The Ref Stop

Just weird - Verratti

The Ref Stop
I might be alone thinking that isn't a trick, if he'd flicked the ball up and headed it yes it would be, but it's not against the laws to head the ball when on the ground. This is the relevant part of law 12, (the previous line is shows a lack of respect for the game which could also be applied).

"uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands"
 
I think you will be alone. Why didn't he use his feet? Oh because he was using a trick to circumvent the laws and allow the keep to pick up it with his hands (turns out keeper didn't but that's not relevant)
 
I agree with William D blatant attempt to circumvent laws. Probably would of been less confusion if the GK had picked it up but a very good call from the ref. Hopefully players will learn from this although I have never had a player so stupid to do this in a game yet!
 
jamie0114 said:
I might be alone thinking that isn't a trick, if he'd flicked the ball up and headed it yes it would be, but it's not against the laws to head the ball when on the ground.
Click to expand...

It is also not against the laws to flick the ball up and head it. Except when doing either to pass to the keeper in this specific instance.
 
Used to annoy me no end when Steven Taylor used to do this all the time for Newcastle and got away with it and people described it as 'clever' and 'funny.' Probably more to do with being a bitter Sunderland supporter though
 
I'm afraid anyone who thinks this is OK has a very short memory (or maybe just wasn't around at the time this amendment was brought in). This kind of trickery (playing the ball from the ground using a body part other than the foot) was specifically mentioned as an illegal practice in FIFA circular no. 488 when the "circumvention" amendment was originally implemented on July 24, 1992.
 
I can kind of see what @jamie0114 is getting at above - when I think of the word "trick" I think of a magician or a juggler doing something with their hands - albeit I think this is an obvious trick - I like the way @WilliamD describes it above :)

My only issue with this is the height of the ball ... this was on the ground so a easy call ... a ball at chest height nodded back would be ok ... so ... where is the line in between chest and floor that we can use to judge if this is an offence or not ..?

Or I am being too simplistic in this !?!?
 
zarathustra said:
I think it's more meant to be for a player who flicks or knees the ball up so that he can head it back to his keeper
Click to expand...
Agreed - but - this wasn't a flick up to nod it back ... if this ball had naturally been at waist height and the player nodded it back - would you call an offence? [I wouldn't]
 
zarathustra said:
No, because heading a ball at waist height, isn't a trick.

Getting down on your hands and knees to do it is.
Click to expand...

So ... and this is helping me (thanks) ... if the player can head it back without the need to get down on all fours - we are ok with this ..?

(as an aside - has anyone ever tried the cereal box challenge - I can get no-where near!)
 
Ultimately this comes down to your interpretation on the day.

I think heading a waist highish ball back to the keeper is OK.

A lower ball gets a bit tricky, a diving header to prevent a shot/cross I think would be ok, someone standing still and bending right over at the waist, I'm not so sure.
 
I think this is a really hard one with plenty of grey areas...

However, I feel that once the player has controlled (or attempted to) the ball with his feet, any attempt to flick the ball and head it / get down on all 4's and head it is unsporting and an attempt to circumvent the laws and should be punished accordingly.

Obviously you have to draw the line somewhere, and you might ask is there really any difference between a diving header at knee height and ground level in this instance, but I'd suggest if a player gets down on all 4's to head a ball on the ground rolling back to the keeper with the express aim to allow him to pick it up rather than passing it back and forcing him to kick, then I'd stop play and penalise, a bouncing ball and I'll allow play to continue.
 
To me, the question is whether the ball has, as part of the normal course of play, arrived at a place where it would be perfectly normal for the player to use a body part other than the foot to play it. If it has, then that's fine. If on the other hand, the player has deliberately manufactured or contrived an artificial situation solely in order to avoid using the foot to play the ball, in order to avoid the restrictions in law 12, this is circumvention and is illegal.

Based on the examples given in the original FIFA circular # 488 that introduced the idea of circumvention, this would include such things as flicking the ball up with the feet to the knee, head, chest etc or kneeling or lying down to use the knee or head to push the ball to the keeper.

In all the scenarios given by FIFA, the ball would be in a position either on or close to the ground where the most normal instinct of a player would be to kick the ball and where it is evident to the referee that the reason for him not just doing the natural thing and kicking the ball, is to avoid the restriction on deliberately kicking the ball to the keeper.
 
What about if one player flicks the ball up and second heads it towards the keeper?

I would think that the heading player has not used a trick so can't be penalised and the flicking player has used a trick but not to pass to his own GK so also can't be penalised.
 
In agreement with majority here. For me, it is no different in attempt than the flick up and head, therefore IDFK & YC all correct.

What I'd be interested to hear people's opinions on though, is if he hadn't played it with his feet at any point (ie, ball had been rolling slowly/come to a natural stop) and headed it, would you allow?
 
DanCohen17 said:
What I'd be interested to hear people's opinions on though, is if he hadn't played it with his feet at any point (ie, ball had been rolling slowly/come to a natural stop) and headed it, would you allow?
Click to expand...

I am amazed at how complicated people can make a simple decision. For what possible reason can the fact that the ball had come to a natural stop have ANY bearing on the Law concerning a 'deliberate circumvention' ? Is it somehow less of a circumvention if the ball is stationary? Why on earth would anyone even suggest that it is? But if you are losing sleep over it, since the "deliberate circumvention' clause also applies to a free kick (where the ball HAS to be stationary), then that takes care of that little side question.

Look guys, it's very simple to spot a trick. A player who lies down to head the ball, kneels and hits it with a knee, or flicks it up to head or chest to keeper ( when in each case a simple kicked pass was an easy option) can only be going to this trouble for one of two reasons:

1 to circumvent the Law on keepers receiving balls they are eligible to touch....IFK and Yellow Card!

2 to be a smart a##s and mock the opposition. Unsporting behaviour! IFK and Yellow card!

And finally, to deal with the situation where two players work together to flick up and head the ball back. Interesting grey area, but if it happens in open play, and allows the opposition a chance to jump in and steal the ball, its a big risk, let them get on with it. If it's a weird little move that the opposition couldn't interfere with (harder to picture) then I'd just caution them both for being clever d@cks!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top