A&H

Two touch

one

one

RefChat Addict
22-23 LOTG have added the requirement of "controlled possession" to play the ball for the first touch in two touch offence. This had gone unnoticed by any futsal referee I know, though I only referee futsal at local centres only now. However I still communicate with some referees at higher levels.

I had an incident last week where the keeper parried the ball before I gave two touch. To the keepers complaint I later checked the laws to confirm my decision of any (deliberate) play is a first touch. I then discovered this new addition. I still think parry can constitute controlled possession.

I think futsal LOTG are better in wording the laws that football. But this one is a miss for me. It just creates more confusion.

@santa sangria your thoughts.
 
The Referee Store
one said:
22-23 LOTG have added the requirement of "controlled possession" to play the ball for the first touch in two touch offence. This had gone unnoticed by any futsal referee I know, though I only referee futsal at local centres only now. However I still communicate with some referees at higher levels.

I had an incident last week where the keeper parried the ball before I gave two touch. To the keepers complaint I later checked the laws to confirm my decision of any (deliberate) play is a first touch. I then discovered this new addition. I still think parry can constitute controlled possession.

I think futsal LOTG are better in wording the laws that football. But this one is a miss for me. It just creates more confusion.

@santa sangria your thoughts.
Click to expand...
Good spot. Should be the same wording in both codes ideally. We don’t start until October so have a while to worry about this one;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
one said:
22-23 LOTG have added the requirement of "controlled possession" to play the ball for the first touch in two touch offence. This had gone unnoticed by any futsal referee I know, though I only referee futsal at local centres only now. However I still communicate with some referees at higher levels.

I had an incident last week where the keeper parried the ball before I gave two touch. To the keepers complaint I later checked the laws to confirm my decision of any (deliberate) play is a first touch. I then discovered this new addition. I still think parry can constitute controlled possession.

I think futsal LOTG are better in wording the laws that football. But this one is a miss for me. It just creates more confusion.

@santa sangria your thoughts.
Click to expand...
At least, I think I was always trained to ignore saves/parries.
 
And I was always trained to count deliberate play. A parry is neither here nor there. Hence the confusion.

What do you do if the parry is deliberately towards a team mate effectively working as a pass?
 
one said:
And I was always trained to count deliberate play. A parry is neither here nor there. Hence the confusion.

What do you do if the parry is deliberately towards a team mate effectively working as a pass?
Click to expand...
Good question - but save is a save. If the GK stops the ball that’s going into or close to the goal then it’s save… (I presume this definition is valid)…
 
one said:
And I was always trained to count deliberate play. A parry is neither here nor there. Hence the confusion.

What do you do if the parry is deliberately towards a team mate effectively working as a pass?
Click to expand...
Would you count the parry with the hands as controlled possession on a regular pitch and punish the keeper for handling it a second time? Think it's fair to think about those in the same measures, just ignore the parries for two-touch until guidance from those above comes down upsetting the game once more
 
Jorik0907 said:
Would you count the parry with the hands as controlled possession on a regular pitch and punish the keeper for handling it a second time? Think it's fair to think about those in the same measures, just ignore the parries for two-touch until guidance from those above comes down upsetting the game once more
Click to expand...
Well, great example from Courtois playing for Tottenham (was it even in the UCL final). He came to his right to where the goal line meets the goal area line - the ball came to him at chest height. He “parried” the ball - played it with his hands - the ball went to the ground and then he picked it up.

For me, that’s not a save as the ball was not going into or close to the goal - so it was an offence.

I think the same applies in futsal. But “save” is not defined in the lawbook AFAIK.

I don’t think football expects a “non-save parry” to be recognized - but yeah agreed - should be some guidance.

I am in our fufsal academy and will ask my coaches;)
 
Jorik0907 said:
Would you count the parry with the hands as controlled possession on a regular pitch and punish the keeper for handling it a second time? Think it's fair to think about those in the same measures, just ignore the parries for two-touch until guidance from those above comes down upsetting the game once more
Click to expand...
For a number of year the soccer LOTG prohibited a GK from parrying the ball and then picking it up. That was removed some (5?) years ago. While almost never called on a full field, futsal, of course, is a different game.
 
santa sangria said:
Good question - but save is a save. If the GK stops the ball that’s going into or close to the goal then it’s save… (I presume this definition is valid)…
Click to expand...
Yes and this is a football definition only for offside purposes. In fact there is nothing even close to the save, going close to goal etc concept in Futsal LOTG. I don't see how its relevant here. I think if we take football completely out of head we think about this differently.
 
Jorik0907 said:
Would you count the parry with the hands as controlled possession on a regular pitch and punish the keeper for handling it a second time? Think it's fair to think about those in the same measures, just ignore the parries for two-touch until guidance from those above comes down upsetting the game once more
Click to expand...
If by "regular pitch" you mean football then it depends. But as per above, these definitions are related to football and though Futsal is a similar games, given the concept of save/parry doesn't exist in Futsal we are not comparing apples with apples. On the point of "upsetting the game", its a dangerous path to be in when making decision based on it.

Back to Futsal. To paint a picture,
1. Ball is kicked by an opponent in the air towards goalkeeper who is in PA. For the sake of narrowing the argument, lets say the ball is clearly not going in goal (but it shouldn't matter in Futsal). The keeper parries the ball to his team mate. The team mate kicks the ball back to the keeper who touches it.

2. Ball is kicked by an opponent on the ground towards goalkeeper who is in PA. For the sake of narrowing the argument, lets say the ball is clearly not going in goal (but it shouldn't matter in Futsal). The keeper (one touch) kicks the ball to his team mate. The team mate kicks the ball back to the keeper who touches it.

Point 2 is the very definition of two touch. Given that a play with the hand has exact same effect of a play with the foot for a keeper in his PA, why is point one not a two touch? @santa sangria , if you are going to ask, the two scenarios above will help get my point across.
 
one said:
Yes and this is a football definition only for offside purposes. In fact there is nothing even close to the save, going close to goal etc concept in Futsal LOTG. I don't see how its relevant here. I think if we take football completely out of head we think about this differently.
Click to expand...
It's also covers save in the GK control which probably brings it more back into context of the discussion.
 
This is a mind bender @one and i went back to the LotG extras p158 (!):

“Possession of the ball means that the goalkeeper has control of the ball. The goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball by touching it with any part of the body, except if the ball rebounds off the goalkeeper.”

First up, this is a dog’s dinner. The futsal book still needs a proper update to get rid of the guidance section IMHO.

And then… so we have “rebound” not “save”. And rebound is not defined. And the idea of a parry doesn’t fit easily here.

How about we take your example #1 but have the GK dive on the floor towards the corner to fingertip a ball that an opponent is attempting to control…. And the ball goes to a team mate that passes it back to the GK?

Rebound? Eeuwwweough!
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Bonus, also on 158:

“An opponent cannot challenge a goalkeeper once the goalkeeper has gained possession of the ball with the hands.”

Which contradicts the earlier passage - it really should be a separate possession concept - and it’s poorly worded (it should say “while” not once!)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
santa sangria said:
This is a mind bender @one and i went back to the LotG extras p158 (!):

“Possession of the ball means that the goalkeeper has control of the ball. The goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball by touching it with any part of the body, except if the ball rebounds off the goalkeeper.”

First up, this is a dog’s dinner. The futsal book still needs a proper update to get rid of the guidance section IMHO.

And then… so we have “rebound” not “save”. And rebound is not defined. And the idea of a parry doesn’t fit easily here.

How about we take your example #1 but have the GK dive on the floor towards the corner to fingertip a ball that an opponent is attempting to control…. And the ball goes to a team mate that passes it back to the GK?

Rebound? Eeuwwweough!
Click to expand...
As you say, mind bender. Is 'controlled' possession any different to stock standard possession?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top