Montedio Yamagata vs Fagiano Okayama - Japan division 2
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
Keepers are not sanctioned for handling offences within there own PA.
Examples of keeper handling offences touching the ball with the hand/or aem when deliberately kicked to him by a team mate, or using the hands or arms after releasing from his control.
Not to be confused with, possibly in this case, touching the ball a 2nd time following a restart. If this happens and it SPA or DOGSO then a sanction should be issued.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
Often we berate players and coaches for doing illegal things in the game and their apparent lack of knowledge of the laws when they are correctly dealt with
this brings up the reverse issue, I dont know exactly how professional these players, esp the gk, are, but here we have a professional footballer, doing his job, who ( we dont get a good look at any protest), at least seems accepting of his fate
Not advocating dissent , mobbing, or worse, but the scene looks very mild mannered given the factual innaccuracy of the decision, A full understanding of the laws by the gk ( replace for, us knowing our own job) might have seen a different outcome here. And thats before we get onto the other officials, who are all three complicit in this error in law
this brings up the reverse issue, I dont know exactly how professional these players, esp the gk, are, but here we have a professional footballer, doing his job, who ( we dont get a good look at any protest), at least seems accepting of his fate
Not advocating dissent , mobbing, or worse, but the scene looks very mild mannered given the factual innaccuracy of the decision, A full understanding of the laws by the gk ( replace for, us knowing our own job) might have seen a different outcome here. And thats before we get onto the other officials, who are all three complicit in this error in law
My thinking is that it would have been DOGSO. Red for anyone else on his team, but a downgrade to caution.
So caution the keeper in the above example then?
No. They are two different offences. The part you quoted applies to a 2nd touch following a restart.
This is a "passback" which is a GK specific handling offence. GK's are not sanctioned for handling offences inside their area.
Here is what the law says exactly which might clear up any confusion in my original post:
The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other
player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their
penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but
there is no disciplinary sanction. However, if the offence is playing the ball a
second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches
another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offence stops a
promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an
obvious goal-scoring opportunity.
No, cannot be a card of any colour. Completely incorrect in law, if that had happened at any level in England the officiating team would be getting a 21 day rest.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
If I was involved in a team I would be going down that route yes.
Am amazed there was not more protest, I go as far as to say I would not be surprised to see a team walk off the pitch.
I don't know whether any protest was made / required, but it looks like the league in question (J 2 League) have confirmed that the game will be replayed on account of the "clear misapplication of the Laws of the Game by the referee that could have influenced the final result of the match":
https://aboutj.jleague.jp/corporate...o-the-misapplication-of-the-laws-of-the-game/
Very helpful clarifications in there.
-cough-
There's loads at that level that don't apply basic refereeing course stuff tbh. And sadly, quite a few from higher up in the tiers.