Overprotecting the goalkeeper

[CapeTownRef]

I've seen this so many times!! From a corner or free kick the ball travels between the 6 yard box and penalty spot. The GK runs out to try and catch/punch the ball whereas the forward is stationary and looking at the ball. The forward (who hasn't moved) is looking at the ball and jumps vertically, but the goalkeeper jumps forward, initiates contact with the forward, and then either spills the ball or fails to make contact with the ball, and the referee gives a free kick to the GK. It drives me mad!! The GK has a natural advantage whereby he can use his hands and yet any contact between the GK and an opponent almost always results in a free kick to the GK.

 

[Anubis]

I've seen this so many times!! From a corner or free kick the ball travels between the 6 yard box and penalty spot. The GK runs out to try and catch/punch the ball whereas the forward is stationary and looking at the ball. The forward (who hasn't moved) is looking at the ball and jumps vertically, but the goalkeeper jumps forward, initiates contact with the forward, and then either spills the ball or fails to make contact with the ball, and the referee gives a free kick to the GK. It drives me mad!! The GK has a natural advantage whereby he can use his hands and yet any contact between the GK and an opponent almost always results in a free kick to the GK.

Its called safe refereeing. And there was a long running post few weeks back dedicated to the difference between calling a decision, and, overseeing your match as a whole.
Whilst what you describe might not be a foul, it looks like one, there is an expectation that a foul be given, it would be a surprise if one was not.
Unless its clearly, as in clearly not a foul, as you have pointed out, its almost always a fk to the gk.
Because most referees have learnt not to hand out surprises.

 

[CapeTownRef]

My first priority always is the safety of ALL players. Because of the unwritten law that says GKs are "special", and therefore must be treated differently to outfield players, they get away with infringements that outfield players seldom do. I'm not concerned about "handing out surprises" but I am concerned about treating all players equally within the LOTG. Refereeing is as much about man management as it is about applying the laws and, as such, I feel I am experienced enough to handle the reactions from players because I am applying the correct decision and punishment.

 

[JamesL]

I've seen this so many times!! From a corner or free kick the ball travels between the 6 yard box and penalty spot. The GK runs out to try and catch/punch the ball whereas the forward is stationary and looking at the ball. The forward (who hasn't moved) is looking at the ball and jumps vertically, but the goalkeeper jumps forward, initiates contact with the forward, and then either spills the ball or fails to make contact with the ball, and the referee gives a free kick to the GK. It drives me mad!! The GK has a natural advantage whereby he can use his hands and yet any contact between the GK and an opponent almost always results in a free kick to the GK.

It's not that they get special treatment, we'll it is or appears as such. I think it's an overly heavy weighting given to keeper is in control and can't be challenged.

 

[Anubis]

My first priority always is the safety of ALL players. Because of the unwritten law that says GKs are "special", and therefore must be treated differently to outfield players, they get away with infringements that outfield players seldom do. I'm not concerned about "handing out surprises" but I am concerned about treating all players equally within the LOTG. Refereeing is as much about man management as it is about applying the laws and, as such, I feel I am experienced enough to handle the reactions from players because I am applying the correct decision and punishment.

its not about protection....is about safe refereeing as in, not wanting to allow a goal when it looks to all and sundry as if they gk has been fouled

sorry for the communication issue, where i am, safe refereeing means sensible no surprises, not safe as in keep safe from injury.

the best example i try use is, you are perfectly placed 30 yards out, striker shoots, and only you see the touch off the defenders shoe laces...

do u give goal kick
or
corner kick

safe refereeing ( location wise here) says, goal kick.

the same principle applies in your example

by giving fk to gk, you upset the attackers for two secs
by awarding a goal ( the winning, or, only goal) after what looks like a foul on the gk, you ' have cost us the game ref' and all the usual statements

 

[one]

While I can see your description in the OP is to make a point and it is well made you need to be careful that your opposition to over-protection of goalkeepers doesn't tip the balance the other way. I have seen this happen often with referees who used to play as attacking players.

I am concerned about treating all players equally within the LOTG.

This can't strictly be correct. You can treat all players equally fair but not just equally. Goal keepers are in fact 'special'. They are the only ones who can play the ball legally with their hand. They are the only ones who can't be challenged for the ball when in control (as defined in law). There are many other laws that are especially written for goalkeepers, some work for some against them. And there are some others that not written but are common sense to look out for around keepers.

For example keepers jump with their hands up to catch the ball leaving their ribs exposed. I have less tollorence for a player charging a keeper in that position. By the same token I have less tollorence for a keeper jumping with a leading knee.

There are also some things that go with expectations. For example a field player getting very low to play the ball may be PIADM if another player is trying to kick it. The same can't be said about a keeper diving low. It is a expected that keeper dive low.

Hope this makes sense.

 

[CapeTownRef]

While I can see your description in the OP is to make a point and it is well made you need to be careful that your opposition to over-protection of goalkeepers doesn't tip the balance the other way. I have seen this happen often with referees who used to play as attacking players.



This can't strictly be correct. You can treat all players equally fair but not just equally. Goal keepers are in fact 'special'. They are the only ones who can play the ball legally with their hand. They are the only ones who can't be challenged for the ball when in control (as defined in law). There are many other laws that are especially written for goalkeepers, some work for some against them. And there are some others that not written but are common sense to look out for around keepers.

For example keepers jump with their hands up to catch the ball leaving their ribs exposed. I have less tollorence for a player charging a keeper in that position. By the same token I have less tollorence for a keeper jumping with a leading knee.

There are also some things that go with expectations. For example a field player getting very low to play the ball may be PIADM if another player is trying to kick it. The same can't be said about a keeper diving low. It is a expected that keeper dive low.

Hope this makes sense.

I respectfully disagree with some of your comments. There is nothing in the LOTG that states GKs are "special". It is true that they have the advantage of using all parts of their bodies in their own PA. However your point of their ribs being exposed when they jump to catch a high ball is exactly the same as an outfield player jumping to head the ball whereby his arms are not tucked along the sides of his torso and hence his ribs are also exposed. My main point is not about when a GK is in control of the ball, it is about what the GK does before getting control of the ball. In the Premier League match between Watford and Crystal Palace a few weeks ago, Watford floated a FK into the area and the Palace GK ploughed through his own player in an attempt to catch the ball and subsequently dropped it. The referee gave a FK to the GK!! Finally, if a player is endangering himself by ducking his head amongst the boots, then an IDFK should be awarded against him. At the end of the day I agree 100% that common sense is the best option for every occasion. Good exchange of views.

 

[CapeTownRef]

its not about protection....is about safe refereeing as in, not wanting to allow a goal when it looks to all and sundry as if they gk has been fouled

sorry for the communication issue, where i am, safe refereeing means sensible no surprises, not safe as in keep safe from injury.

the best example i try use is, you are perfectly placed 30 yards out, striker shoots, and only you see the touch off the defenders shoe laces...

do u give goal kick
or
corner kick

safe refereeing ( location wise here) says, goal kick.

the same principle applies in your example

by giving fk to gk, you upset the attackers for two secs
by awarding a goal ( the winning, or, only goal) after what looks like a foul on the gk, you ' have cost us the game ref' and all the usual statements

Wow!! How many other laws should the referee ignore? If I see a defender touch the ball last before it goes out over the goal line, I give a corner - because that's what the LOTG says I should do. If the attackers get "upset" because I give a FK to the GK, then so be it, they will get over it. As a referee, I do not give a damn about who wins or what the score is (unless it is at the end of the game and I have to confirm it on my match card). I will always make the odd mistake in a game but I make a lot of good decisions as well. If after a game members of the losing team what to express their dissatisfaction with my efforts, then I am happy to explain to them my reasoning (if I can remember the incident!!). In retrospect, and if I realize I was wrong, I will say so and apologize. In 40 odd years of refereeing this has always been the best policy for me as I have never had any cause to report a player's behaviour after the final whistle.

 

[Anubis]

Wow!! How many other laws should the referee ignore? If I see a defender touch the ball last before it goes out over the goal line, I give a corner - because that's what the LOTG says I should do. If the attackers get "upset" because I give a FK to the GK, then so be it, they will get over it. As a referee, I do not give a damn about who wins or what the score is (unless it is at the end of the game and I have to confirm it on my match card). I will always make the odd mistake in a game but I make a lot of good decisions as well. If after a game members of the losing team what to express their dissatisfaction with my efforts, then I am happy to explain to them my reasoning (if I can remember the incident!!). In retrospect, and if I realize I was wrong, I will say so and apologize. In 40 odd years of refereeing this has always been the best policy for me as I have never had any cause to report a player's behaviour after the final whistle.

a decent referee manages the decision
an excellent referee manages the game.

there are no prizes given out for being the only person on the pitch to see something,

 

[RustyRef]

Wow!! How many other laws should the referee ignore? If I see a defender touch the ball last before it goes out over the goal line, I give a corner - because that's what the LOTG says I should do. If the attackers get "upset" because I give a FK to the GK, then so be it, they will get over it. As a referee, I do not give a damn about who wins or what the score is (unless it is at the end of the game and I have to confirm it on my match card). I will always make the odd mistake in a game but I make a lot of good decisions as well. If after a game members of the losing team what to express their dissatisfaction with my efforts, then I am happy to explain to them my reasoning (if I can remember the incident!!). In retrospect, and if I realize I was wrong, I will say so and apologize. In 40 odd years of refereeing this has always been the best policy for me as I have never had any cause to report a player's behaviour after the final whistle.

Do you automatically give an IDFK once a keeper has held the ball for more than 6 seconds? Do you insist on a throw in or free kick being taken from the exact blade of grass? Always caution a player who delays the restart of play? And so on. They are all mandatory decisions, but as referees we manage the situation.

That said, I do agree that keepers are sometimes over protected.

 

[CapeTownRef]

Do you automatically give an IDFK once a keeper has held the ball for more than 6 seconds? Do you insist on a throw in or free kick being taken from the exact blade of grass? Always caution a player who delays the restart of play? And so on. They are all mandatory decisions, but as referees we manage the situation.

That said, I do agree that keepers are sometimes over protected.

As I said, common sense is of paramount importance. I would warn the GK to release the ball once and, if he does it again, I then give a IDFK. Throw-ins and free kicks to be taken within an acceptable distance from where the ball went out or the infringement occurs. Time wasting gets one verbal warning and the next time a caution. All common sense management of the game. My voice is just as important as my whistle. I ap[preciate that not all referees are of the same personality and, therefore, I understand your comments about the mandatory decisions.

 

[Matthew]

its not about protection....is about safe refereeing as in, not wanting to allow a goal when it looks to all and sundry as if they gk has been fouled

sorry for the communication issue, where i am, safe refereeing means sensible no surprises, not safe as in keep safe from injury.

the best example i try use is, you are perfectly placed 30 yards out, striker shoots, and only you see the touch off the defenders shoe laces...

do u give goal kick
or
corner kick

safe refereeing ( location wise here) says, goal kick.

the same principle applies in your example

by giving fk to gk, you upset the attackers for two secs
by awarding a goal ( the winning, or, only goal) after what looks like a foul on the gk, you ' have cost us the game ref' and all the usual statements

I completely disagree with your example in bold. It's a corner and I'd be giving the corner; I as the referee know the defender has touched it, as does the defender, so it's a corner. There's a difference between "safe" refereeing and making a decision that you know is wrong.

 

[Ben448844]

I completely disagree with your example in bold. It's a corner and I'd be giving the corner; I as the referee know the defender has touched it, as does the defender, so it's a corner. There's a difference between "safe" refereeing and making a decision that you know is wrong.

The point about the corner, it wouldn't even occur to me to give a goal kick because other people may not have seen the deflection. I have and therefore its a corner.

 

[refeire]

I had the corner/goal kick thing once.

Home team losing 15 - 0 with about 3 or 4 mins to play. Away striker shoots, it brushed the jersey of a home defender but so slightly that it didnt change direction. The shooter ran back (preparing a GK) and all defenders got ready for a GK. No attackers prepared a corner and both touchlines prepared for a GK.

I gave a goal kick. Then this away kid who was beside me comes and goes "ref it's a corner" with a "yes no one else knows it but we do" tone and facial expression.

 

[Anubis]

I had the corner/goal kick thing once.

Home team losing 15 - 0 with about 3 or 4 mins to play. Away striker shoots, it brushed the jersey of a home defender but so slightly that it didnt change direction. The shooter ran back (preparing a GK) and all defenders got ready for a GK. No attackers prepared a corner and both touchlines prepared for a GK.

I gave a goal kick. Then this away kid who was beside me comes and goes "ref it's a corner" with a "yes no one else knows it but we do" tone and facial expression.

perfection and a great example of managing your game


as ever if folk wish to give the corner, thats up to them

 

[Anubis]

I completely disagree with your example in bold. It's a corner and I'd be giving the corner; I as the referee know the defender has touched it, as does the defender, so it's a corner. There's a difference between "safe" refereeing and making a decision that you know is wrong.

An average ref can call a decision
An excellent one can call the entire game

 

[one]

It is a sad day for the game that you have to choose between making the right/fair decision and pleasing your bosses to get promotion.

Lucky for me, I don't want to, or have the chance to get to the top. I shall give the penalty if I see a defender holding an attacker in the PA after the ball is in play.

 

[GraemeS]

It is a sad day for the game that you have to choose between making the right/fair decision and pleasing your bosses to get promotion.

Lucky for me, I don't want to, or have the chance to get to the top. I shall give the penalty if I see a defender holding an attacker in the PA after the ball is in play.

I'd love @Big Cat 's thoughts on this - I remember a few seasons ago he was "promotion-sceptical" based on similar reasons such as this.

Now with the L5 badge on their profile, I wonder if they still see the promotion pathway as requiring quite the same level of betrayal to the principals of football? In my experience on this forum, people who have never attempted promotion love to assume it's a constant stream of observers telling you to be strict on sock tape and lax on everything else. In reality, the sock tape bit is often true but the other bit isn't!

 

[Ben448844]

An average ref can call a decision
An excellent one can call the entire game

That's just random meaningless words. Back to the decision at hand. If you see the ball flick off a defender then give a strong signal and give it early. Anyone whinges then tell them to ask the defender, who you've already looked at straight away so he knows you've seen it.

That's management that gets the right call too imo.

 

[Ben448844]

I'd love @Big Cat 's thoughts on this - I remember a few seasons ago he was "promotion-sceptical" based on similar reasons such as this.

Now with the L5 badge on their profile, I wonder if they still see the promotion pathway as requiring quite the same level of betrayal to the principals of football? In my experience on this forum, people who have never attempted promotion love to assume it's a constant stream of observers telling you to be strict on sock tape and lax on everything else. In reality, the sock tape bit is often true but the other bit isn't!

Agreed. Alot of it is going a bit over the top to tick a box or show that you're away of the laws of the game. But without doing this how can you show that you know them to meet the criteria? Its not a betrayal of principles. I've always allowed the whole sock tape thing etc at early promotions on a Sunday League game and just highlighted to the observer that I've seen it and spoken to the player but accepted that it's the spirit of the game at that level. Never had an issue. Obviously someone might but that conundrum is the same with all observers at the bottom levels. There's some strange ones around! but most just need to know that you're aware of the laws and understand at that level of football you're lucky that they've got 11 shirts even remotely the same colour never mind the other stuff