Keeper releasing ball into opponent

[OnlyUseMeWhistle]

Funny one in a game today and I can’t find any info on it.

Team A keeper has the ball in his hands whilst team B player is walking out of the box after a corner, slowly and in my view deliberately snaking his run to delay the keeper.

The keeper then deliberately kicks the ball from his hands into the team B player. I gave a free kick because I believed he was deliberately trying to obstruct the keeper and just cover it with “oh I’m just walking out the box”. (Should’ve been a yellow? Wasn’t sure so sided with not giving one)

After the game the team B coach says he thinks the new law is that the keeper should be carded and a free kick given to team B IF the ball is deliberately kicked at the player. Can’t find anything online to say either way so thoughts welcome!

 

[BreakingBrad]

Am sure he can deliberately kick it at a player if he wants (not sure why you'd want to though). However if the attacker challenges the GK as he releases the ball it should be an indirect FK.

 

[RustyRef]

It is an offence for an attacking player to prevent the keeper from releasing the ball, you have to decide whether he did that or not. For that he really needs to be stood right next to the keeper, if he has walked away some distance and the keeper kicks it at him that is play on and down to the stupidity of the keeper.

Would only be a caution for the attacker if it was reckless, e.g. if he dangles a leg and the keeper's clearance kicks into it, or potentially PI if he has done it before.

 

[CaptainsPlease]

Yes if an opponent is preventing GK release from hands then you can give the indirect free kick even if the GK kicks it at them deliberately. It is not a mandatory caution, but you could caution for persistent infringement if the opponent does it again.

The only way I could imagine the GK being penalised would be something really excessive where it could be regarded as violent conduct, but I think that would always be very difficult to sell. And it would still be an indirect FK restart if the opponent was preventing release from hands at the time, because that would be the first offence.

 

[GraemeS]

If you're confident it was deliberate, you can certainly justify a card for the keeper - if it's hit with force and connects with the attacker's head I think you'd be obliged to go red, any body contact then yellow is probably the most that would be expected. But I don't think it's mandatory in most cases.

 

[RefereeX]

If you're confident it was deliberate, you can certainly justify a card for the keeper - if it's hit with force and connects with the attacker's head I think you'd be obliged to go red, any body contact then yellow is probably the most that would be expected. But I don't think it's mandatory in most cases.

Given the ball is in active play, I'm not sure you could ever justify carding for it. If the game was stopped and he did it, then by all means.

 

[GraemeS]

Given the ball is in active play, I'm not sure you could ever justify carding for it. If the game was stopped and he did it, then by all means.

"Ever" is a big word there! I'd love to see the LOTG citation that suggests VC can't happen while the ball is in play?

I'd want to be sure it was a deliberate act (like for example if the attacker has eventually moved off so the side and so the kick isn't in the normal direction), but if the circumstances are right, this could clearly be an aggressive/violent act and deserving of a card.

 

[RefereeX]

"Ever" is a big word there! I'd love to see the LOTG citation that suggests VC can't happen while the ball is in play?

I'd want to be sure it was a deliberate act (like for example if the attacker has eventually moved off so the side and so the kick isn't in the normal direction), but if the circumstances are right, this could clearly be an aggressive/violent act and deserving of a card.

Of course VC can happen when the ball is in play, but violent conduct involving kicking the ball at someone is different to other types of violent conduct. A goalkeeper is entitled to kick the ball in any direction they want, no? How can you prove that I've deliberately kicked it at anyone?

Maybe I'm being silly, but they're questions you could be open to.

Ever is probably wrong yes.. E.g. if the goalkeeper started chasing the attacked round and fired it at him maybe, but that seems unlikely and if they've lost their head that much, they're more likely to sod the ball and just go in on the player themselves. Like you say it would have to be very very clear.

 

[GraemeS]

"Prove" is the wrong word. I'm not in court, I don't need to present detailed, objective evidence. And I don't need to have a list of criteria pre-written in order to determine if it was a deliberate act or not.

I need to watch the incident that happens in front of me and determine if the kick was intended to send the ball upfield and the attacker just happened to get in the way, or if it was a targeted kick at him. I'm relatively confident in my ability to make that determination on any given incident, and in reality the GK generally deserves the benefit of the doubt. But I'm not going to let some invented threshold of certainty let a clearly violent act go unpunished if that's the way I see it.

 

[RefereeX]

"Prove" is the wrong word. I'm not in court, I don't need to present detailed, objective evidence. And I don't need to have a list of criteria pre-written in order to determine if it was a deliberate act or not.

I need to watch the incident that happens in front of me and determine if the kick was intended to send the ball upfield and the attacker just happened to get in the way, or if it was a targeted kick at him. I'm relatively confident in my ability to make that determination on any given incident, and in reality the GK generally deserves the benefit of the doubt. But I'm not going to let some invented threshold of certainty let a clearly violent act go unpunished if that's the way I see it.

I'm not saying you're wrong... I'm playing devil's advocate. With regards to handball and other things, 'intent' was removed because we don't know what a players intentions are.

My original post, despite my clearly misplaced use of the word 'ever', was to say that if the goalkeeper kicks the ball at a player under normal match circumstances with the ball in play, even if you felt it was done deliberately, carding for it would be ill-advised.

 

[JamesL]

With regards to handball and other things, 'intent' was removed because we don't know what a players intentions are.

Yet still exists in some capacity to determine if a ball was deliberately kicked to a goalkeeper.

 

[GraemeS]

I think the concerns over intent are valid in trying to write "consistent" law, but are also massively overstated in terms of how much trouble they used to cause.

It's certainly worth looking at the effect of removing it from the HB law - is what we have now clearer than "did he mean to use his hand/arm?" I'm not really sure it is. And what we're discussing here is IMO likely to be far clearer than some borderline handballs.

I think your concerns over ball in/out of play and the text of the law are causing you to miss the obvious a little. If a GK has attempted to use the ball as a weapon against a striker who's annoyed him, it will a) be pretty clear and b) would be considerably more "ill-advised" to ignore it and try to just get on with a free kick. I'm genuinely struggling to imagine a version of this where it's a clear enough offence that I have to give an attacking FK, but that a card wouldn't be required.

 

[RefereeX]

I think the concerns over intent are valid in trying to write "consistent" law, but are also massively overstated in terms of how much trouble they used to cause.

It's certainly worth looking at the effect of removing it from the HB law - is what we have now clearer than "did he mean to use his hand/arm?" I'm not really sure it is. And what we're discussing here is IMO likely to be far clearer than some borderline handballs.

I think your concerns over ball in/out of play and the text of the law are causing you to miss the obvious a little. If a GK has attempted to use the ball as a weapon against a striker who's annoyed him, it will a) be pretty clear and b) would be considerably more "ill-advised" to ignore it and try to just get on with a free kick. I'm genuinely struggling to imagine a version of this where it's a clear enough offence that I have to give an attacking FK, but that a card wouldn't be required.

I'll use the word ever in the correct context here - I would not ever give an attacking FK and not issue a card (Edit: for this situation). That wasn't what I was implying. What I am saying is that in a normal match situation, even if a goalkeeper is deliberately aiming his goal kick at a striker, I'd be very unlikely to want to give a FK against, or card the keeper. I'm not missing the obvious, I've just never seen a goalkeeper divert enough from his normal goal kick routine to deliberately kick the ball at a striker in an obvious enough manner that it would warrant a free kick and card. As said above, if he did chase after the striker, or turn round and kick it at a striker who was behind him, I could back a card, but I find it a stretch to imagine a keeper doing that. If they're upset enough, they'd leave the ball and confront physically themselves. That's the point I'm making. It's a 1 in a million situation.

 

[GraemeS]

I mean, I think your reasoning for not penalising is exactly why a keeper might try it - plausible deniability.

Drop the ball and swing a punch at someone, the only question is how quickly you can get the red card out and if the opponent also gets sent off for swinging back.

Boot the ball vaguely towards the FOP but it just "happens" to smack the irritating striker in the face? "Whoops, sorry ref, must have sliced it".

I can definitely think of one occasion where I think a keeper tried it, but happened to miss. Ball went straight out of play and before the restart, I took a moment to ask the captain to remind the GK that he's responsible to ensure he plays in a safe manner. Everyone knew what had happened, and because I delayed the game, everyone knew I had seen and was onto it and the last 5-10 mins of the game went fairly smoothly - an outcome I don't know I could have relied on if I'd just assumed no one would ever even think of trying anything like that.

 

[Peter Grove]

I'm not saying you're wrong... I'm playing devil's advocate. With regards to handball and other things, 'intent' was removed because we don't know what a players intentions are.

Intent was only completely removed from physical contact fouls.

For handball it's still there, at least in part:

It still exists in some capacity to determine if a ball was deliberately kicked to a goalkeeper.

It still exists in a lot more places than that. The words 'deliberate' or 'deliberately' still occur 43 times in the LotG document (10 times in the offside law alone).

 

[RefereeX]

I mean, I think your reasoning for not penalising is exactly why a keeper might try it - plausible deniability.

Drop the ball and swing a punch at someone, the only question is how quickly you can get the red card out and if the opponent also gets sent off for swinging back.

Boot the ball vaguely towards the FOP but it just "happens" to smack the irritating striker in the face? "Whoops, sorry ref, must have sliced it".

I can definitely think of one occasion where I think a keeper tried it, but happened to miss. Ball went straight out of play and before the restart, I took a moment to ask the captain to remind the GK that he's responsible to ensure he plays in a safe manner. Everyone knew what had happened, and because I delayed the game, everyone knew I had seen and was onto it and the last 5-10 mins of the game went fairly smoothly - an outcome I don't know I could have relied on if I'd just assumed no one would ever even think of trying anything like that.

Intent was only completely removed from physical contact fouls.

For handball it's still there, at least in part:

View attachment 7106


It still exists in a lot more places than that. The words 'deliberate' or 'deliberately' still occur 43 times in the LotG document (10 times in the offside law alone).

Fair points, well made. I think we're probably on the same side here, but it was my use of the word 'ever' that caused the issue. Clearly it could in some circumstances, be carded, my only intention was to say it would have to be very extreme. If a play was stood infront of a keeper releasing the ball and I suspected he tried to kick it straight at him, I'd be far more likely to have a quiet word than try and make a big deal of it, as you've said Graeme.

 

[Big Cat]

Our guidance heavily leans towards finding in favour of the GK (Safe). I don't ordinarily agree with excessively safe refereeing, but I can live with it for this scenario. As for a sanction for kicking the ball at an opponent (ball in play). That ain't happening in my World