A&H

Indirect Free Kick Handled on Goal Line

Status
Not open for further replies.
A) To quote the rugby referee from last weekend, we're here to referee, not coach - so if a player doesn't know the IDFK signal that's their lookout, not yours.

B) Which brings me on to asking what everybody else does about signalling for IDFK. I only ever raise my arm, I think only in a rare couple of occasions have I also shouted out that its indirect - but should I? Does everybody else also put a shout out for IDFK? There is a coach locally that on pretty much every free kick will shout out "Ref, is that direct or indirect?", to which I always reply "Is my arm up?" and move on.

If it's in an attacking area, where they might attempt a shot or to put it into the box, I'll do the arm and a shout to confirm it's indirect.

I'm not shouting for every offside though, just the arm for those.
 
The Referee Store
If a player asks I'll tell them whether it's direct or indirect, but otherwise it's the arm signal and that's all. Not my problem if they don't know the difference.
 
As long as you are signalling that it is an indirect free kick (arm in the air) then it would be handball, penalty, I don't see the need for any card, I can't see what it would be for. And as for a retake, definitely not !
 
It really depends where the hands are and what the ball has done. If, for example, the ball is going in and the player moves his arms out to block it then I just don't see how that can be DOGSO as if he didn't handle the ball the restart wouldn't be a goal but rather a goal kick. So he hasn't denied a goal, he has denied a goal kick and therefore penalised his own team. Whereas if the shot takes a nick off someone and the defender does the same then DOGSO does apply as a goal would have been awarded had he not handled it.

Someone mentioned it above, but there used to be a Q&A in the laws talking about a defender denying a goal by handling from a throw-in that was going to go directly in the goal. The answer to that was that it was a penalty but not DOGSO as had the ball gone in a goal wouldn't have been awarded. Nothing has ever been subsequently written to contradict this so I would say that is still valid, and the same premise has to apply for an IDFK.
 
As long as you are signalling that it is an indirect free kick (arm in the air) then it would be handball, penalty, I don't see the need for any card, I can't see what it would be for. And as for a retake, definitely not !
I'd be cautioning him for unsporting behaviour - to me, the intent to prevent a goal by illegally handling the ball deserves some sort of sanction, and the player's ignorance of the LotG shouldn't excuse him from that! Same as if a player deliberately handles the ball but it still enters the goal - it's still a caution.
 
The original post states : " Attacker not realising it is indirect takes the kick quickly and shoots" so that is illegal as it should be INDIRECT as the OP stated.... so what would be your course of action on that scenairo alone ? Forget this rubbish about having a shot hoping for a rebound, why does someone always have to put a "curve" on a given situation..... wouldn't you blow the whistle as it should be indirect? course you would? Normally yes you would normally RC the defender for handball,and award a penalty, it was going in so DOGSO ...... but !! the illegal first kick renders that situation immaterial...as the ref should have blown for the erroneous direct kick .... If the OP stated "hoping for a rebound" then i would take a different course of action.

Sorry what's illegal the player taking a shot at goal? Eh...nope scoring is illegal..shooting without it touching another player is stupid! If the attacker takes it quickly and you as the referee hasn't indicated correctly by raising your arm that it is indirect then yes potentially call it back if it is the attacker just being stupid then wtf would you call it back? If it's in shooting position I am assuming he is asking for a quick one or you are telling him it's on the whistle and marching out your wall?

If the defender handles the ball dependent on distance from goal line etc will make my decision then!
 
I should have thrown in my fourpennorth on the OP.

Penalty, but I don't see why a card is needed - just compounds the misery of giving away a needless penalty.
 
If a player asks ill tell them.

I might confirm with them if its something othan offside which doesnt happen very often, stopping play to caution a player for dissent for example (not that ive done this)
 
Think of it like this..
Defender deliberately handles the ball and it goes in, goal and yellow card.
Defender deliberately handles the ball, it doesn't go in.. Because it has touched another player (the deliberate handball), a goal can now be scored, but it wasn't, because he stopped the ball from entering the goal, therefore I'd go red card.
 
Think of it like this..
Defender deliberately handles the ball and it goes in, goal and yellow card.
Defender deliberately handles the ball, it doesn't go in.. Because it has touched another player (the deliberate handball), a goal can now be scored, but it wasn't, because he stopped the ball from entering the goal, therefore I'd go red card.
I'd rather not think of it like that, for that way lies madness.

Did you not read PG's post?
It's also not DOGSO since a goal cannot be scored directly from an IFK. It's directly analagous to one of the old Q&A's which posited the scenario of a defender handling a ball that was heading into the goal from a throw-in. The answer told us that:
The player does not prevent a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity since a goal cannot be scored directly from a throw-in.
 
Think of it like this..
Defender deliberately handles the ball and it goes in, goal and yellow card.
Defender deliberately handles the ball, it doesn't go in.. Because it has touched another player (the deliberate handball), a goal can now be scored, but it wasn't, because he stopped the ball from entering the goal, therefore I'd go red card.
That makes no sense.
 
I'm just putting a different perspective out there. I've actually emailed IFAB to find out what the answer actually is, because really, I'm not sure myself.
 
I'm just putting a different perspective out there. I've actually emailed IFAB to find out what the answer actually is, because really, I'm not sure myself.

You dont need to email IFAB, it is a penalty and a caution, simple as that.

@bloovee you cannot ignore the caution because you feel sorry for the player!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top