Ball hits me
- Thread starter JA77
- Start date
So many variables...
If the ball hits you and goes out of play the restart remains as it would had it not hit you.
If the ball hits you and remains on the field and either posession changes or starts a promising attack or the ball goes directly into the goal then you restart with a dropped ball to the team that last touched the ball before you, from where the ball was touched.
Finally if none of these things happen and the ball remains in play it is carry on.
Covered in law 9 I believe
If the ball hits you and goes out of play the restart remains as it would had it not hit you.
If the ball hits you and remains on the field and either posession changes or starts a promising attack or the ball goes directly into the goal then you restart with a dropped ball to the team that last touched the ball before you, from where the ball was touched.
Finally if none of these things happen and the ball remains in play it is carry on.
Covered in law 9 I believe
Keeday
Formerly known as 'Ref' on RefereeForum
And one more variable - if the ball hits you in the penalty area it’s drop ball to the goalkeeper regardless of who touched it last
So to clarify, if the team retain possession after ball hits me I continue. If ball hits me and opponents then have position it’s a drop ball for original possession team?
Yes. But on point 1 if it starts a promising attack you have to stop and dropped ball to them.
I suggest you have a read of law 9 as a starting point for this scenario. It's also mentioned in law 8.
And then you have the dilemma of where a promising attack starts.
A player on the half way line can play a ball to his player down the wing etc. Very tricky.
True. True.
I also find that the dropped ball Restart often is turned into a promising attack anyway so when it's the same team it's almost pointless exercise.
I had one where the ball brushed off my feet but still made its way to the teammate of the kicker. By brushing me the pass lost its power and that gave enough time for an opposition player to be hot on the case of the receiver.
None of the 3 scenarios that require a dropped ball were met so i played on, that didn't stop the manager yelling 'there's no advantage there ref'.
None of the 3 scenarios that require a dropped ball were met so i played on, that didn't stop the manager yelling 'there's no advantage there ref'.
one
RefChat Addict
I take it you haven't been on this forum long enough
spuddy1878
RefChat Addict
I always try and drop it to the side so they cant just launch a ball over the top for example.
Its a nightmare if you're on your own, you're dropping a ball so could be fifty yards away from where the ball could be in 2 or 3 seconds and have no chance with a tight offisde.
My experience is that players now expect a dropped ball when the ball hits the referee and deviates. That means half of them stop, which might cause a different problem you don't want if you play on. So my rule of thumb in practice would be to err on the side of caution and just give the dropped ball.
Of course, if the ball goes out or just lightly brushes you as it goes by and ends up where it was going anyway, that's different. But if it was going left, hits you and is now going right, if you're in a part of the pitch with players from both sides around you, 9 times out of 10 I'm hitting the whistle, apologising and we go with the dropped ball.
They might moan at you for being in the way, but they won't moan about the restart.
Of course, if the ball goes out or just lightly brushes you as it goes by and ends up where it was going anyway, that's different. But if it was going left, hits you and is now going right, if you're in a part of the pitch with players from both sides around you, 9 times out of 10 I'm hitting the whistle, apologising and we go with the dropped ball.
They might moan at you for being in the way, but they won't moan about the restart.
Wish players would learn that they get to keep the ball. Every game I get "shall I kick it back ref"
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
On the other hand when you give DBs that aren't called for in Law, you reinforce the myth that every time it hits the R play stops, making it harder on the next ref who does it properly . . . consider quickly calling out "keep playing--ball's in play" or something similar instead of stopping. (Though I do agree that if it is debatable whether a PA is involved, err on the side of caution.)
Without wishing to reopen another discussion, 'properly' for me is managing the game, not slavishly applying a literal interpretation of every sentence in the LOTG.
My perspective on this one is that the intention of the change of law a couple of years ago is clear. We don't want either side to gain an unfair advantage or disadvantage from the ball striking the referee. On the other hand, we don't want to stop the game unnecessarily if the ball strikes the referee and there is no meaningful consequence.
My point is just that, when the ball strikes the referee in traffic and significantly changes direction, the challenge of interpreting in the moment whether a PA might accrue either directly because of where the ball went or as an unintended consequence of players stopping because they expect a decision, means that 9 times out of 10, with the teams I referee at the level I referee, a dropped ball is the safe and expected restart. If it's not needed, I don't do it. I just find it generally is.
I'd rather explain that after the game, than why I allowed the winning goal to stand when everyone except me and one attacker were waiting for something else to happen.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Slavish? Judgmental much?
Maybe we're envisioning different things--if it's going to lead to a scoring opportunity, then absolutely agree that play should be stopped. And, as I said, I agree with you that to the extent there is any ambiguity it is best to resolve in favor of a DB. (And I have posited elsewhere that I expect it likely that the DB requirement is going to extend to any time it hits a ref because of all the confusion the current standard creates.) But I'll stand by my assertion that where the standards in the Law are clearly not met, the better process is for the referee to vocalize that the ball remains in play.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
if the ball hits ref, subject of course to the oddities, promising attack, going out of play, and the players basically stop in their tracks expecting a drop ball, as much as its incorrect in law, I dont see too much issue with stopping play.
its not game changing, it might just be the safe sensible expectation thing to do.
it will be forgotten about by time ball is dropped, nobody will bat an eyelid and you have zero chance of anything going pear shaped ( guy who should be playing on stops and picks ball up to give to you for the drop ball,) or similar, not breakdown in communication, nothing
if I saw it happen in a game and the ref said afterwards, ' i know it should be a play on but' then I certainly would not lose any sleep.
bit like things like, if someone did not whistle to restart play after a caution or sub.
one
RefChat Addict
I really don't see how or why we should stop play for a dropped ball if the only reason for it is because the players expect it.
I get this frequently when defenders stop, expecting an offside. No Sir, it's not offside. As @socal lurker said, a loud shout of no and manage the game from there.
Similar with injuries, if I think a player needs help ('serious' is my discretion) is stop play. Otherwise if 'players' want the game stop they always have a choice of kicking the ball out.
I get this frequently when defenders stop, expecting an offside. No Sir, it's not offside. As @socal lurker said, a loud shout of no and manage the game from there.
Similar with injuries, if I think a player needs help ('serious' is my discretion) is stop play. Otherwise if 'players' want the game stop they always have a choice of kicking the ball out.
Last edited: