mikedn
Referee/Mentor
But that would never happen with a defender and we both know that.....
Indirect Free Kick Handled on Goal Line
- Thread starter arbitre
- Start date
- Status
mikedn
Referee/Mentor
I am not wrong here.... if the player knew it was indirect.... but he didn't ... i digress...(yes ok i know YC for me, note to self - read post properly-) i blame the missus she rabbiting about damn shopping tomorrow..
DISAGREE... i have never had a player " have a shot" hoping for a deflection.... have always passed to a team-mate, within a few yards
I have. I gave an IDFK on the edge of the penalty area, told everyone it was indirect and raised my arm. The player shot at goal, at which the keeper tried to save it but pushed it into the corner. He then ran at me shouting "he can't shoot! You said it was indirect!" I managed not to laugh while cautioning him!
Even though I explained why it was a goal he didn't learn. In the second half the same keeper pushed another IDFK around the post for a corner when he could have safely left it!
Players don't always think and sometimes it's worth having a go.
I have. I gave an IDFK on the edge of the penalty area, told everyone it was indirect and raised my arm. The player shot at goal, at which the keeper tried to save it but pushed it into the corner. He then ran at me shouting "he can't shoot! You said it was indirect!" I managed not to laugh while cautioning him!
Even though I explained why it was a goal he didn't learn. In the second half the same keeper pushed another IDFK around the post for a corner when he could have safely left it!
Players don't always think and sometimes it's worth having a go.
Keep digging Milkman, the right answer is somewhere down there!!
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
I'm assuming you've also revised your answer now?
Are you even believing yourself at this point? Where on earth are you getting an illegal free kick from?
Just because the attacker didn't realise it was IFK, in what world does that make it an illegal FK? And why would you be blowing the whistle just because it's indirect? He can take a quick one, he did, a defender deliberately handled it. Penalty, it's that simple.
Yeah, I'm joining the consensus here. The ball is in play when it's kicked, so the handball is a foul, so penalty.
If the player hadn't handballed and the ball had gone in the goal direct from an IDKF, what would the outcome have been? As I'm sure we all know, a GK. Therefore there's no likely goal that's been denied, so no justification for a red. Yellow seems reasonable, although I don't know if you'd be totally wrong to show no card at all?
If the player hadn't handballed and the ball had gone in the goal direct from an IDKF, what would the outcome have been? As I'm sure we all know, a GK. Therefore there's no likely goal that's been denied, so no justification for a red. Yellow seems reasonable, although I don't know if you'd be totally wrong to show no card at all?
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Mike, think this might me the time to stop and draw breath. There's not a single other person on here agreeing with the way you oversee the taking of IFKs. Whilst you're absolutely right that the most common occurrence is for one attacker to touch it to another, that's purely because they feel that's their best chance of success. Plenty of other tactics are completely legal, including shooting at goal and hoping it takes a deflection. So halting the game and demanding a retake just because an attacker does this is 100% wrong in law.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
There is absolutely no justification in law for retaking the free kick in these circumstances. I can't believe anyone is trying to claim that shooting the ball towards the goal from an indirect free kick is illegal. Whether the player thought it was direct or not makes no difference. The law tells us that:
As for the idea that is somehow wrong because a player would almost never shoot at goal from an IFK that's both illogical and incorrect in fact. Firstly, just because something rarely happens in a game doesn't make it illegal. Secondly, it's something that does happen - and I have seen it relatively frequently in games. For instance when there is an IFK to the attacking team on the goal area line and all the defenders are on the goal line, the player just blasts it at the wall hoping for a deflection on the way in. This might be seen as slightly unsporting by some but is certainly not illegal.
It's also not DOGSO since a goal cannot be scored directly from an IFK. It's directly analagous to one of the old Q&A's which posited the scenario of a defender handling a ball that was heading into the goal from a throw-in. The answer told us that:
So long as these criteria are met, the kick is legal.
As for the idea that is somehow wrong because a player would almost never shoot at goal from an IFK that's both illogical and incorrect in fact. Firstly, just because something rarely happens in a game doesn't make it illegal. Secondly, it's something that does happen - and I have seen it relatively frequently in games. For instance when there is an IFK to the attacking team on the goal area line and all the defenders are on the goal line, the player just blasts it at the wall hoping for a deflection on the way in. This might be seen as slightly unsporting by some but is certainly not illegal.
It's also not DOGSO since a goal cannot be scored directly from an IFK. It's directly analagous to one of the old Q&A's which posited the scenario of a defender handling a ball that was heading into the goal from a throw-in. The answer told us that:
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
Defender on the goal line is clearly a muppet and gets a yellow card for unsporting behaviour to add to his embarrassment.
RefJef
RefChat Addict
To leap to @mikedn defence, we do need to know the answer to the question why the player didn't know it was indirect.
If it's because the ref did not signal an indirect free kick by raising his arm (and also saying "indirect free kick") would the ref have been right to order a re-take? I have a vague recollection of a question similar to this from my exam, but I can't remember the correct answer!
(However, if he (the player) didn't know it was an IDFK because he doesn't know the signals, then he's a muppet. Penalty and YC)
Only if he didn't give the indirect free kick signal AND the indirect free kick had gone directly into the goal.
The only time you would award a retake would be if you, the referee, had not made the signal, arm raised in the air, to indicate IDFK and the ball enters the goal. As the ball doesnt enter the goal here I am not sure a retake can be justified in any event.
Im going penalty and yellow card. Fact is its not an obvious goal scoring opportunity as you wouldnt be awarding a goal if it goes directly in the goal. Could dos and might dos arent really up for discussion because if its could do or a might do, to me, thats not obvious.
Im going penalty and yellow card. Fact is its not an obvious goal scoring opportunity as you wouldnt be awarding a goal if it goes directly in the goal. Could dos and might dos arent really up for discussion because if its could do or a might do, to me, thats not obvious.
Fun.
A) never ever ever a retake. Sorry, I actually feel bad for the pile on top of mike but has to be said.
B) hope this is hypothetical - what a mess for someone if not. Clearly a pen...I want to say RC though I completely underdstand the YC/No card argument - just not sure which is technically correct. The defender DOGSO even though it wouldn't of counted if it went in - the defenders offense is what it is irrespective of the attacking outcome which in this case would of been a GK. Trying to think of another situation like this - maybe a player offside chasing a ball in an OGSO position outside the box and is tripped from behind before the offside call...would that just be offside or cherry DOGSO. In this made up offside scenario I would say cherry DOGSO but this is the same logic...it "wouldn't of counted" if the attacker kept going as he would of been offside. (I know I'm stretching as normally you'd blow for the offside if the attacker was the only player close etc...but go with it)
A) never ever ever a retake. Sorry, I actually feel bad for the pile on top of mike but has to be said.
B) hope this is hypothetical - what a mess for someone if not. Clearly a pen...I want to say RC though I completely underdstand the YC/No card argument - just not sure which is technically correct. The defender DOGSO even though it wouldn't of counted if it went in - the defenders offense is what it is irrespective of the attacking outcome which in this case would of been a GK. Trying to think of another situation like this - maybe a player offside chasing a ball in an OGSO position outside the box and is tripped from behind before the offside call...would that just be offside or cherry DOGSO. In this made up offside scenario I would say cherry DOGSO but this is the same logic...it "wouldn't of counted" if the attacker kept going as he would of been offside. (I know I'm stretching as normally you'd blow for the offside if the attacker was the only player close etc...but go with it)
A) To quote the rugby referee from last weekend, we're here to referee, not coach - so if a player doesn't know the IDFK signal that's their lookout, not yours.
B) Which brings me on to asking what everybody else does about signalling for IDFK. I only ever raise my arm, I think only in a rare couple of occasions have I also shouted out that its indirect - but should I? Does everybody else also put a shout out for IDFK? There is a coach locally that on pretty much every free kick will shout out "Ref, is that direct or indirect?", to which I always reply "Is my arm up?" and move on.
B) Which brings me on to asking what everybody else does about signalling for IDFK. I only ever raise my arm, I think only in a rare couple of occasions have I also shouted out that its indirect - but should I? Does everybody else also put a shout out for IDFK? There is a coach locally that on pretty much every free kick will shout out "Ref, is that direct or indirect?", to which I always reply "Is my arm up?" and move on.
happy whistler
Active Member
Had one last season u15 game when I gave an IDFK for dangerous play. Announced very loudly that free kick was indirect and raised arm. Taker shot straight into the goal. Goalkeeper stepped away from shot and allowed it to enter goal and then retrieved ball and placed it for goal kick whilst attacking team were all celebrating their goal.
Transpired taker did not understand what an indirect free kick actually meant and his manager thought all free kicks were direct in this particular league.
Transpired taker did not understand what an indirect free kick actually meant and his manager thought all free kicks were direct in this particular league.
Another interesting scenario, which reminds me of the foul on Koscielny in the Arsenal vs. Burnley match in January. He was offside, but the assistant had not yet flagged and Jon Moss adjudged that he was fouled at the back post.
Now, of course, the real question is how early should we call offside. My understanding is that if there is only one player who could conceivably play the ball, we can give offside before he becomes active by touching the ball. However, if there is any doubt there, we must wait and therefore allow the possibility that a prior foul might annul the offside.
In your scenario, then, I would give red card and DOGSO. If he were all on his own and I can agree with my assistant that he was offside, I would give the defensive IDFK and judge the foul by normal criteria (careless, reckless, SFP).
- Status