A&H

Pass Back Rule

R

ref11

New Member
If a player controls the ball with his foot then heads it back to the goalkeeper is it a pass back or not?
 
The Referee Store
there is no 'pass back' rule ;)

but, yes, the above should result in an idfk to the opposing side for circumventing the lotg
 
indeed....interestingly, for me at least, i noticed that, should a player try the same thing when taking a free-kick, that there should be a caution but the free kick would then be re-taken. dead-ball situation.

anybody had this...or general circumvention during a game?
 
Had a player get down on his hands and knees to head the ball back to his goalkeeper. His manager was furious with him for getting cautioned.
 
can we just clarify this point?

theoretical scenario: the ball is played in the general direction of the goalkeeper by an attacking player. the ball is bouncing, and a defender is chasing it back towards his own box. if the defender stoops/crouches/slides to head this ball to his keeper, would you still give IFK/caution?

personally i couldn't say that he is circumventing the LOTG by doing this. there's no law that governs when it's appropriate to head the ball.

therefore it's only circumvention if he's doing it deliberately to avoid it being a backpass, ie if he or one of his own team has passed it back to the keeper.

am i wrong?
 
My judgement would be that if he heads the ball when that would be the natural way to pass in the situation OR when either heading or kicking makes sense (ie ball at waist height), then I have no problem.

It should be pretty obvious when a player is doing something which would not be a normal play to head the ball - ie flicking it up with his foot, or getting on the ground to head the ball.
 
My point is who are we to judge whether a player is heading the ball "legitimately"? There's nothing in the LOTG governing when and how a header should be executed...
 
No, but my point is it should be pretty obvious whether or not the player has used a "deliberate trick" to head the ball, which is what we are required to judge.
 
Yes so for me, if he flicks it up himself and heads it back that's a deliberate trick.

If he uses unconventional means to head back a ball that an opposition player has kicked, I don't see a problem.
 
"A goalkeeper is not permitted to touch the ball with his hand inside his own penalty area in the following circumstances: if he touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate"

What other law could it possibly be referring to?
 
The same way that flicking the ball up to head it is circumventing it - that is, in a situation where the player would never normally use his head to play the ball, he has gone out of hisway to do so, the only purpose being to avoid playing the ball to the keeper with his feet.
 
I have a problem with this as well...... is he 'circumventing' the Laws, or using them to his advantage?

Sure, a keeper who has held the ball in his hands for 6secs, tosses it to a teammates head, and catches the rebound, holds it for 6secs again, and bounces it off his mates head again is circumventing the laws, not in the spirit of the game, time-wasting etc etc

But a ball kicked across the penalty area and headed back to the goalkeeper ?????

Not trying to start an argument with it, just wanna get it straight in my own head.

I have scored once by getting on my knees and heading a grounded ball across the line - George Best nearly did it in the European Cup Final he reckoned - but the goal was given. Where's the difference?
 
MattyontheWhistle said:
I have scored once by getting on my knees and heading a grounded ball across the line - George Best nearly did it in the European Cup Final he reckoned - but the goal was given. Where's the difference?
Click to expand...

i seem to recall that you should be cautioned for that if you tried it these days, Matty, for unsporting behaviour
 
The difference is intent. If a player has control of the ball and then gets down on the ground to head into the goal, then it might be silly, and some might make the argument for it being unsporting if it is just to show off how much time he has, but it is not a deliberate trick intended to circumvent the spirit or letter of the law. There is no benefit he is seeking to gain from the absurd action.

If this happens at the other end of the field, back to the keeper, I just don't see how that can be anything other than a deliberate trick to circumvent the law. You may disagree, but in my mind it meets exactly the same criteria as flicking the ball up in the air to head it. Not an illegal action anywhere else on the pitch, but clearly a player going out of his way to head the ball when the only advantage to be gained from doing so is the keeper being able to pick the ball up. In my opinion the same would apply if a player intentionally used his knee to nudge a ball that was on the ground.
 
rainertheref said:
The difference is intent. If a player has control of the ball and then gets down on the ground to head into the goal, then it might be silly, and some might make the argument for it being unsporting if it is just to show off how much time he has, but it is not a deliberate trick intended to circumvent the spirit or letter of the law. There is no benefit he is seeking to gain from the absurd action.
Click to expand...
OK, I follow as has been said earlier - USB.

rainertheref said:
If this happens at the other end of the field, back to the keeper, I just don't see how that can be anything other than a deliberate trick to circumvent the law. You may disagree, but in my mind it meets exactly the same criteria as flicking the ball up in the air to head it. Not an illegal action anywhere else on the pitch, but clearly a player going out of his way to head the ball when the only advantage to be gained from doing so is the keeper being able to pick the ball up. In my opinion the same would apply if a player intentionally used his knee to nudge a ball that was on the ground.
Click to expand...

Now, this is where I feel we need more clarification. To 'circumvent' means to 'go around' or 'get around' the laws of the game, which to my mind means, doing something outside the LOTG in order to avoid penalty or gain advantage. A defender, who heads the ball back to the goalkeeper has done what that is outside the LOTG?

Full back under pressure, plays a square ball across the pitch to center back in space, it bobbles a bit, but center back drops to his knees and heads it back to GK who picks it up.

How high off the ground does the ball have to be before he can 'legally' head it back to GK?
Is it our place to judge whether or not the defender has the ability to control a thigh high ball back to GK, or knee-high, or shin high?

As I have said earlier, if it is an obvious trick to eat time, juggling it up to his head, or GK tossing it for him to head back I could get them for time-wasting under USB, but if the ball is played to him and he heads it back to GK I would struggle to find an offence, however near the ground the ball is.

Again, not trying to agree or disagree here, I understand that 'circumventing the law' is punishable, I am trying to understand where the boundaries are between circumvention and quick thinking!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top