Indirect Free Kick Handled on Goal Line
- Thread starter arbitre
- Start date
- Status
Deliberately handling the ball is not showing lack of respect for the game. How could it be SPA if a goal can't legally be scored from the shot and the ball isn't going to a team mate.
And yes you do need to justify your card Graeme, maybe not on your reporting system, but a justification from the LOTG. There is a list of criteria for cautions for deliberately handling the ball, I don't see this situation meeting any of those.
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
So the ball is going directly into the net and a player tips the ball over the bar and that is not showing a lack of respect for the game. If that is not showing a lack of respect for the game what is??
Sounds like you are trying your best to justify a red card here, which is wrong. Mr Elleray will tell you the same when he emails back.
If that Q&A said it wasn't DOGSO, would it not have suggested a caution instead? - but didn't.
"Handling the ball to stop a promising attack or showing a lack of respect for the game, take your pick but i would probably put it under the promising attack option." If it could be any of these, it could be none. How could it remotely be stopping a promising attack? If he doesn't touch it, it's a GK.
Seriously, a player gives away an unnecessary penalty, has disadvantaged no-one but his own team, and you want to give him what may be his second yellow card? You might be laughing off having to give the penalty but I don't think anyone would be laughing if it ends in a sending-off.
"Handling the ball to stop a promising attack or showing a lack of respect for the game, take your pick but i would probably put it under the promising attack option." If it could be any of these, it could be none. How could it remotely be stopping a promising attack? If he doesn't touch it, it's a GK.
Seriously, a player gives away an unnecessary penalty, has disadvantaged no-one but his own team, and you want to give him what may be his second yellow card? You might be laughing off having to give the penalty but I don't think anyone would be laughing if it ends in a sending-off.
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
Ok, so new scenario then player shoots from open play, beats the keeper and player tries to save it but actually palms it into his own net. Are you not cautioning him either?
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Surely this is the same as an attacker attempting to score a goal with his hand, matters not if he was "successful" its the action that's earning the yellow card, not whether he has been punished already by missing the goal etc etc etc.
Same as someone attempting to trip an attacker, but failing, referee plays advantage, goal is scored you can still go back and caution defender - at time of offence he WAS trying to break up promising attack and/or committed a reckless challenge, hence the yellow - fact he failed, doesn't mean its not USB.
Same as someone attempting to trip an attacker, but failing, referee plays advantage, goal is scored you can still go back and caution defender - at time of offence he WAS trying to break up promising attack and/or committed a reckless challenge, hence the yellow - fact he failed, doesn't mean its not USB.
arbitre
Active Member
I have it from the horse's mouth, Federation Francaise de Football (FFF), who state that it is a penalty and RED card offence for DOGSO!!!!!!!
The head of the my county referee's committee, and some of his colleagues disagree!!!!! He (and they) states penalty and YELLOW card for USB. However some other members of the same committee agree with the FFF's opinion!
So, maybe there still is not a definite answer.
The head of the my county referee's committee, and some of his colleagues disagree!!!!! He (and they) states penalty and YELLOW card for USB. However some other members of the same committee agree with the FFF's opinion!
So, maybe there still is not a definite answer.
Cant just say your wrong and not justify it. Good luck saying that to an assessor.
Different situation, LOTG specifically says thats a caution.
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
Whats an assessor go to do with anything? I have justified it, a few times. It is a caution for unsporting behaviour, the player doing this is doing so because he believes he stopping a goal otherwise he would move well out of the way and allow the ball into the net and take a goal kick.
@arbitre sorry but i completely disagree with this, it is not an OGSO is it, it cant be.
Justify it using the LOTG, not just saying why you think it should be a caution.
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Sorry Grug, me and others already have - the act is unsporting, hence the caution - the consequence is irrelevant.
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
Going round in circles here so im out.
You cannot just say its unsporting behavior just because it is. Otherwise I can just say it's not a caution just because its not. The LOTG is there, use it.
We are going around in circles because you can't justify a caution using the LOTG, and "unsporting behavior" doesn't cut it.
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
USB - Showing a lack of respect for the game. Player either did not realise its IDFK through ignorance of laws or his ignorance of law means he didnt realise he could leave it it to go in the net, therefore he was attempting to stop a goal with his hand and showed a complete lack of respect for the game.
Cheshire Ref
RefChat Addict
That is exactly what i am saying, tipping the ball over the bar when you are not the goalkeeper is showing a lack of respect for the game, especially because he thinks he saving his team a goal.
So how is deliberately handling the ball anywhere else on the FOP any different? If a player deliberately handles the ball to control it because he thinks its going to help his team score a goal, is that showing a lack of respect?
- Status