The Ref Stop

GK throwing ball into his own net.

Donate to RefChat

Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated

M

marshr02

Member
Hi folks.

Just reading the LOTG again. I note you can’t score direct from a throw in (inc. own goal). Also in Law 10 the GK can’t score directly from a throw into the opposition’s goal. Which left me wondering where do we currently stand with GK throwing direct in his own goal?

Cheers
 
The Ref Stop
marshr02 said:
Hi folks.

Just reading the LOTG again. I note you can’t score direct from a throw in (inc. own goal). Also in Law 10 the GK can’t score directly from a throw into the opposition’s goal. Which left me wondering where do we currently stand with GK throwing direct in his own goal?

Cheers
Click to expand...
Goal.
 
- can’t score a direct own goal from GK, CK, FK, KO
- can’t score any direct goal from a throw-in
- GK can’t score direct thrown goal into oppo’s goal.
- but GK can’t score score direct thrown goal in his own goal….
 
marshr02 said:
Thought so. Seems a bit inconsistent with all the laws against directly scored goals..
Click to expand...
The keeper cannot score in the opponents' goal by throwing the ball in, as that is forbidden in the LOTG.
A goal cannot be scored direct from a throw in, for the same reason.
For a goalkeeper to throw the ball into their own goal would require the ball to be in play, so it becomes an own goal.
Well done for studying the laws - in the UK, July/August is a great time to do so😊
 
there's a good example of this in action from (i think) a Bournemouth pre season friendly from a few years ago.

keeper went to throw it out, at the last second changed his mind but let go of the ball and it dribbled into the goal

Here it is!
 
Yes as Chas pointed out that’s a thrown own goal from open play, yet a thrown goal from open play into opponents goal is not allowed… (law 10).. seems inconsistent..
 
marshr02 said:
Yes as Chas pointed out that’s a thrown own goal from open play, yet a thrown goal from open play into opponents goal is not allowed… (law 10).. seems inconsistent..
Click to expand...
The no throwing to score. Goal is a relatively new addition to the Laws. (And a stupid one in my opinion, but I digress . . . ) I believe it was added at the same time IFAB added the non-deliberate handball offense for an attacker who immediately scores. )tomdigress again, originally it was if the team scored, but now if the player scores.) the idea of both was that hands shouldn’t be used to score.
 
socal lurker said:
The no throwing to score. Goal is a relatively new addition to the Laws. (And a stupid one in my opinion, but I digress . . . ) I believe it was added at the same time IFAB added the non-deliberate handball offense for an attacker who immediately scores. )tomdigress again, originally it was if the team scored, but now if the player scores.) the idea of both was that hands shouldn’t be used to score.
Click to expand...
Correct, sir! The change was made in 2019 to bring Law 12 in line with the revision to Law 12 (scoring after handling)
 
socal lurker said:
the idea of both was that hands shouldn’t be used to score.
Click to expand...
And the idea is maintained even if a goal is allowed when thrown into own goal, as it is not scoring but it it is conceding.

So I don't really see any inconsistency here. Its not about a throw, its about the "touch by an opponent's hand" before a goal. And it is regardless of opponent being a goalkeeper or not.

That bit in law 10 had to be added to avoid an unwanted outcome. Otherwise a direct throw into opponent's goal by a goalkeeper would have resulted in a penalty according to law 12 (needs a bit of thinking this one).

Interesting secnario: A defender kicks the ball long from own PA. The ball brushes own goalkeeper's hand in own PA before ending up in opponets goal. What's your decision?

The secnario is just as far-fetched as keeper throwing the ball into opponent's goal.
 
Yeah if we were disallowing the goal if a keeper threw in to his own net, but allowing it if he parried a save in to his own net, things could become messy where the line blurs
 
Thanks, that’s a great explanation..
one said:
And the idea is maintained even if a goal is allowed when thrown into own goal, as it is not scoring but it it is conceding.

So I don't really see any inconsistency here. Its not about a throw, its about the "touch by an opponent's hand" before a goal. And it is regardless of opponent being a goalkeeper or not.

That bit in law 10 had to be added to avoid an unwanted outcome. Otherwise a direct throw into opponent's goal by a goalkeeper would have resulted in a penalty according to law 12 (needs a bit of thinking this one).

Interesting secnario: A defender kicks the ball long from own PA. The ball brushes own goalkeeper's hand in own PA before ending up in opponets goal. What's your decision?

The secnario is just as far-fetched as keeper throwing the ball into opponent's goal.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Great explanations, I might add with the example of a parry the keeper isn’t in control of the ball, whereas throwing into his own goal he is?
 
one said:
Interesting secnario: A defender kicks the ball long from own PA. The ball brushes own goalkeeper's hand in own PA before ending up in opponets goal. What's your decision?
Click to expand...
No goal, because you cannot score if the last touch was with the arm/hand even if it was not deliberate.

Move the scenario up the pitch. Kicked by defender, brushes the strikers arm on the way into the goal. You would disallow the goal. Same with the keeper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
one said:
That wasn't the point of the scenario though. What's the restart?
Click to expand...
Safest option in this virtually impossible situation would be a goal kick, even though wrong in law. Can't be a penalty or direct free kick, and selling the indirect free kick as per Law 12 would start a riot😁
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Safest option in this virtually impossible situation would be a goal kick, even though wrong in law. Can't be a penalty or direct free kick, and selling the indirect free kick as per Law 12 would start a riot😁
Click to expand...
What would the correct restart be in law? I can't see how it would be IDFK.

I'd also be going for a gk.
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Safest option in this virtually impossible situation would be a goal kick, even though wrong in law. Can't be a penalty or direct free kick, and selling the indirect free kick as per Law 12 would start a riot😁
Click to expand...
Agree and I am sure a goal kick would have been the intent of the law for my scenario as well. Even though they used the word "throw" in law 10 for scoring a goal, the intent would have been for any handling. As usual wording in law leaves a lot to be desired.
The IFK in law 12 would have been intended for things like 'backpass' or double touch...

Archer said:
Didn’t see it. 👀

😂
Click to expand...
So if you don't see it you are awarding the goal?

Viridis1886 said:
What would the correct restart be in law? I can't see how it would be IDFK.
Click to expand...
It's in law 12, the handball section. Any handling in his own PA that is illegal for a goal keeper is IFK.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top