RefSix

Another quiz q

one

RefChat Addict
#1
I'm am using a variation (easier) of this in may May quiz but this version is more interesting:

A goalkeeper takes a goal kick. After leaving the penalty area, the ball is blown back into the penalty area by strong wind without touching any other player. The ball enters the goal after it is touched by the goalkeeper's hand inside the penalty area. What is the decision?

A. Restart with a corner kick
B. Retake the goal kick
C. Restart with an indirect free kick for touching the ball again before it has touched another player
D. Award a goal after playing advantage
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
#10
Ignore me
I thought this change might be relevant, but it's not
<If the goalkeeper attempts to ‘clear’ (release into play) a throw-in or deliberate kick from a team-mate but the ‘clearance’ fails, the goalkeeper can then handle the ball>
 
#11
I'm curious the rationale behind the difference you see. I still see at as C for both years. But I think it hinges on what "directly" means. I understand directly to require a touch by another person. So advantage doesn't giver a goal--and a CK is not more advantageous than an IFK in front of the goal.
If "directly" means that the same player touching makes it no longer direct, then you can get to D.
 
#14
Why can you not play advantage here (if you answered C)?
For the reason I already posted. A GK cannot directly against the team taking the kick. I believe that what directly means in this context is that, like with an IFK, the ball must be touched by another player. Since another player has not touched the ball, applying advantage to ignore the second touch by the GK would still result in a CK, not a goal. (So far as I know, the use of directly here is not defined anywhere--and directly is used differently in different places within the Laws.)

(If a player other than the GK had taken the kick, this is easy: apply advantage to the potential handling by the GK, and award the goal.)
 
#16
Great question by the way.

...I don't see this changing with the 19-20 laws... it just won't matter that the ball has left the area... also the 19-20 are clear that there's no sanction for GK handling in the box.

I'm still D and I've just read the 18-19 sections and 19-20 changes, again :wall:
 

JH

RefChat Addict
#17
Great question by the way.

...I don't see this changing with the 19-20 laws... it just won't matter that the ball has left the area... also the 19-20 are clear that there's no sanction for GK handling in the box.

I'm still D and I've just read the 18-19 sections and 19-20 changes, again :wall:
I agree, why would you not give the advantage here?
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
#18
You should all know by now the questions @one asks are never as straight forward as they seem.
I can understand why folks are saying advantage but for me this is one of those things that spirit of the game was designed for. The scenario is not covered, exactly, in law.. We know a GK can not score an OG from a GK and we know he can't touch the ball a second time.
What does football expect here? A freak gust of wind resulting in a goal or for the keeper to be penalised for a handling offence?
I dont think there is a right answer here. But in my game I am going C.
I'd be interested on IFAB ruling on this one. I'd be surprised is mr@one hasn't already asked
 

RobOda

RefChat Addict
#20
Why can you not play advantage here (if you answered C)?
The only thing I can see going against it is America's (USSF) own advice suggesting that advantage can only be applied for Law 12 infringements. But that's very old advice and I'm not sure it has anything to do with the IFAB's own views.
 
Top