Goalkeeper DOGSO

[FirsFox40]

Three scenarios, that all result in a IDFK in the penalty area. What are the additional sanctions for the goalkeeper, if any?

Scenario 1:
Goal kick. Taken by the GK who scuffs it. With the ball still in the penalty area, and an attacker sprinting on to it, the GK picks the ball up without anyone else touching it and denies an OGSO.

Scenario 2:
As above, but the GK kicks the ball away instead of picking it up.

Scenario 3:
GK has ball under control in his hands, rolls the ball out in order to kick it upfield but rolls it a bit too far. An attacker sprints to close him down and just before he can get there, the GK picks the ball back up again within his penalty area, before anyone else touches it, and again denies an OGSO.

 

[JamesL]

Three scenarios, that all result in a IDFK in the penalty area. What are the additional sanctions for the goalkeeper, if any?

Scenario 1:
Goal kick. Taken by the GK who scuffs it. With the ball still in the penalty area, and an attacker sprinting on to it, the GK picks the ball up without anyone else touching it and denies an OGSO.

Red card - 2nd touch post a restart

Scenario 2:
As above, but the GK kicks the ball away instead of picking it up.

Red card - 2nd touch post a restart

Scenario 3:
GK has ball under control in his hands, rolls the ball out in order to kick it upfield but rolls it a bit too far. An attacker sprints to close him down and just before he can get there, the GK picks the ball back up again within his penalty area, before anyone else touches it, and again denies an OGSO.

No sanction - keeper handling offence.

 

[one]

Slight addition to above and something that just came to me. The first two are also handling offences but a more serious simultaneous offence (bigger sanction) of 2nd touch takes precedence.

 

[JamesL]

Slight addition to above and something that just came to me. The first two are also handling offences but a more serious simultaneous offence (bigger sanction) of 2nd touch takes precedence.

Sorry @one but scenario 2 does not involve the hands so cannot possibly be a handling offence

Otherwise, your analysis is sound; I probably could have added that context to my post.

Think this came out of a clarification and subsequent modification of law text whereby playing the ball a 2nd time after a restart, including with the hand/arm, that SPA or DOGSO are more serious offences and should be punished as such. Obviously, scenario 3 is not a restart so the sanction doesn't apply. Good luck if both of these events happen in one game.

 

[one]

Sorry @one but scenario 2 does not involve the hands so cannot possibly be a handling offence

Yeah, missed that. But otherwise happy to get your happy to get your approval my sound analysis

 

[RonnieM]

Assuming the opposition player(s) were outside the PA when the goal kick was taken as well?

 

[Kes]

Assuming the opposition player(s) were outside the PA when the goal kick was taken as well?

Not relevant if the goal kick was taken quickly before they had (reasonable) time to leave.

 

[FirsFox40]

Assuming the opposition player(s) were outside the PA when the goal kick was taken as well?

I should add, no other infringements were committed by any player(s) other than described as above.

 

[NOVARef]

Can anyone provide the reasoning behind why the laws treat the instances so differently? Why a sanction for a double touch after a restart but no sanction for a handling offense? Seems the situations are very similar as presented in the original post. Thanks.

 

[JamesL]

Can anyone provide the reasoning behind why the laws treat the instances so differently? Why a sanction for a double touch after a restart but no sanction for a handling offense? Seems the situations are very similar as presented in the original post. Thanks.

One offence can only be committed by a goalkeeper and the other can be committed by any player.
One happens following a restart of play, the other is not from a restart of play.
Also the laws are clear that goalkeepers can't be sanctioned for GK specific handling offences in their own area. The restart issue is not specific to goalkeepers

 

[NOVARef]

One offence can only be committed by a goalkeeper and the other can be committed by any player.
One happens following a restart of play, the other is not from a restart of play.

Right, but I'm saying...If I muff a goal kick and pounce on it. It's a red card. If I roll it and pounce on it, no sanction. To me, these are pretty similar actions. I'm wondering if there is a reason that they are not treated similarly as far as sanctions go.

 

[bester]

Can anyone provide the reasoning behind why the laws treat the instances so differently? Why a sanction for a double touch after a restart but no sanction for a handling offense? Seems the situations are very similar as presented in the original post. Thanks.

Historically the ball had to leave the penalty area before it was in play from a goal kick or free kick.
Once they changed that then it became more likely a second touch offence would be DOGSO.
It didn't make sense that a goalkeeper could be sent off for kicking the ball with a second touch offence but was able to handle it and concede just an IDFK.

 

[JamesL]

Right, but I'm saying...If I muff a goal kick and pounce on it. It's a red card. If I roll it and pounce on it, no sanction. To me, these are pretty similar actions. I'm wondering if there is a reason that they are not treated similarly as far as sanctions go.

Yep, I got what you were meaning..I alluded to it in my first post when I said good luck if you get both in a game.
It all comes back to the principle of GK handling offences having no sanction. Just like stopping a ball going into the Goal when deliberately kicked by a team mate.
With the restart issue it isn't the fact the GK has used the hands, it's the fact they have played the ball a 2nd time, and that includes with the hand / arm. The sanction would be the same they kicked it.

 

[one]

The law that prevents goal keepers to be sanctioned for handling offences in their own PA has been around for a long time. It trumped any other offence like DOGSO. At the time it created 'inconstant' situation that for a second touch offence which was a DOGSO, sometimes the goalkeeper can be sent off (2nd touch by foot) and sometimes not even a yellow (second touch by hand). This law change was brought in to fix that inconsistency.

 

[The Gump]

The law that prevents goal keepers to be sanctioned for handling offences in their own PA has been around for a long time. It trumped any other offence like DOGSO. At the time it created 'inconstant' situation that for a second touch offence which was a DOGSO, sometimes the goalkeeper can be sent off (2nd touch by foot) and sometimes not even a yellow (second touch by hand). This law change was brought in to fix that inconsistency.

There is a still an inconsistency though that will always be difficult to manage should both scenarios come up in a game, and also highlights the issues with the IFAB website that it's not especially clear that the double touch overrides the handling offence, which is why this site is so useful!

 

[one]

There is a still an inconsistency though that will always be difficult to manage should both scenarios come up in a game, and also highlights the issues with the IFAB website that it's not especially clear that the double touch overrides the handling offence, which is why this site is so useful!

The published laws of the game trumps the ifab website. Let's get that out of the way.

If it was up to me I would just remove the no sanction for keepers handling offences clause. If it's an offence, it's an offence. You are not supposed to do it. And you know that. If you do it, take whatever sanction that is supposed to come with it. True keepers are supposed to use their hands in their own PA, but they are supposed to use it lotgfully.

 

[Kes]

lotgfully.

Superb Sir!

 

[FirsFox40]

I should probably mention that IFAB clarified that @JamesL’s answers are correct.

Spoiler: “Email from IFAB”