potential mistakes. What makes this harder is coaches, CARs and parent reactions and verbal abuse.
 
for me, at u15. Unless it’s a side footed obvious pass to the keeper I’m waving them away. You’re creating a rod for your own back trying to determine if it was deliberate. If there is ANY element of question that the ball has travelled in an unintended direction it’s not a back pass. Regardless of it’s pace and opposition proximity.

If it doesn’t scream “I’ve passed this to my keeper” as you watch it, then don’t look for finding ways to justify its deliberate.

Coaches and sidelines at that level are the worst. You could be correct in law and they’ll still be kicking off because of who knows what.

Chin up though, and remember if you are not sure SAFE REFEREEING. doing nothing in that scenario would have saved you an earful.

I would be interested to know what body part the player “touched” the ball with. But equally don’t want you to keep reliving the trauma😬
 
jnwright71 said:
Hi Guys,

Thanks for the feedback.

I also took into consideration proximity and the pace of the ball. All the pace came off the ball, the goalkeeper was in close proximity to the incident and the ball moved in his direction. ‘Deliberate’ is very hard to determine and often so subjective. My opinion was it was deliberate, the player, CAR and coaches thought otherwise.

You can’t get things right every time, although I am one to self-reflect on mistakes/potential mistakes. What makes this harder is coaches, CARs and parent reactions and verbal abuse.
Click to expand...
If it was hard to determine on this occasion and you have doubts then making a big punishment like a IFK on the goal area line on a doubtfully act is prob not the best decision. That doubt won't be there if they did it a second time and you can give it. Or better yet a quiet warning on the first one makes sure it doesn't happen again.

Deal with the reactions and abuse separately and independent of your other decision. Anyone in the team list is sanctioned. Ground officials (or as designated by your comp rules) must control the parents and spectators. Let them know if they don't then you will abandon the game. And follow through with it. They don't pay you nowhere near enough to take abuse.
 
More great feedback - thank you.

gvu-ref - the defender played the ball with his foot.

I was sure of the decision at the time, and am only seeking other viewpoints because of the reaction.

I definitely get the ‘turn a blind eye or ‘I didn’t hear/see it’ approach’, but also want to be fair. it’s one of those that if you don’t give it the attacking team goes nuts and if you do give it the defending team does the same. Hence, as you can’t win either way, I went with my first instinct.

The attacking team didn’t score from the IFK, but apparently it was still my fault the defending team lost 4-1 😂😂.

Most of the abuse was post game and has been reported.
 
Were there any appeals from the opponents? If there weren't you are going to be surprising everyone in penalising it, and that generally doesn't end well.

Many participants believe that the ball has to be played backwards for it to be an offence. I penalised one where a defender trapped the ball and the keeper then dived onto the ball and picked it up. It was clearly an intentional act, but everyone started shouting that the ball had been played forwards, not backwards, and nothing I said could make them understand that it doesn't have to be played backwards, or that a "back pass" offence doesn't actually exist in law.
 
There were loads of appeals from the attacking team.

I also explained that the pass doesn’t need to be backwards (it was sideways) and that there is actually no actual back pass rule, but this fell on deaf ears.
 
jnwright71 said:
Hi Guys,

Thanks for the feedback.

I also took into consideration proximity and the pace of the ball. All the pace came off the ball, the goalkeeper was in close proximity to the incident and the ball moved in his direction. ‘Deliberate’ is very hard to determine and often so subjective. My opinion was it was deliberate, the player, CAR and coaches thought otherwise.

You can’t get things right every time, although I am one to self-reflect on mistakes/potential mistakes. What makes this harder is coaches, CARs and parent reactions and verbal abuse.
Click to expand...
I may be getting this wrong (and if so, please correct me) but I get the impression you're concentrating primarily on whether the kick was deliberate (as opposite to a deflection, rebound etc) and not so much on whether the ball was intentionally passed to the goalkeeper.

Yes it's hard to determine if something is deliberate but in this particular scenario (as in the multiple other places in the law where the word "deliberate" is used) the referee is required to make that determination. And as with every decision you give, you have to be convinced of its correctness before you give it.

You said in your original description, that "it could have been very unfortunately knocked down to the keeper by mistake."

That sounds as if you were not totally sure where the player intended the ball to go. If that's the case, then as mentioned above, you shouldn't give the offence.

I have to agree with @gvu_ref that, "If there is ANY element of question that the ball has travelled in an unintended direction," then it’s not a ball deliberately kicked to the player's goalkeeper, and there's no offence if the keeper uses their hands.

If on the other hand, you're absolutely convinced that that the player meant the ball to go to the keeper, then obviously you should call it.
 
I've had something similar with an academy game - Goal kick - keeper plays it out from the back to left back, left back tries to play it across the 18yd box to the right centre back ( they had done this move several times before) but doesn't get enough on it and scuffs it, attacking team start to move towards the ball and the keeper rushes out and gets their hands on the ball just before the attacker taps it in.. Attacking team appeal for pass back - I wave play on as I believed the act of the keeper having to rush out from his natural position meant it wasn't intended for them to pick it up.. At half time I have both coaches approach me asking for clarity - one happy with the decision, the other not so.. The unhappy coach is asking why it isn't DOGSO and a red card & penalty - I stick to my decision to this day - not intentional therefore crack on and play the game out
 
Taity78 said:
I've had something similar with an academy game - Goal kick - keeper plays it out from the back to left back, left back tries to play it across the 18yd box to the right centre back ( they had done this move several times before) but doesn't get enough on it and scuffs it, attacking team start to move towards the ball and the keeper rushes out and gets their hands on the ball just before the attacker taps it in.. Attacking team appeal for pass back - I wave play on as I believed the act of the keeper having to rush out from his natural position meant it wasn't intended for them to pick it up.. At half time I have both coaches approach me asking for clarity - one happy with the decision, the other not so.. The unhappy coach is asking why it isn't DOGSO and a red card & penalty - I stick to my decision to this day - not intentional therefore crack on and play the game out
Click to expand...
To be clear, even if you do give this as a backpass (which you correctly didn't) and IFK, it can not be DOGSO. Not yet anyway.
 
one said:
To be clear, even if you do give this as a backpass (which you correctly didn't) and IFK, it can not be DOGSO. Not yet anyway.
Click to expand...
You say not yet, but I don't think there will be a change any time soon based on the (fairly) recent addition to make sure that it wasnt incorrectly penalised as such
 
JamesL said:
You say not yet, but I don't think there will be a change any time soon based on the (fairly) recent addition to make sure that it wasnt incorrectly penalised as such
Click to expand...
Well, I think the reason change was actually more about making clear that the GK exemptions is only for GK specific violations, and removed the old interpretation that if a GK used his hands (in the PA) for a second touch offense, there could not be misconduct. (Which was, IMO, never an interpretation that made a whit of sense, but it was there for a long time. That said, I agree with you that I don't sense any likelihood that IFAB has any interest in changing that and sending off GKs for these technical offenses.
 
JamesL said:
You say not yet, but I don't think there will be a change any time soon based on the (fairly) recent addition to make sure that it wasnt incorrectly penalised as such
Click to expand...
Let's just say, intuition is usually based in experience ☺️. I tend to agree with 'anytime soon' which implies it IS at the bottom of the backlog.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top