Leeds Burnley

[santa sangria]

It does indeed say all that, but I'm not sure IFAB intended it to; because its nonesense

...even though it's stayed in the law book through the big re-write?

LOL

 

[one]

the ball is between the hands or between the hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body) or by touching it with any part of the hands or arms, except if the ball rebounds from the goalkeeper or the goalkeeper has made a save

This is another confusing wording, contradictory and one you can't just go by what's written rather use what is meant to be written.

For starters this part is completely redundant: "the ball is between the hands or between the hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body) or" when the OR part says "touching it with any part of the hands or arms". Last time I checked when the ball is between hands, the hands are touching it.

"except if... the goalkeeper has made a save" what this is saying is if the keeper catches the ball between both hands and his chest to make a save, then he can be challenged, which of course we know that is not what is meant.

 

[QuaverRef]

It is important to consider when the keeper is in control of the ball. Which is the reason it is perceived keepers get so much protection.
The law says the keeper is in control of the ball if he touches it with any part of the hands Or arms (except if rebounding or a save). I think pretty much as soon as the keeper attempts to catch this and he he is touching the ball any contact thereafter the referee is going to call a foul.
Obviously not withstanding any claims for a penalty once the keeper has a hand on that ball any challenges upon him become a foul as he is, in law, in control of the ball.

Control of the ball or not, it’s a penalty for me. He’s jumped knee first into the back of Ben Mee and clattered him recklessly. In the same way that winning the ball with slide tackle doesn’t always mean it’s a fair challenge, being in control of the ball shouldn’t mean the keeper can jump into the back of a player in this manner.

 

[socal lurker]

This is another confusing wording, contradictory and one you can't just go by what's written rather use what is meant to be written.

For starters this part is completely redundant: "the ball is between the hands or between the hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body) or" when the OR part says "touching it with any part of the hands or arms". Last time I checked when the ball is between hands, the hands are touching it.

"except if... the goalkeeper has made a save" what this is saying is if the keeper catches the ball between both hands and his chest to make a save, then he can be challenged, which of course we know that is not what is meant.

I *think* that "touching the ball" was added to end any possible debate about some of those plays that happened over the years--heading the ball out of a keeper's hand or kicking a ball on the ground that the keeper has a hand on. But in typical IFAB fashion, they can't write worth a bucket of warm spit to say what they mean. At the end of the day, I think what it really means is that if the GK currently has a hand/arm on the ball, opponents cannot play the ball, but once it bobbles away, of course they can.

(The except/save language sounds to me like it came out of a committee discussion that devolved into silliness and someone misinterpreting the language, afraid it would mean no one could kick the ball after the GK bobbles it away.--and, as is so often the case, the cure was worse than the disease.)