The Ref Stop

How deliberate does a "backpass" have to be?

GraemeS

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
First off, I know we don't necessarily like that term, but I'm going to use it here as a shorthand.

Had an incident in my match today that I would appreciate opinions on. Ball is bouncing around in the PA after a corner kick. It eventually falls to the feet of a defender facing his own goal, who goes to smash it to safety. However during this action, he either gets a shout from his advancing keeper, or sees him coming and tries to pull out of his clearance. In the end, he only manages to pull back far enough to scrape his studs across the top of the ball and scuff it backwards a few yards - allowing the keeper to pick the ball up easily and uncontested.

Attacking team scream for a "backpass", but I give nothing as I don't believe the player's intention was to pass it back and I've always understood a backpass to require a deliberate attempt to pass it to the keeper. However I'm a little unsure about this, as 1) the attempt to play the ball in the first place was clearly deliberate, even if the intention didn't appear to play it to the keeper and 2) the benefit gained from this slight touch was significant, allowing the keeper to pick the ball up cleanly rather than have to dive at opponents feet to claim it.

Thoughts appreciated!
 
The Ref Stop
You've kind of answered your own question; "the benefit gained from this slight touch was significant, allowing the keeper to pick the ball up cleanly". So, that signals a "backpass" if it was a deliberate act (for the keeper to pick up).

But...

You believe that the player done all that he could to prevent himself touching the ball when he heard the oncoming keeper. So, did he deliberately mean to play/touch the ball? It sounds to me that the defender was trying to clear, heard the oncoming keeper so tried to stop. That doesn't sound deliberate to me. Good call.

I think this is a "you had to be there mannnn" sort of call.
 
You got that decision right. Had a similar incident the defender trying to put the ball out which was obvious but it ended up going to the keeper, attacking team did not evan appeal for the backpass, yet on Saturday I had a deliberate back pass and still no appeal.
 
its not just 'a deliberate touch of the ball' - its got to be a deliberate pass of the ball to the keeper

if I player is on the right wing, goes to clear it but completely scuffs it and it goes back to the keeper ...

he has deliberately touched out, but not to the keeper?

I think you made the right call
 
@GraemeS good shout , i think you've read that situation well mate. Its quite difficult for a player to change the intention of his action halfway through swinging a leg , unless its pre meditated... which by the way you've described it, it was'nt .
I had one couple of weeks ago where the defender was chasing a ball going towards his keeper, he glances over at his left back who is in the clear and goes to play the ball to him . Instead of the ball coming off his instep it pops off the outside of his boot, runs through to the goalie who picks it up. Plenty of calls from the opposition for ''backpass ref!'' which i didnt give, as he would have to have been unbelievably skillful to have sold it that way !
 
Had a situation where early on a game a defender knocks the ball back to the keeper pretty badly, keeper has to dive to save it. Shouts for back pass ref!

It is a backpass, but it's a crap pass and he no way meant to do that. Shout play on. Quiet word in the players ear.

2 minutes later he did the exact same thing. Thought to myself, he's taking the mickey, gave it as a deliberate pass to keeper and idfk.

When he asked me about it (quite politely I might add) I said "learn to pass better or just hoof it upfield like a proper centre back!"

Funnily enough he didn't do it again.
 
Related - just checking something. With "backpass" the restart is IDFK from where the keeper touches it (as his touch with the hands is the offence) unless in the GA where you go closest parallel etc. As opposed to from where the pass took place right??

Had an argument with a level 5 about this and I'm quite sure I'm right.
 
GraemeS said:
1) the attempt to play the ball in the first place was clearly deliberate, even if the intention didn't appear to play it to the keeper
Click to expand...
If the ball wasn't intended for the keeper then for me, it's not an offence. The law says it is an offence if the keeper touches the ball with the hands after:
it has been deliberately kicked to the goalkeeper by a team-mate
Click to expand...
It seems to me that if the idea was to penalise for any deliberate kick that ends up with the keeper, even if it wasn't intended to, they would just have left out the words "to the goalkeeper."
GraemeS said:
2) the benefit gained from this slight touch was significant, allowing the keeper to pick the ball up cleanly rather than have to dive at opponents feet to claim it.
Click to expand...
As far as I'm concerned, this should be treated in a similar fashion the other "deliberate" offence of handball, in that whether the player (or their team) benefits from it has no probative value when the only question is one of intent.
 
WilliamD said:
Related - just checking something. With "backpass" the restart is IDFK from where the keeper touches it (as his touch with the hands is the offence) unless in the GA where you go closest parallel etc. As opposed to from where the pass took place right??

Had an argument with a level 5 about this and I'm quite sure I'm right.
Click to expand...

The IDFK is taken from where the offemce is committed.
It is not an offence to pass the ball back to the keeper.
The offence is committed by the keeper then using his hands.
And therefore you were correct.
 
WilliamD said:
Related - just checking something. With "backpass" the restart is IDFK from where the keeper touches it (as his touch with the hands is the offence) unless in the GA where you go closest parallel etc. As opposed to from where the pass took place right??

Had an argument with a level 5 about this and I'm quite sure I'm right.
Click to expand...
And in the related question of deliberate "circumvention", the offence is the circumvention act itself and so the IFK there would be from the defender's location, not the GK's, regardless of if he picks it up or not?
 
Scuffs a kick and scrapes the bottom of his studs on the ball?
Sounds like it would be impossible to tell if the keeper was the intended recipient of a kick gone that wrong, so no foul for me.

GraemeS said:
2) the benefit gained from this slight touch was significant, allowing the keeper to pick the ball up cleanly rather than have to dive at opponents feet to claim it.

Thoughts appreciated!
Click to expand...
Not relevant IMO. Either it was a deliberate kick with the keeper as the intended recipient or it wasn't. 'it did or didn't change things anyway' doesn't come into it.
And you'll give the defenders the benefit of the doubt for these ones.
 
The ones I hate which always seem to divide opinion during a game are when a defender dispossesses the attacker and passes back to the keeper with the same touch. Right or wrongly always err on the side of it was a good tackle as opposed to deliberate backpass.

Unfortunately in the world of grassroots football there are still many out there who think even the slightest involuntary deflection off a defending player is still a "backpass" :wall::eek::confused:
 
Yeah, I had one yesterday morning.

Defender makes a good clean sliding tackle in the area, ball rolls to the keeper. One attacker just wouldn't accept it wasn't a genuine attempt by the defender to pass the ball to the keeper
 
zarathustra said:
Yeah, I had one yesterday morning.

Defender makes a good clean sliding tackle in the area, ball rolls to the keeper. One attacker just wouldn't accept it wasn't a genuine attempt by the defender to pass the ball to the keeper
Click to expand...

had the opposite last time i played in goal... our full back was in a race with an attacker coming towards me, slid in to make a challenge about 30 yards out, and the ball comes in my direction, which, armed with my 'knowledge' of the laws, ive picked up.... only to be awarded an IDFK against !
 
this is the issue with the backpass rule ... 90% of it is the referees interpretation of the pass! if in doubt, clear it out
 
I got one of these wrong a few months ago, penalising an U14 defender who, the CAR subsequently told me, had made a complete hash of controlling the ball. However, I am not overly sympathetic to goalkeepers who are foolish enough to pick up/touch a ball helped on to them by a defender.
 
Where do people stand on proactively advising yes or no to a pickup?

I usually wait until asked by the keeper but what are peoples thpught on pre warning with a you can pick that up or a no dont handle it shout?
 
if asked, i'd give the information... if you volunteer it you'll have accusations of favouritism from the attacking side i'd imagine.
 
James Long said:
Where do people stand on proactively advising yes or no to a pickup?

I usually wait until asked by the keeper but what are peoples thpught on pre warning with a you can pick that up or a no dont handle it shout?
Click to expand...
If I think it's a borderline decision AND there is enough time to do so, then yes I will inform all on the pitch if it is acceptable for a GK to pick up a ball that's been kicked to him by a defender. For me it's no different to proactively talking to outfield players to avoid inferingements (eg grappling prior to a corner being taken). Certainly helps the 'sell' when and if the GK does pick the ball up ...!
 
James Long said:
Where do people stand on proactively advising yes or no to a pickup?

I usually wait until asked by the keeper but what are peoples thpught on pre warning with a you can pick that up or a no dont handle it shout?
Click to expand...
You have to be very careful how you phrase it if you do choose to warn them. Got myself in a heap of trouble once by shouting "Don't pick it up!" and the GK was furious when I gave the IFK as he claimed he hadn't heard the word "Don't"! Not sure why he thought I would be offering him coaching advice, but that's a different matter....

I tend to go with "No hands!" now if the opportunity comes up. As @Russell Jones says, it's proactive refereeing and I imagine, would go down fairly well with observers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top