A&H

Player entering the FOP without permission

one

one

RefChat Addict
I recently read a simple quiz question which made me think of the below more complex scenarios.

An injured defender is off the field of play behind his own goal line with the referee’s permission. The ball is in play and is about to roll into his goal. He runs/limps in a few meters and

a) Kicks the ball over the goal line outside the posts.
b) Pushes the ball with his hand over the goal line outside the posts.
c) Pushes the ball with his hand but the ball still enters into the goal.

What should the referee do in each case?
 
The Referee Store
A) idfk at the postion of the ball and a red for dogso. He has committed an offence which attracts a caution and an idfk for entering the fop without permission and at the same time denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity with his foul, hence the red dogso.

B) dogso

C) allow goal plus caution for entering entering fop without permission

just checked and have updated my answer.
 
Last edited:
@SM there was no foul in A. No opponent near the ball.

Also what is the restart for B? And where is the location of the restart for A and B?
 
It doesn't mater. A player who comes onto the pitch without permission is penalised with an idfk and a caution. But in this case they have also denied an OGSO - check out Page 67 LOTG - so they are penalised with the most serious offence.

B) penalty - taken from the penalty spot! :D

For a) the restart is the position of the ball when the whistle is blown (where he was when he kicked it or the postion of the Fk moved appropriately if it occurs in the 6 yard box)
 
For A I agree with the ifk and caution. Which sentence/paragraph in page 67 you are referring to for DOGSO?
DOGSO has a key requirement that is missing in case A, "to an opponent moving the player’s goal". Furthermore it is not an offence for a player to kick the ball. The only offence he committed was to enter the field of play without permission.
 
The ball is going into the goal? If there is no one else who could stop it, it's dogso. Page 67 only refers to the player entering the field of play. Dogso is page 130. Stopping a ball travelling into the goal is dogso all day long (unless you are a goal keeping handling the ball when you shouldn't inside his own box of course :) ).

He is not a legal player on the pitch and has denied a clear and obvious goal scoring opportunity with an offence which attracts a caution/idfk (entering field of play).
 
Last edited:
one said:
I recently read a simple quiz question which made me think of the below more complex scenarios.

An injured defender is off the field of play behind his own goal line with the referee’s permission. The ball is in play and is about to roll into his goal. He runs/limps in a few meters and

a) Kicks the ball over the goal line outside the posts.
b) Pushes the ball with his hand over the goal line outside the posts.
c) Pushes the ball with his hand but the ball still enters into the goal.

What should the referee do in each case?
Click to expand...
one said:
For A I agree with the ifk and caution. Which sentence/paragraph in page 67 you are referring to for DOGSO?
DOGSO has a key requirement that is missing in case A, "to an opponent moving the player’s goal". Furthermore it is not an offence for a player to kick the ball. The only offence he committed was to enter the field of play without permission.
Click to expand...
How much more obvious would you want "the ball is about to roll into his goal" to be?
 
Assuming you send the player off using this law:
denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick
Click to expand...
I am afraid you have used the part "denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity" only and ignored the rest of this law which is very relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jez
It's the same reasoning as saying you can send off a player for shouting to distract an attacker as he's about to shoot (or hanging off the goalpost to stop a goal, or pulling it down). You can send him off because it's cautionable.

I think it's circular reasoning, but either way it's the same.
 
one said:
Assuming you send the player off using this law:

I am afraid you have used the part "denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity" only and ignored the rest of this law which is very relevant.
Click to expand...

Entering the field without permission is an offense punishable by a free kick, an indirect free kick
 
http://www.brooklynayso.org/pdfs/qa-laws.pdf

13. A substitute, warming up behind his own goal, enters the fi eld of play and prevents the ball entering the goal with his foot. What action does the referee take? The referee stops play, cautions the substitute for unsporting behaviour and the match is restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team where the ball was when play was stopped *.

13.1. If the player prevents the goal with his hand, what action does the referee take? The referee stops play and sends-off the substitute for denying the opposing team a goal by deliberately handling the ball and the match is restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team where the ball was when play was stopped *.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
The old Q&A said case a is a caution and b is red for Dogso, it was referring to a substitute.
 
Last edited:
SM said:
This is not a substitute.
Click to expand...

Clearly. Trying to see what reasons in law would make the situation different for a player reentering without permission, as outlined in the OP, may aid understanding of the law.
 
Last edited:
The real answer is to make the injured player leave by the sidelines (or wait for him to get there)!

In practice, I think it has to be a) caution for re-entering the field without permission and the IDFK (reluctantly); b) DOGSO-H (penalising the more serious offence) and c) goal, caution (for either re-entering or the handball, certainly easier to sell the latter) and restart with kick-off.

Tough one though...
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
It's the same reasoning as saying you can send off a player for shouting to distract an attacker as he's about to shoot (or hanging off the goalpost to stop a goal, or pulling it down). You can send him off because it's cautionable.
Click to expand...
Actually... FIFA's said that hanging off the crossbar/post/what-have-you to stop a goal is not DOGSO. Merely USB, IFK. (Note that the USSF used to say that this was DOGSO, but has since changed their stance.)

From everything I've discovered from their guidance, interpretations, and otherwise, for DOGSO-F, it must occur toward an opponent. Which is why dangerous play can be DOGSO, but hanging from a crossbar and kicking the ball away while doing so? Not so much.
 
Yacinho said:
Entering the field without permission is an offense punishable by a free kick, an indirect free kick
Click to expand...
This is correct. However, the act of "entering the field without permission" in itself does not "deny an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal". It is the players actions after entering the field of play that result in the denial of a goal. However, these actions (kicking the ball out of play) are completely legal and therefore the player may only be sanctioned for entering the field of play without permission (yellow card).

Grug said:
A cannot be a red card for DOGSO, no foul has occurred. Double yellow though, most definitely.
Click to expand...
According to the LOTG, "the referee must punish the more serious offence when a player commits more than one offence at the same time". This would leave me to assume that a double yellow is not possible.
 
A double yellow is perfectly possible. Book the player for the original offence, and whilst doing so wind him up so much that you can follow up with another booking for dissent (is there a smiley for tongue in cheek?).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top