The Ref Stop

Goalkeeper handball

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

R

Redref34

Well-Known Member
Level 5 Referee
https://twitter.com/x/status/2110710402917040500

I saw this on X.

Would it be correct in saying that if the goalkeeper dives at an oncoming striker in a DOGSO location, and handles the ball inside the area - then as the striker reels away with the ball remaining with the keeper - the keeper handles the ball as he gets up - this would not be given as a red card as it is not a DOGSO situation anymore?

I would even go as far to say here that if the first contact with keepers hands was inside the area (hard to see) the second contact as he gets off the floor was an accidental handball therefore it is not a handball offence.


EDIT: Having watched I think the first contact may well be outside the box therefore it is a DOGSO.
 
The Ref Stop
Impossible to tell from that angle. I THOUGHT the ball was partially on the line when the GK first stopped it. If so, not DOGSO. But then why a caution at all? Hard to be SPA if he already stopped the attack. And certainly wasn’t a cynical HB.i think it has to be red or no card. I can’t defend a caution at all.
 
It’s a clear and handball outside the box (the D isn’t part of the penalty area - it’s purely a mechanism to keep players 10 yards from a spot kick?) and given without it the player rounds the keeper and would get a shot away at an unguarded goal it’s DOGSO and RC surely?

From IFAB:

Sending-off offences
A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:
- denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by committing a deliberate handball offence (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)
- denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by committing a non-deliberate handball offence outside their own penalty area
 
The Gump said:
It’s a clear and handball outside the box (the D isn’t part of the penalty area - it’s purely a mechanism to keep players 10 yards from a spot kick?) and given without it the player rounds the keeper and would get a shot away at an unguarded goal it’s DOGSO and RC surely?

From IFAB:

Sending-off offences
A player, substitute or substituted player who commits any of the following offences is sent off:
- denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by committing a deliberate handball offence (except a goalkeeper within their penalty area)
- denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by committing a non-deliberate handball offence outside their own penalty area
Click to expand...

I had to watch it twice to see it was outside the area so yes 100% agree.

My point was - in a hypothetical situation - if the first handball was inside the area and then the second handball as h got up was outside would it still be a red card if the free kick is given as at the point of the second handball it is not DOGSO anymore as the striker is way past the ball and does not have possession
 
Looks well outside the box, fuzzy line is the D.

The handling as he stands up looks like a no offence but you're right it wouldn't qualify as DOGSO, if the initial handling hadn't occured, as you decide DOGSO at the point of the offence and contrary to popular belief the goalkeeper handling outside the box isn't automatically a red card.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20261015-222653.png
    Screenshot_20261015-222653.png
    593.6 KB · Views: 0
If a goalkeeper carries a ball outside the box then he can't be sanctioned for DOGSO or SPA (not certain where that is in the book, but I know it's there somewhere)

Don't think that applies here, and a caution is a very odd decision.
 
RefereeX said:
If a goalkeeper carries a ball outside the box then he can't be sanctioned for DOGSO or SPA (not certain where that is in the book, but I know it's there somewhere)
Click to expand...
Yeah also heard of it. I think it's one of those 'bright ideas' IFAB dreamt of and put it in Q and A or in their socials. It is not in laws but should eventually find its way to it like other IFAB bright idea like advantage of a incorrectly taken restart.
 
RefereeX said:
If a goalkeeper carries a ball outside the box then he can't be sanctioned for DOGSO or SPA (not certain where that is in the book, but I know it's there somewhere)

Don't think that applies here, and a caution is a very odd decision.
Click to expand...
Good grief. I wasn't aware of this fantastically stupid Q&A crap
Imagine explaining that one to the baying mob
Highly, highly likely, that unless the observer frequents this on-line gaffe, they ain't got a cat in Hell's chance of knowing this nonsense, so this cat would gamble on the expected red card, as that's the 'right' outcome every day of the week, even if some nutter at IFAB was on Q&A duty the day that one got answered
 
bester said:
I don't think it's intended for situations where the goalkeeper is sliding out the box while continue to touch the ball

https://twitter.com/x/status/1836012280246366421
Click to expand...
In terms of intent, why should it be any different? Say the OP situation (assuming it is DOGSO) with the only difference being the ball is bounced up and the keeper is on their feet. The situation, circumstance and impact is all the same. Why should being on your feet or sliding on the ground make any difference?

EDIT: what I think is that IFAB possibly intended that for situations where the keeper unintentionally carries the ball over the line in a well controlled release like a fly kick or a drop kick. But IFAB being IFAB made a more generic statement without thinking through its impact on other scenarios.
 
Last edited:
one said:
In terms of intent, why should it be any different? Say the OP situation (assuming it is DOGSO) with the only difference being the ball is bounced up and the keeper is on their feet. The situation, circumstance and impact is all the same. Why should being on your feet or sliding on the ground make any difference?

EDIT: what I think is that IFAB possibly intended that for situations where the keeper unintentionally carries the ball over the line in a well controlled release like a fly kick or a drop kick. But IFAB being IFAB made a more generic statement without thinking through its impact on other scenarios.
Click to expand...
The advice about the keeper handling the ball in the penalty area then their impetus takes them outside the area with the ball in their hands was to indicate that could not be DOGSO as the goalkeeper was in possession. In the OP (video not totally clear) it looks as though he leaves the area then handles the ball, which IMHO is a DOGSO dismissal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top