A&H

Lift your knee during jumping header - allowed?

kazehelmet

New Member
If you are jumping perpendicularly upwards in an established position (so you are not jumping towards the defender), are you allowed to lift your knee to increase your vertical lift (and hence jump higher to reach the ball)?

For example, this case.Football rules.png
 
The Referee Store
There's no law that states you can't. As a player, you just have to be careful. You see goalkeepers doing it all the time, that is merely to protect themselves from a late challenge. For me, photo number 2 is fine, he's using his knee to gain height. The bottom left photo, his knee appears to be going into the back of the player and appears to leave him off-balanced. Theres not alot of difference between that and an arm. Obviously dependant on the force used through the knee on the jump, but also whether there is an indaication of pushing. It's a close call. For me, this one looks like a foul. Obviously they are only stills so it is hard to judge.
 
Yes, you are allowed to lift your knee while playing football. Whether it's while jumping, running or whatever, it doesn't really matter. What you're not allowed to do however, is lift your knee in a way that would constitute an offence against an opponent.
 
There's no law that states you can't. As a player, you just have to be careful. You see goalkeepers doing it all the time, that is merely to protect themselves from a late challenge. For me, photo number 2 is fine, he's using his knee to gain height. The bottom left photo, his knee appears to be going into the back of the player and appears to leave him off-balanced. Theres not alot of difference between that and an arm. Obviously dependant on the force used through the knee on the jump, but also whether there is an indaication of pushing. It's a close call. For me, this one looks like a foul. Obviously they are only stills so it is hard to judge.

The stills are just a sequence of the same jump.
Still 3 clearly shows (for me) that the white player has his knee raised unnaturally high and that it's either to protect himself from the red player backing into him or to foul him/put him off. As a ref, I'd probably just let that one go unless there was clear contact. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DB
View it the same as the arms really...

Is the leg being used to push off/balance? Is it being used as a tool against an opponent? Is it being used as a weapon against an opponent?
 
You can raise your knee....but if that knee strikes an opponent, it's a DFK. If it prevents the opponent challenging the ball, it's an IFK. Just like the fact that you can lift your foot to head height ;-)

His responsibility to jump in a safe manner. the images show a definite foul. Probably a yellow card.
 
the images show a definite foul. Probably a yellow card.

Please explain that.
The images don't show any actual contact. Rather they show a player lifting his right knee exceptionally high but winning the header.
Based on what I can see, there might (at best) be an argument for dangerous play(?) but a foul?
 
Dangerous play is an IFK offence and does not involve any contact. As soon as there is contact it changes from an IFK to a DFK offence. My take on still 3 is that the player puts his knee in the players back / shoulder. That makes it a DFK and probably a caution. That challenge could easily be considered reckless because of the height involved. A knee in the back of the head is really going to hurt!

As we all know, the fact that he wins the ball is no defence against the award of a free kick.
 
Dangerous play is an IFK offence and does not involve any contact. As soon as there is contact it changes from an IFK to a DFK offence. My take on still 3 is that the player puts his knee in the players back / shoulder. That makes it a DFK and probably a caution. That challenge could easily be considered reckless because of the height involved. A knee in the back of the head is really going to hurt!

As we all know, the fact that he wins the ball is no defence against the award of a free kick.

Yes we know, as you've pointed out. But for me, the stills don't clearly show any contact. I make a judgement call based on what I see, not on a presumption.
 
Yes we know, as you've pointed out. But for me, the stills don't clearly show any contact. I make a judgement call based on what I see, not on a presumption.
Of course we can only give what we see in real life. But if we're looking at a series of stills, then by definition we need to presume what has happened in between the stills to come to an informed opinion. In this case, it looks to me like the balance of probability is that the high knee made contact with the back of the player --> DFK and YC (or even theoretically RC). But can't be certain without a video
 
Yes we know, as you've pointed out. But for me, the stills don't clearly show any contact. I make a judgement call based on what I see, not on a presumption.
True, but it's a good thing we're not making an actual decision and drawing an interpretation from images :)

Step 3 looks like there's probably contact, but the arch of the red player's back in step 4 is what tells me there was contact in the back. These are little signs you can use to help recognise when a foul has occurred
 
I think we're getting distracted from the point of the thread here. The main thrust of it wasn't, "Do you see an offence in the specific example given below for illustrative purposes? " It was simply the general principle of whether you are allowed to lift your knee when jumping for the ball.
 
Back
Top