The Ref Stop

Own Goal advantage double touch?

bester

RefChat Addict
Scenario goalkeeper takes a goal kick / free kick, and the wind blows it back towards goal.
Goalkeeper gets a touch on it but fails to stop the ball entering the net.

Can we apply the advantage and give the goal, or does it need to hit another player?
 
The Ref Stop
The OP has two questions, I think. (1) Can you apply advantage to a second touch on a goal kick/free kick, and (2) if you did that here would it be a goal.

The answer to 1 is yes as it is an infraction while the ball is in play. If instead of going directly into the goal a teammate then touched it and the ball went into the goal, so long as the referee had not blown the whistle, advantage could be played and the goal given.

The answer to 2 is less pellucid. Law 16 says that the ball can score directly only into the other team's goal and if it "directly enters the kicker's goal" it is a CK. Directly (of course) is not defined and is used differently in various places within the Laws. While one could argue that once it is touched a second time it is no longer "directly" entering the goal, I agree with @RobOda that the best interpretation of the intent of "directly" would be that another player is required such that the result (if advantage were applied) should be a CK.

Since an IFK in the PA is more advantageous than a CK, the R should not apply advantage and should simply award the IFK.
 
We have discussed this in details in another thread a couple of years ago. The scenario was possible even before the new goal kick. While this is not directly (pun intended) covered in law, there are a couple places that support @RobOda 's answer:

1. The definition of direct free kick in glossary suggests 'directly' means without touching another players (note the underline is part is new this year and i suspect was added after my email for clarification :) - see below).
Direct free kick
A free kick from which a goal can be scored by kicking the ball directly into the opponents’ goal without having to touch another player

2. A variation of this was in law when a goal was scored 'directly' from a dropped ball. The same question was raised a single player took multiple touches and scored. IFAB changed the law so that the ball has to touch more than one player for a goal to be scored. Aging this can apply to OP s well.

And here is this email:

Dear ----
Thank you for your suggestion
It is too late for this year as the books are going to print but we will consider for next year
Best wishes
David
David Elleray
Technical Director of The IFAB


On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 6:51 AM +0100, ----- wrote:

Dear David,

I would like to suggest the addition of the following terms to the LOTG glossary

Directly (ball entering a goal)
When the ball enters a goal without touching another player, for example after a restart or after touching a player’s hand/arm.

Reason: This clarifies the current use of the word and removes any doubt that if a player takes a restart and then scores an own goal by a second touch it is still considered an own goal scored directly. It also gives correct context to the use of the word in the new changes.

Regards,
 
Last edited:
I don't see how this is any different, in terms of the underlying principles involved, from the following scenario that used to be in the FIFA Q&A's:
A player takes a throw-in. He throws the ball directly to his goalkeeper who touches the ball in attempting to stop it entering the goal. The ball enters the goal, however. What action does the referee take?
The advantage is allowed and a goal is awarded.

OK, we're talking about a different category of IFK offence (double touch as opposed to deliberately handling a throw in from a team mate) and a different restart (goal kick as opposed to throw in) but as it seems to me, the basic legal premise remains the same. Even though a goal could not be awarded if the ball gone in directly, once the touch which would otherwise be an IFK offence occurs, the advantage can be applied.
 
I don't see how this is any different, in terms of the underlying principles involved, from the following scenario that used to be in the FIFA Q&A's:


OK, we're talking about a different category of IFK offence (double touch as opposed to deliberately handling a throw in from a team mate) and a different restart (goal kick as opposed to throw in) but as it seems to me, the basic legal premise remains the same. Even though a goal could not be awarded if the ball gone in directly, once the touch which would otherwise be an IFK offence occurs, the advantage can be applied.

The fundamental difference is in the Q&A the ball touches another player but in OP it does not. Laws have now (since Q&A) made it clear that indirect means touching another player.

So the equivalent of the OP to the Q&A is that an outfield player takes the goal kick and before it enters own goal, it is touched by own keeper. A goal is awarded then.
 
Thanks guys had asked Mr Elleray but wanted the nuance. As ever the law could be better written.

", the goal cannot be awarded as the ball has not touched another player."
 
Are there any scenarios in which a DOGSO could result from a GK handling the ball in the defensive PA?
 
Are there any scenarios in which a DOGSO could result from a GK handling the ball in the defensive PA?

Not that I can think of.

This season's law changes pretty much rule it out now in 12.1 the handball offences rewrite. They can't be cautioned for SPA handling offences either.
 
Are there any scenarios in which a DOGSO could result from a GK handling the ball in the defensive PA?

No. Full stop. No.

"The goalkeeper has the same restrictions on handling the ball as any other player outside the penalty area. If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded but there is no disciplinary sanction. "

In fact, IFAB added a new DFK offense because GKs cannot be disciplined for handling within the PA. The DFK for using an object or throwing an object at the ball was included so that (if it ever happens in the real world) a GK doing so would result in a PK and appropriate caution or send off.
 
Scenario goalkeeper takes a goal kick / free kick, and the wind blows it back towards goal.
Goalkeeper gets a touch on it but fails to stop the ball entering the net.

Can we apply the advantage and give the goal, or does it need to hit another player?

I'll add a different reply here. If that happens I'd have to question why the game is being played at all, you would have to be talking gale force winds and in those conditions the ball wouldn't stay still at any restart. Even in Storm Ciara and Storm Dennis conditions of the past two weekends I doubt that happened in any of the very few games that were played, so the answer is obvious here. Pick up the ball and go home.
 
With the new law we don't necessarily have to have very strong wind for this to happen. The kick is across the goal only hard enough to get from one side of goal area to the other side (say half way up the goal area) which is quite common now. You don't really need a very strong wind to make the ball move towards goal. Id say the OP scenario is quite plausible.
 
I have seen a GK miss-kick a back-pass before diving on the ball in desperation (OA game a month or so ago)
We can imagine how the opponents reacted. I doubt there's a pundit out there who would know this Law change
 
I have seen a GK miss-kick a back-pass before diving on the ball in desperation (OA game a month or so ago)
We can imagine how the opponents reacted. I doubt there's a pundit out there who would know this Law change

What law change are you referring to?
 
If, after a throw-in or deliberate kick from a team-mate, the goalkeeper unsuccessfully kicks or tries to kick the ball to release it into play, the goalkeeper can then handle the ball

Misunderstood--thought you might be referring to GKs not being cautioned for handling offenses, which wasn't new.
 
Misunderstood--thought you might be referring to GKs not being cautioned for handling offenses, which wasn't new.
I can see why you may think he was referring to that. But to be clear, handling a back-pass by keeper in the area, as an offence on it's own, even to save a goal, is not a caution (or send off).
 
Back
Top