Open Age Off the ball...

[Yoda&2]

I was refereeing a Vets League last week, and the following incident happened that I would welcome comments on.

There was 2 minutes left in the game, the ball was played through by the attacker and the keeper collected and was lying on the floor with the ball safely in his hands.

As the attacker was chasing the ball down, and after the keeper had collected it in his hands, the defender tripped the attacker in the penalty area. The attackers were leading 3-2 and the game was getting a bit narky.

In my mind, the ball was dead and in the keeper's hands with the incident being off the ball... What would you have done?

 

[JamesL]

I was refereeing a Vets League last week, and the following incident happened that I would welcome comments on.

There was 2 minutes left in the game, the ball was played through by the attacker and the keeper collected and was lying on the floor with the ball safely in his hands.

As the attacker was chasing the ball down, and after the keeper had collected it in his hands, the defender tripped the attacker in the penalty area. The attackers were leading 3-2 and the game was getting a bit narky.

In my mind, the ball was dead and in the keeper's hands with the incident being off the ball... What would you have done?

The ball is in play so a penalty kick should be awarded.

 

[Yoda&2]

The ball is in play so a penalty kick should be awarded.

So even though the keeper had the ball in there hands and the next phase of play/roll out by the keeper was yet to happen, that would be a penalty decision?

 

[JamesL]

Correct. When the keeper has the ball in their control it is still in play.
The best place for you to start with this one is law 9

 

[Runner Ref]

So even though the keeper had the ball in there hands and the next phase of play/roll out by the keeper was yet to happen, that would be a penalty decision?

Correct.

The ball hasn’t left the pitch and you haven’t stopped play, so the ball is in play.

 

[wazztie16]

But it's ok to wave play on when an attacker jumps for the ball and is pushed or held by the defender as the ball sails over their heads, with neither of them having any chance of getting anywhere near the ball?

Because let's be honest, that happens more often than it should...

 

[one]

So even though the keeper had the ball in there hands and the next phase of play/roll out by the keeper was yet to happen, that would be a penalty decision?

To be clear, even if the ball was in the keeper's hands on the the opposite side of the pitch, 100 yards away, and there is a foul on this side, you still give give the penalty where the foul was.

Would you allow a substitution while the ball is in the keeper's hand? No. Because the ball is in play. So any foul is still penalised.

 

[Yoda&2]

To be clear, even if the ball was in the keeper's hands on the the opposite side of the pitch, 100 yards away, and there is a foul on this side, you still give give the penalty where the foul was.

Would you allow a substitution while the ball is in the keeper's hand? No. Because the ball is in play. So any foul is still penalised.

Thanks - When you put it that way it makes absolute sense. Cheers

 

[socal lurker]

What is said above is absolutely correct from a Laws perspective. I’d just add one gloss. What qualifies as “trifling” in terms of a foul that does need to be called is a bit more expansive when the GK is already holding the ball and there is nothing the attacker can do. But a clear (and incredibly stupid) foul should be sanctioned with the PK

 

[NoFoulsAllowed]

Fully agree with the trifling side of things.

If keeper has the ball and there is a little afters between an attacker and a defender. Likely best just playing on.

Caveat being if someone does something incredibly stupid.

 

[DJIC]

On a similar thread, last night's Man C v Real Madrid match, ball being knocked along Man C back four when referee Clement Turpin spots Haaland & a Real Madrid defender in the opposite half, grabbing each other's shirt & pushing each other. He blows to stop the game, calls them in, no cards, admonishes them but restarts play with a drop ball to Man C back in their back four.

Is this correct in law? Would/should you decide it was a foul one way or the other?

 

[socal lurker]

The argument for a DB would be that the R did not consider there to have been an offense, and stopped the match proactively to prevent there being an issue. Since there was no offense, the only possible restart is a DB.

That said, especially in a professional match, if there is not an offense, I don’t think the R should be stopping play.

(it’s also possible that he stopped because he thought there was an offense, and his ARs or 4O convinced him there was not actually an offense, in which case it is an inadvertent whistle and the DB is simply the proper restart.)

 

[santa sangria]

It presented poorly. He should have “found” a foul. Safe option is go defensive foul but give them both the Collina haidryer. But ideally the AR would inform the ref if the main instigator.

 

[RefereeX]

It presented poorly. He should have “found” a foul. Safe option is go defensive foul but give them both the Collina haidryer. But ideally the AR would inform the ref if the main instigator.

Not sure it would have looked any tidier to find a foul so far away from the ball to be fair. Just a sh*tty situation to deal with.

 

[GraemeS]

Well exactly. Neither outcome is tidy or what football expects, so probably best to go with the sh*tty-looking one that actually complies with law!

 

[RefereeX]

They could both comply with law, as explained by @socal lurker

 

[GraemeS]

The drop ball solution is the correct restart....if you are incorrectly whistling in the first place - that implies a non-law-compliant reason for stopping the game. So perhaps avoid unnecessarily admitting to blowing the whistle for no particular reason when there are other options available?

 

[RefereeX]

The drop ball solution is the correct restart....if you are incorrectly whistling in the first place - that implies a non-law-compliant reason for stopping the game. So perhaps avoid unnecessarily admitting to blowing the whistle for no particular reason when there are other options available?

You've conveniently ignored the alternative reason for a dropped ball... but...

Sorry yes, 'finding a foul' is a far more law compliant solution... a foul in a similar position to the one that Everton scored from last night. What a howler that would be!

 

[santa sangria]

I was taught you can’t stop the game to warn players and restart dropped ball. There were offences, you just have to choose the first/worst. No one buys exact simultaneous offences idea.

I can’t find in the book where the ref can stop play to warn players. And this is not in any traininh or guides. Indefensible for me. Small potatoes and he’s a great ref - but don’t do it!

 

[Cowboy Ref]

I say penalty. Ball wasn't out of bounds and the whistle hasn't blown for a stoppage of play. It's still an offense for tripping another player. It had no intention of touching the ball. A foul is a foul.