circumvent the Law form free kick

[one]

"uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball to his own goalkeeper to circumvent the Law while he is taking a free kick (after the player is cautioned, the free kick must be retaken)"

Has anyone ever seen (or even heard) of one of these happening?

The only way I can think of this happening is if the player takes a second touch. I go as far as saying all players know they can't touch the ball again after a free kick let alone doing it in the process of a "deliberate trick".

 

[DB]

On hands and knees and uses his head to pass it to the keeper?

 

[richard ramjane]

attacking team have retreated expecting a long free kick from outside the defending team's PA. kicker chips it up to a fellow player, who heads it back to keeper ?
that kind of thing?

 

[one]

On hands and knees and uses his head to pass it to the keeper?

In a free kick, the ball is in play when its 'kicked' and moves.

@richard ramjane in your scenario when defenders have retreated it defeats the purpose of doing it. Plus there has been numerous discussion on if passing it via other defenders qualifies for 'circumventing'.

Anyway I have never seen or heard of 'circumventing from a free kick' and don't know anyone who has.

 

[DB]

In a free kick, the ball is in play when its 'kicked' and moves.

Which is my point... Circumventing the laws.... Using his head to restart play. Also, using his head so a keeper can pick the ball up.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

"uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball to his own goalkeeper to circumvent the Law while he is taking a free kick (after the player is cautioned, the free kick must be retaken)"

Has anyone ever seen (or even heard) of one of these happening?

The only way I can think of this happening is if the player takes a second touch. I go as far as saying all players know they can't touch the ball again after a free kick let alone doing it in the process of a "deliberate trick".

Taking a second touch cannot be classified as circumventing the law because it is clearly and specifically breaking another law. So you deal with that.
The whole thing about circumvention is that no particular law applies.
But it's such a ridiculous, vague and inconsistent concept. Don't overthink it.

Which is my point... Circumventing the laws.... Using his head to restart play. Also, using his head so a keeper can pick the ball up.

Incorrectly restarting play is not circumvention. It simply means the ball hasn't been put into play.
But of course you can caution for delaying the restart of play.

 

[DB]

. Incorrectly restarting play is not circumvention. It simply means the ball hasn't been put into play.
But of course you can caution for delaying the restart of play.

Ball on edge of area (or within reach of goalie)..

If a player restarts play by passing to the keeper and he picks it up... "passback".

Player knows of this law, so he gets down on his hands and knees and heads the ball back to the keeper from the free kick... that's circumventing in my eyes. He is aware of the law, hence why he feels the need to go on his hands and knees.

 

[es1]

Ball on edge of area (or within reach of goalie)..

If a player restarts play by passing to the keeper and he picks it up... "passback".

Player knows of this law, so he gets down on his hands and knees and heads the ball back to the keeper from the free kick... that's circumventing in my eyes. He is aware of the law, hence why he feels the need to go on his hands and knees.

I disagree, that's a retake, the ball is is in play when it is kicked and moves so if someone gets on their knees to head it simple retake

 

[Brian Hamilton]

On hands and knees and uses his head to pass it to the keeper?

Cautioned for this

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Ball on edge of area (or within reach of goalie)..

If a player restarts play by passing to the keeper and he picks it up... "passback".

Player knows of this law, so he gets down on his hands and knees and heads the ball back to the keeper from the free kick... that's circumventing in my eyes. He is aware of the law, hence why he feels the need to go on his hands and knees.

circumvention is when you are getting around a law. when you are doing something which is 'wrong' but the laws would otherwise permit.
The laws wouldn't otherwise permit such a move, so it isn't circumvention.
Although for sheer stupidity alone a caution for DTROP is well warranted.

IMO the whole idea of 'on the feet are illegal' makes no sense. If the law was 'deliberately played to the goalkeeper' then it would make so much sense and stop having to worry about these obscure cautions that no player would understand anyway.

 

[one]

Taking a second touch cannot be classified as circumventing the law because it is clearly and specifically breaking another law. So you deal with that.

That's my point. Once the second touch is taken you stop play for that infringement and 'circumventing' doesn't apply anymore. So I don't see 'circumventing' from a free kick ever happening.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Well if he heads it into play then you have to stop things then and there, but it isn't circumvention because he hasn't put it into play.
By that logic, a defender touching the ball inside a PA at a defensive FK is also circumvention - aren't they circumventing the law that says they can't touch it until it's outside the PA?
No, clearly they're not.

 

[Peter Grove]

I think it's important to draw a distinction between the meaning of the word 'circumvent' in normal speech and its specific meaning as part of Law 12 in the Laws of the Game document, just as we have to distinguish between the natural language definitions of 'interfering with play' and 'gaining an advantage' and their meanings as part of Law 11.

When used within the confines of the LotG, circumventing is only applicable when it involves a deliberate trick done as part of an attempt to evade the restrictions on a team mate's deliberate kick to the keeper.

When the amendment on circumventing was first introduced, FIFA issued circular no 488 to explain and clarify its provisions. Specifically mentioned in that circular was the example of:

a player who deliberately flicks the ball with his feet up onto his head in order to head the ball to his goalkeeper

At the time of this amendment and also when it was added to the LotG the following season, there was no mention of a deliberate trick being used at a free kick. Without being able to prove this, I suspect that just as players tried to come up with ways around the law in open play, they also subsequently tried a variation of the 'flick up to head' involving two players at a free kick, taking advantage of the fact that opponents have to be 10 yards away. If it were only the question of kneeling down and using the head (or knee or whatever to push the ball to the keeper) there would have been no need to mention free kicks as this action by a single player was already covered in circular 488 with the second example they gave:

or, a player who kneels down and deliberately pushes the ball to the goalkeeper with his knee, etc.