- 5 Jun 08, 01:34 PM
You Are The Ref is back for the final time this week.
Today Paul Trevillion has crafted a lovely image of Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy to go alongside another unusual You Are The Ref scenario.
Question
A team hanging on to a one-goal lead are desperately trying to waste time when their goalkeeper catches a long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy. The keeper runs to the edge of the penalty area and then calls for a defender, who runs up close to him and throws the ball for him to head back into his hands. He does this repeatedly, assured it would not be judged a back pass.
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
How would you handle this situation?
Use the comments field below to give your answer. Thank you to Aerialflipflap for posing the question. The answer will be provided tomorrow, when there will be another opportunity to pose your suggestions for next week's You Are The Ref.
Now it is time to revisit yesterday's question.
Yesterday's question
A defender is off the pitch receiving treatment and you have clearly told him to remain on the sideline until you signal for him to return. Spain are on the attack and Fernando Torres receives the ball outside the penalty area, runs through the defence, rounds the goalkeeper and taps the ball towards the empty net. As he turns to celebrate his goal the defender who was off the field receiving treatment sprints back on to the pitch without waiting for your signal to invite him on and performs a last-ditch goalline clearance.
How would you deal with this situation?
Keith Hackett's answer
Award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team from the place where the player touched the ball. Caution him for entering the field of play without permission. If he had already been cautioned, administer a second yellow card and then a red card. As the incident took place inside the goal area, (defending players have to be at least 9.15m from the ball) the defenders must stand on the goalline and between the goalposts.
This is an excellent question and sure to create a lot of debate, with many insisting he should have been shown a red card for denying a goalscoring opportunity.
Thanks again to TigerSarjo for the question.
This question is now closed.
To see the answer from You Are The Ref's Keith Hackett click here.
BBC Sport Euro 2008
Who are you supporting in Austria and Switzerland? Share your thoughts on all things Euro 2008 with our BBC Sport experts.
Fletch's view of Euro 2008
Recent Comments
- vikrulz on You Are The Ref #13
- vikrulz on You Are The Ref #13
- swampeemarsh on You Are The Ref #13
- BlueStarIT on You Are The Ref #13
- goalie_up_front on You Are The Ref #13
Teams
Latest Photos
Clicking on any of these photos will take you to an external site.
Podcast
Download or subscribe to this programme's podcast
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
A player using a deliberate trick whilst the ball is in ball to try and pass the ball back to the goalkeeper and avoid the back pass rule should be cautioned and in indirect free kick given to the attacking team. I imagine this game of head tennis with the keeper would count as a 'trick'.
Complain about this comment
Thats easy! It constitutes a 'taylor made backpass', which in the laws of the game isn't allowed. Indirect freekick to the attacking team as soon as the ball had been headed back to the keeper the 1st time.
Complain about this comment
Nothing should be done. It is timewasting but not breaking any rules. To stop it happening the attacker should attempt to stop the ball getting back from the outfield player to the goalkeeper
Complain about this comment
Give an indirect free kick against the goalkeeper and defender for ungentlemanly conduct!
Complain about this comment
Sounds a bit like that "seal dribble" situation.
In that case, the ref didn't do anything until the opposing defender without the ball lump the seal guy one with his elbow.
I'd imagine the striker could get between the ball and keeper and see what happens.
Most likely a foul on the keeper, then the game could restart with a free-kick.
Complain about this comment
I'd blow up as soon as it had happened twice and threaten to book them for timewasting.
The "trick" rule hasn't been broken as a goalie can legally throw the ball out and catch a headed return pass.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
No, provided his action was not dangerous to either opponent (ie by using his feet) or that he committed no other offence. He could legitimately try to head the ball once it was thrown to the defender by the keeper or headed back.
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
Yes, you could deem this an act of unsporting behaviour (because theplayers are using a trick to circumvent the laws) and you could yellow card either or both of them. This has nothing to do with time-wasting, just the fact that they are using a trick to get around the laws.
Complain about this comment
That's a hard one :D
Complain about this comment
You could easily stand inbetween those two players to stop it! I would stop it for ungentmanly conduct and book both players awarding a free kick outside the box to holland!
Complain about this comment
It is unsporting behaviour, rather than timewasting, but they'd probably get away with a warning.
Complain about this comment
If the ball hasn't crossed the line, the goal cannot be given (except at Anfield). The defender should only be booked as he entered the field of play without permission. The game should continue from where the ball ended up, presumably a throw in.
Complain about this comment
royaloxford blue
excellent answer to the wrong question.
Should the ref give a penalty and send the goalie off, or follow his linesman's signal and give a goal?
I'd have preferred a goal and a penalty and a sent-off goalie, but it wasn't at old Trafford, so never mind.
Complain about this comment
1. You have it spot on! It states in the laws of the game via the FA website:
"Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player
may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper
using his head or chest or knee, etc. If
however, in the opinion of the referee, a
player uses a deliberate trick while the ball
is in play in order to circumvent the Law,
the player is guilty of unsporting
behaviour. He is cautioned, shown the
yellow card and an indirect free kick is
awarded to the opposing team from the
place where the infringement occurred."
With this in mind part two of the question is null and void!!!
Now lets see how many half wits waste their time writing ludicrous things like 'send them both off and give a panalty - or that's what I'd do anyway!' like in the previous two scenarios!
Complain about this comment
what's a panalty?
I'd send them both off (one yellow for every time they did it) and award a penalty.
Complain about this comment
This seems clearly covered by the deliberate trick section, which reads: "Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own
goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is
in play in order to circumvent the Law, the player is guilty of unsporting behaviour. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect
free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred."
This requires some parsing as to whether passing the ball via his head or chest or knee is necessarily legal, or whether the "however" covers doing those in such a way as to circumvent the law.
I suspect in practice that you'd be hard pressed as the team doing this to generate much outrage if you got blown up and yellow carded for it.
Otherwise, the Dutch team has two good options - have someone move in between defender and goalkeeper after the goalkeeper's throw and block the ball that way, or just move all ten players behind the defender and claim the ball via offsides.
Complain about this comment
These Paul Trevillion pictures are brilliant. Is there anyway of getting hold of some of his artwork?
Complain about this comment
I would book both the defender and keeper for timewasting, making it clear to both that it is not on. No way is it a sending off offence.
14 - I wasn't sure about the indirect free kick but if its in the rules, then you would have to give it
Complain about this comment
the keeper is not allowed to flick up/ or throw the ball to a defender to get it back from him. Th eref should award an indirect free before the attacking player has a chance to try break it up.
Complain about this comment
Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player
may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper
using his head or chest or knee, etc. If
however, in the opinion of the referee, a
player uses a deliberate trick while the ball
is in play in order to circumvent the Law,
the player is guilty of unsporting
behaviour. He is cautioned, shown the
yellow card and an indirect free kick is
awarded to the opposing team from the
place where the infringement occurred.
Not sure this is a trick. The player heading the ball is not flicking it up onto his head to play it back, which is what I assume is meant by a trick. It could be construed as time wasting but there is no specific offence if the goalie does it within 6 seconds. If the goalie takes longer than that he could be cautioned and an indirect free kick given to the attacking team. If the attacking player goes close to the defender, I think they will stop it.
It's like taking the ball into the corner it's annoying but not an offence. If the ball is in play it's there to be won back by pressurising the opponent.
I think the answer to Ref2 is poor. If the clearance is from the goal line as stated how can you have the free kick on the goal line itself. Hackett said
"Award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team from the place where the player touched the ball."
The laws state it should be on the goal area line parallel to the goal line.
I quote
"an indirect free kick awarded inside the
goal area is taken from that part of the goal
area line which runs parallel to the goal line,
at the point nearest to where the infringement occurred"
No wonder Sir Alex is hacked off by Hackett!!
Complain about this comment
The keeper isnt allowed to throw the ball up for the player to head it back.
Just like the fact that u arent allowed to chip the ball onto ur own head to play it back to the keeper.
An indirect free-kick should be awarded as if it was the keeper picking up a back-pass.
Complain about this comment
How would he be offside in his own half???
comment 15. Got me there! Note to self, beware of razor sharp wit of 'therealluisgarcia'!
Complain about this comment
Pompey4Europe - excellent analysis, very funny name!! : )
Complain about this comment
14 - the-cannon....
Your answer - spot on.... as I stated yesterday "in the opinion of the referee" is still used within the LOAF... so it the referee makes a decision in this case, he cannot be wrong!!!!!!!
Your response further on - spot on.
Complain about this comment
comment on 22 was refering to 16!
Just to clarify!
Complain about this comment
Law 12 seems to cover this one, but what about time wasting in general?
There's nothing worse than seeing a team take the ball into the corner to waste time at the end of a game. It used to be a continental trick, but I've seen it done recently by English clubs.
Could the ref intervene, citing unsporting behaviour?
Complain about this comment
Send them both off and give a penalty - that's what I'd do anyway!
;)
Complain about this comment
The referee should abandon the game and hand a moral vistory to the Dutch!
Complain about this comment
No rule is being broken.
They are "time consuming" not "time wasting" which are two different things entirely.
Play continues and should the other team want the ball they should challenge the player for it.
There is also no rule to say the player cant stop it getting to a defender, they just cant prevent the keeper from releasing it. So, standing in front of the player would be ok...worst case scenario if I deemed them to push the defender or hold them etc as the ref I could give a freekick and then the defending team have to kick it out...can't pass back from that! lol
Complain about this comment
or even a victory!
Complain about this comment
I would let it happen once, maybe twice and then have a word with the goalkeeper and advise if does it again will book both him and the defender and award an indirect free-kick to the opposition.
Complain about this comment
"Claim the ball via offsides" eh Phil. How does that work then?
Complain about this comment
#20. A good point regarding the "where the player touched the ball" comment from Hackett. Read the question Hackett!
Complain about this comment
the-cannon
much respect!
The "trick" rule is subject to interpretation - you've persuaded me that a game of headers here would be a "trick" - not a clever one, but a sly one, and therefore a free-kick could be awarded from where the goalie caught it.
Complain about this comment
You guys are being too harsh on Hackett!
The issue was is it a free kick/ penalty/ yellow / red card? We all know a free kick in goal area is taken on the goal line - that wasn't the issue.
Complain about this comment
thanks therealluisgarcia )
I think this is a rather boring one compared to the other 2, but KH's answers to the first 2 don't strike me as perfect. Wonder what he'll say about this one.
Complain about this comment
sorry 'goal area line' (doesn't it have a better name?!)
Complain about this comment
If it is a trick to flick it up to your own head to give it back to the goalie, is it a trick to flick it onto a co-defenders head to get it back to the goalie?
How far away from the person you flick it to would you have to be before it's not a trick? i.e. if a midfielder has the ball on the halfway line, hoofs it back towards the goalie and a defender heads it into the goalies hands... is that a trick?
I guess it's down to ref's interpretation again, and (like some others said) which ground your at and who's doing it!!!
Complain about this comment
Turn your back and let the dutch players set upon the keeper and defender in question
Complain about this comment
Have to agree with pompey4europe, regarding the law everyone keeps quoting (and please stop that by the way, we all know it off by heart now) I can't really see how this qualifies as a trick. After all two players could pass the ball backwards and forwards all afternoon if they wanted and could manage it.
All this requires is a well-timed 'challenge' on the defender by an opposition player, the referee need not intervene.
Complain about this comment
38 - s24da1
Believe me, you know a trick when you see one. In general terms, a trick will be an act that is not part of playing the game in the normal way.
Your example of the midfielder is a good one. This would be OK, as this might happen naturally in a game - and would take some skill if it was pre-planned or part of a trick!
Complain about this comment
Re #29
Although no rule is being broken as such, the two players are trying to bend the no passback rule.
As its happening right at the end of the game it would be considered time wasting.
I would give an indirect freekick and book both players as they are circumventing the law and are guilty of unsporting behaviour.
My mate thinks he's a referee but often quotes me rules etc which are totally flawed... He'd probably agree with you at this point, tho you'd be wrong.
Complain about this comment
40 - thebunshop
Can't agree. As I say above (41) this is not a natural act within football and is being done for a specific reason (to waste time) but the offence is the using of a trick to get around the law.
Two players passing the ball to each other is OK - the keeper could do this with a defender if he wants. But he specifically throws it to the defender's head and catches the return for a reason ... it is a trick and any decent ref would recognise that this is not normal football behaviour.
Complain about this comment
I dont think there is anything that can be done about this but for the opposition player to place himself between defender and goalkeeper.
Complain about this comment
Whats with the super busy rule book answers, its all fun and games.
The act is deemed as un-gentlemanly conduct, in-direct free kick award from where the incident takes place.
Complain about this comment
No offence is being committed. Time consuming - like when a player takes the ball to the corner - is not an offence and it is the opposition players' responsibility to attempt to win the ball back legally.
If a keeper is attempting to drop-kick a ball out of the area but is challenged whilst doing so, it counts as dangerous play and the opposing player would be cautioned.
However, in this case, we have a keeper throwing the ball onto a teammate's head and getting it back (it is NOT one of the 'tricks' such as a defender flicking the ball up and then heading it back, so that does not apply and there is no rule in 11-a-side football to prevent a goalkeeper and defender exchanging passes in this way).
The forward is perfectly entitled to legally challenge the defender for the ball in this case, just as for any other header elsewhere on the field.
The referee is there to administer the laws and, since none have been broken, has no reason to put a stop to this. However, he would be advised to position himself close-by, as there is likely to be a foul committed by the challenging attacker, OR by the goalkeeper handling the ball outside the area.
Complain about this comment
a.) Well, I think if the opposition player tries to get in the way, as long as he doesn't foul either player, he can try to intercept the ball. As the ref, I'd just have to hope that the opposition intercept the ball at some point.
b.) Not sure I can book either player or blow it dead.
Complain about this comment
Re 16#
Offsides?
surely if hes heading it back hes in his own half and cant be offside?
Good try though.
Complain about this comment
I must admit if someone did this in a game I was in charge of I would not be best impressed!
Using a trick like this to waste time is obviously a bookable offence under unsporting conduct. The tricky bit is restarting the game.
The attacker is allowed to play the ball once its left the keepers hands as long as he does so fairly I would say, so no problem with that. If he wins it then great, he can stick it past the keeper and teach him a lesson!
If not I would probably blow up, book the keeper and defender, then award an indirect freekick. But Im not sure its right given I would be doing that to stop the blatant cheating, if appealed Im sure the bookings would be overturned.
Still, another top question and lots of interesting input! Im quite enjoying these, shame its the last one of the week!
Complain about this comment
hi thebunshop
have to agree with you, if the ball is in play you have to challenge for it.
I started my answer when only three people had replied, by the time I'd researched and made it there were 20. I think I was one of the people who started quoting the rules a lot as well. But without the precise wording it's difficult and even then it's never clearcut. What is a 'trick' exactly?
Also if a team tried this and they lost the ball to a challenging attacker and conceded a goal the manager would go mental! In the circumstances you want the ball down the other end of the pitch, preferably in your possession.
Complain about this comment
Yellow card defender, in-direct free kick to other team.
Complain about this comment
If they marked all the defenders, the keeper would have to hold onto the ball, and I could then book him for time wasting.
Complain about this comment
Or possibly just tell one of the beefy strikers to put a nice strong challenge in on the centre half!
One thing is for sure, this problem would not have existed in the 60's when it was a harder game! Just knock either one out of the way hahaha
Complain about this comment
This is tailor made back passes which are against the rules and therefore an indirect free kick should be awarded and the players involved warned/booked.
Complain about this comment
The Law 12 being quoted here has absolutely nothing to do with this situation. That law was introduced to prevent defenders getting down on their knees to pass back to the goal-keeper, of flicking the ball up and heading it back.
In this case, the defender is perfectly legally heading the ball back to the goalkeeper. He is not trying to get around the back-pass rule. If the back pass rule did not exist (as it never before 1992-ish), it would be the same as kicking it back.
The ball is in play during all the time. This means the forward is allowed to challenge for the ball. Although they may not prevent the goalkeeper throwing the ball out, they can be next to the goalkeeper and then challenge once the ball was headed back.
The referee would have to allow this to occur until an actual foul took place. Given there would likely be a defender heading the ball while in the area (indirect free-kick to the attack side), the attacking side interferring with the throw (direct free kick to defending side) or some sort of pushing (direct free kick as ball is in play) the situation would solve itself quickly enough with a foul. If not, chances are the defending side would make a mistake sooner or later, resulting in an easy goal for the attacking side.
Complain about this comment
Book the goalkeeper and defender for time wasting/unsportsmanlike conduct and give the other team an indirect free kick.
Complain about this comment
Take action under the rules of unsporting behaviour to the player and defender with possibly yellow cards being administered.
i would not book an attacker for trying to break this up as it is clearly a honest effort to ensure the game flows/is played in the correct spirit.
Complain about this comment
In the old days when it was legal to pick up a back-pass, you never saw a keeper and defender pass the ball to each other for very long - not even at Anfield :) - because they'd be chased down by an attacker. If this isn't a "trick" then the same should apply, that the attacking team should press the ball and force them to desist within the game.
Complain about this comment
No different to passing it back and fourth with their feet, or the goalie dropping the ball and controlling it, it'd be up to the opposition to break it up, which they surely would do by just approaching, as the keeper and defender would look like a right pair if a goal came of it!
Complain about this comment
The attacker would be perfectly entitled to stand in front of the defender to stop him receiving the ball, so making the keeper pass it out to someone further away. He would not however be able to challenge the goalkeeper or stop him passing the ball.
There is no specific rule for this situation I think, but it would certainly be timewasting so the referee would be able to punish it under un-gentlemanly conduct and issue a yellow card to both the defender and the goalkeeper and insist the goalkeeper clear the ball properly.
Complain about this comment
How do you submit a question?
I have always wondered if you are allowed to use your clothing to carry the ball. For example, if you team-mate chips the ball to you and you pull out your waistband and catch it in your shorts (ie no handball), are you then allowed to run with the ball down your pants and even into the goal? Technically, the ball hasn't touched any part of your body that isn't allowed to touch the ball.
Unsporting yes, but illegal?
Complain about this comment
'...long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy.'
Did I read that correctly?
Complain about this comment
The clues to this are in how the question is being asked. To quote part of it...
''The keeper runs to the edge of the penalty area and then calls for a defender, who runs up close to him and throws the ball for him to head back into his hands. He does this repeatedly, assured it would not be judged a back pass.''
So this is not a natural action in football, underlined by the fact this is done repeatedly and the question even says this is being done in this way so it will not be 'judged as a back pass.'
For those in any doubt, this is a trick designed to both consume/waste time and it is being done in a way that the two players involved hope to avoid the back-pass rule being applied.
Therefore either/both defenders can be cautioned for unsporting behaviour as they are trying to circumvent the laws by what they are doing. Remember, ''You are the Ref'' in this situation and you have to make a decision within the laws as they stand today.
Complain about this comment
The ref would immediately blow his whistle and call the game off and award it to the opposition, as the dutch have a horse on the field.
Complain about this comment
61 - benjamintinsley
A pretty good question and sort of related to the actual scenario we are looking at.
Yes there is nothing in law to say you can't do what you suggest - but any and every referee (I hope) would see this as unsporting behaviour and would stop play, yellow card the player and re-start the game with an indirect free-kick where the player was when the game was stopped.
Complain about this comment
I see it like this:
a. The opponent will have full right to intervene because once the ball has been released by the keeper and left the penalty area it is in play.
b. As soon as the ball is headed back both the defender and goalkeeper are cautioned for unsporting behaviour and an indirect free kick awarded to Holland where the offence took place.
Complain about this comment
66 - theref30
Why do you stipulate the ball has to leave the penalty area? It doesn't have to in open play - only when a goal-kick is being taken.
Complain about this comment
yellow card the keeper and defender and award an indirect free kick from where the defender is standing.
Complain about this comment
Comment 14- The-cannon,
i think the idea/ fun of this game is to decide by yourself what you would do having to make a split second decisionas the ref, not to see how easily you can look up the rule book, find the answer and pass it off as if you know the whole rule book off by heart, then mock people who are trying to have a bit of fun.
pretty pretentious if u ask me m8.
if i was the ref i'd allow the forward to close down the defender and attacker and mostly likely when he got within a close distance the pair would cease this play in fear of losing a goal through error. that was my first instinct.
if im wrong then who cares really?
Complain about this comment
i dont think there is no rule against it so i would just let play continue as it isnt illegal to throw and head the ball back over and over again it is time wasting but legally
Complain about this comment
If Keith Hackett was refereeing he would never have let the situation develop in the first place. It would be such a free flowing game the players wouldn't stand for time-wasting.
Complain about this comment
Hi,
I would blow up for an Indirect Free Kick to the attacking team and caution both the Goal Keeper and the Defender for Unsporting Behaviour.
Thanks,
Complain about this comment
present a foul for time wasting. If an oppersition player gains possesin by fair means, then allow play to continue
Complain about this comment
65 - Yorkshireref
I assumed this would be the case, after all it is outrageously unsporting!
However, I always laugh when I think of the scenario as I picture 10 opposition players trying to boot the ball out of the guy's shorts!
Complain about this comment
69 - robbiedinho8
Agree with about looking up the text-book answers (not much point unless - much later in the thread - there is a good debate and someone is trying to underline a point with the actual text of the laws).
But with respect what you haven't done is answer the two specific questions as posed:
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
Complain about this comment
robbiedinho8 - Well said mate!
After all, anyone can use Google and find the FA referees handbook, but you cant use search engines in the middle of a pitch on a saturday afternoon, even if the keeper has started playing ping pong with his own defender!!!
Kinda like people using google on their mobiles to answer questions at the pub quiz and then pretending to be humble when they score 100%, even answering the question that was cut off by the photocopier :D
And I cant believe how many people have dissed Keith Hackett during this game - if you keep on guys he wont answer any more and the game will be done! Chap does a top job under tough circumstances, and is closer to an expert than some teenager with AOL and Google...
Complain about this comment
The way I see it then Holland can only gain the ball back by fairly challenging the defender and/or by attempting to intercept the ball as it goes from defender to goalkeeper. If he challenged the goalkeeper unfairly a free kick would be awarded to the defending team and the Dutch player would not be cautioned unless it was a bookable offence.
Though after a while I'd probably get annoyed, halt play for a moment and have a stern word with the defender and goalkeeper and probably flourish two yellow cards for unprofessional behaviour.
Complain about this comment
probably give a free kick for unsportsmanlike behaviour;
but i'm guessing that the opposition players would have gone in with 2 footed tackles before the ref gets time to blow, hence forcing a free kick and deadball situation which would force the ball to the ground.
Complain about this comment
Allow the game to continue. An example of gamesmanship.
Complain about this comment
To 61
it's handball. There is a clear rule for it.
Handling the ball
Touching the ball with an object held in the hand (clothing, shinguard etc.) counts as an
infringement
Pg 92 of the rules available from the FA or FIFA website
Complain about this comment
Re: Various people who were smart enough to approach this after they'd been awake for more than ten minutes -
Yeah, offsides wouldn't work. My bad. Have had coffee now. Much better.
I still am inclined to think that this is well within the spirit of the "deliberate trick" rule, however.
Complain about this comment
I do not think it is a foul for time wasting, it is effectively the same as two outfiled players passing the ball between themselves.
An attacker can try to intercept a pass from the goal keeper, or prevent the defender receiving the ball (i.e. by standing in front of him) and so it would not be a foul proivded there is another outlet the goal keeper can use - mark the defender not the goal keeper.
If the defending team is judged to have committed a foul then it would be the goal keeper and an indirect free kick would be given from his position inside the area.
Complain about this comment
If this was in Scotland the ref would immediately stop the play and award a goal to Rangers, even if they werent playing....
Complain about this comment
a) he should be booked if he tried to stop the keeper throwing the ball but it is ok for him to try and intercept the thrown pass.
b) If, as the question says, it is time wasting then you would warn the keeper and then issue a yellow card if he continues to time waste. An indirect free kick would be awarded where the offence took place with the defenders at least 10 yards (is it still yards?) from the ball.
If it is not considered to be timewasting, then no action should be taken and it is up to the Dutch players to get control of the ball if they are capable of doing so.
Complain about this comment
84 - reffinmad
on your b) answer. If you don't stop the game, how are you going to warn the 'keeper - tell him not to waste time while he is playing thow-head-catch with his team-mate?
I see what you are trying to achieve, but it won't work on the field of play.
Complain about this comment
We have had a few people asking us for some clarification on Question #1, in response to Keith Hackett's answer.
We have been in contact with Keith to find out what would have happened had he mistakenly allowed play to continue until the end of the passage of play, where the player that committed the red card offense scored a 'goal'.
Here's what he had to say:
"If the player who I intended to send off had scored the goal, I would with great embarrassment have disallowed it and sent the player off the field of play, re-starting the game with a free-kick from the position the original reckless tackle took place. I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE GOAL TO STAND. If the team who I had applied the advantage had gone on to score I would have allowed the goal then sent off the player for his reckless challenge with excessive force that endangered the safety of an opponent."
We hope this has cleared up any issues.
Complain about this comment
i would give holland a free kick where the time wasting commenced
i would also caution the goal-keeper and the defender preforming the headering
if a holland player tried to break the play up illegally then that player would be cautioned but if he broke the play up legally and a goal would stand and the two player doing the time wasting would get booked when there is a break in play
Complain about this comment
Andrew M - great that Keith has revisited this - but he would be slaughtered by any one of his own assessors for taking this course of action. He is so way off the mark in law - it is a real surprise to hear him say that.
He would be right to be embarrassed by alowing play to go on so long - but having done so he would have to allow the goal and send the player off. Nothing else would be credible.
Refereeing - great isn't it!
Complain about this comment
The attacker should block the defender from receiving the ball.
Complain about this comment
A) if he fouls either the keeper or the defender yes if the ball is in flight at the time no.
B) surley a booking for timewasting and a drop ball to restart.
Complain about this comment
a) he wouldnt get booked as his attempt to get the ball isnt as much an attempt to disrupt the keepers chance to throw as he got to throw it out once. but when it turns into a passing game then the attacker is free to try and get it.
b) Once he does it the second time, he would told not to do it a third because its a clear ploy at time wasting, did it again and he gets booked.Indirect Free to opposing team where he stands.
Complain about this comment
The defender and goalkeeper should be booked for Unsporting Behaviour. They are trying to circumvent the back pass law.
An indirect free kick is then awarded from the place the ball was when the referee blew to caution both players.
Complain about this comment
As frustrating as this would be i dont think this is classed as breaking any rules. Players wasting time at the corner flag is the same principal and this is allowed so i cant see how it can be penalised. An opposition player would have to try and get between them to stop this
Complain about this comment
The striker can intercept when the ball is being played back to the keeper. There for he will not be booked becasue he is not obstructing the keepers throw but the defenders pass back.
Also if the player marks the defender he cannot be cautioned for blocking the keeper from throwing the ball as he is not blocking the keeper but is marking/trying to intercept a pass.
I would also make 100% sure that the keeper was not holding the ball for more than the limited 6 seconds. (I think this is the right amount of time)
Complain about this comment
Using a trick to circumvent the laws of the game results in an indirect free kick to opposition.
Complain about this comment
Yellow card to goalkeeper and defender for unsporting behaviour, however no free kick is awarded and instead they are warned to get on with it, or risk a second yellow and getting sent off. This is like when a player gets booked for normal time wasting i.e. not taking free kick quickly enough. In this situation a player is given a yellow card but no free kick, so i see no reason why this should happen again. Another way of looking at it is that it is upto the opposing team to break it up, like when a player takes the ball into the corner flag to waste time. Usual this results in a foul, meaning a free kick must be taken which puts the ball back into play
Complain about this comment
Decisions of the International F.A. Board
Decision 3
Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is in play in order to circumvent the Law, the player is guilty of unsporting behaviour. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.*
A player using a deliberate trick to circumvent the Law while he is taking a free kick, is cautioned for unsporting behaviour and shown the yellow card. The free kick is retaken.
In such circumstances, it is irrelevant whether the goalkeeper subsequently touches the ball with his hands or not. The offence is committed by the player in attempting to circumvent both the letter and the spirit of Law 12.
Complain about this comment
It's ungentlemanly conduct, but not against any written rules, so the ref can't do anything about it.
Complain about this comment
The defender will be booked for 'Unsporting Conduct,' and an indirect free-kick is to be given to the opposition.
'kdylad' has it all right...
Complain about this comment
We have been in contact with Keith to find out what would have happened had he mistakenly allowed play to continue until the end of the passage of play, where the player that committed the red card offense scored a 'goal'.
Here's what he had to say:
"If the player who I intended to send off had scored the goal, I would with great embarrassment have disallowed it and sent the player off the field of play, re-starting the game with a free-kick from the position the original reckless tackle took place. I CERTAINLY WOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE GOAL TO STAND. If the team who I had applied the advantage had gone on to score I would have allowed the goal then sent off the player for his reckless challenge with excessive force that endangered the safety of an opponent."
-------------------------------------------------------
HALLELUJAH!
Don't see how he could justify disallowing the goal though but at least it's an answer.
3a) My guess is not unless he fouls the keeper or defender.
3b) Unsportsmanlike. Indirect free kick to Holland where the last header occured.
Complain about this comment
The striker can intercept the ball but as long as he does not foul the defender or the keeper. And if it was judged a time wasting ploy then putting the ball in the corner should be banned.
Complain about this comment
The attacking player cannot challenge the goalkeeper here, as it is an offence to stop him from throwing the ball out. However he can challenge the defender, as long as he does it within the laws of the game.
The 'trick' is plain to see, and it is an attempt to circumvent the backpass law (NOT timewasting), so book the goalkeeper and defender, restart with an indirect free kick to The Netherlands, from where the defender last headed the ball.
Obviously if you are going to penalise the defending team, the first part about the attacker challenging for the ball is a moot point.
Complain about this comment
The answer is that this is an illegal move by the goalkeeper. You can not intentionally head the ball back to the keeper if it was played intentionally to your head. This would be the same if the player flicked the ball up to his head and played it back to the keeper. This is treated the same as a back pass and is an indirect free kick to the opposing team.
Complain about this comment
102 - dax47988
Look no further than this for the perfect answer!
Well explained and correct in law - even remembered to point out that the attacker can't challenge the keeper as he looks to throw it out, which is more than I did.
Mr Hackett should just cut and paste this in as his answer.
Complain about this comment
(a) The attacker will booked for blocking the goalkeeper from releasing the ball to his defender.But if the attacker marks the defender he can not be booked.
(b) Yes the is way to stop this,by cautioning the goalkeeper(yellow card) for time wasting and awarding an indiract freekick again him.
Complain about this comment
A. The attacker should be booked if it redeamed to be a foul on the defender or the goalkeeper.
B. There is nothing that a ref can do. It is the same as players going into the corner and shielding the ball.
Complain about this comment
I would issue an indirect freekick for unsporting behaviour and book both defender and goalkeeper accordingly.
The referee has to use his common sense, this is clearly against the spirit of the game and so he is well within his rights to put a stop to it.
Complain about this comment
The keeper is using trickery to surconvent the spirit and rule of the game. A pass back in itself is not an offense. It becomes one when the keeper picks up th ball using his or her hands. This action would simply results in an indirect free kick from the spot where the infraction was commited. However if in the opinion of the referee, trickery was employed by both players involved, both must be cautionned and shown a yellow card. If the keeper was the guilty party (Time wasting sheme), he or she must be cautionned. This will apply to any player using trickery to surconvent the rule of the game. Keep in mind that, passing the ball between a keeper and his defenders for the pupose of wasting time, althought unapealing and annoying, is not a delay nor an offense.
Complain about this comment
A player can not stop a keeper from releasing the ball so if he does get involved he would be booked.
Before the player gets involved the Referee I would have thought would have stopped play and awarded a free kick to the attacking team and caution the goal keeper.
He is circumventing the Laws by his actions and it should be classed as a back pass.
Complain about this comment
yesterdays scenario: surely if its a goal line clearance, it has happened inside the 6 yard box, and so the resulting indirect freekick should be on the 6 yard line directly opposite where the infringement occured. Any thoughts Mr Hacket??
Complain about this comment
It's another one of those instances that goes against the spirit of the law whilst maintaining the letter of it...
I'd expect that most referees would just gesture to the goalkeeper and tell him to "Get on with it!" - if the goalkeeper then continued to waste time in this way, then the referee would book him for dissent.
Complain about this comment
i think you could give an indirect free-kick because the actions are not in the spirit of the game. for instance, if the ball was on the floor and a defender headed the ball along the ground i think a free kick could also be given - although not using his feet the players have broken the spririt of the game in attempting to get round the backpass rule
Complain about this comment
The keeper and the defender are circumventing the laws of the game with their little trick. Caution them both and give an indirect kick to the opposing team, where the trick was taking place.
Complain about this comment
Technically the attaching player could get booked if he tried to jump in the way of the keeper.
However, I would book both goalkeeper and defender for ungentlemanly conduct and give an indirect freekick to the atacking team
Complain about this comment
although this is a complete time wasting activity, it is not actually going against any laws, as the keeper is not holding the ball for longer than 6 seconds and the recieving player is not breaking the rule when heading the ball back.
However, if an opposing player was to block the keeper from throwing the ball, then yes it would be an indirect free kick but upto the referee whether or not to caution.
The opposing player can stand in front of the player the keeper is trying to pass to, as it he is not getting in the way of the keeper, if the opposing player sticks on the player who is heading the ball then the time wasting will stop because no keeper will attempt this technique as there is a huge risk of a goal.
basically....no offence being committed, to stop it, get in front of the guy heading the ball or even close to him
Complain about this comment
thanks for asking my question bbc but also if there is a rule saying that you cant do this, because of the taylor-made backpass or something, then what about if 2 defenders came up to the keeper and the ball was rebounded off one head and on to the other and then into the keepers hands? i dont think theres anything wrong with the first scenario but surely there cant be anything wrong with the second? thanks!
Complain about this comment
btw i just want to make it clear that it is obvious that this would be very unsporting of the keeper and the defender (or both defenders if you look at my question on comment 116) but is there actually a specific rule saying that you cant do this and not just lack of sportsmanship?
Complain about this comment
Moving your own players behind the defender for offside wouldn't work, as the defender is in his own half.
Complain about this comment
The Laws of the Game states... "Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is in play in order to circumvent the Law, the player is guilty of unsporting behaviour. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the
infringement occurred." In the opinion of the referee is the best phrase ever invented (I am a referee). The referee should stop it and cite this rule for justification.
Complain about this comment
nothing can be done iwould foul one of them 2 get play started again
Complain about this comment
Simple this one...
Allow play to go on. If the Dutch are stupid enough to not put a man on the defender and harrass them (without fouling), eventually they would make a mistake - which would prove very costly given the situation.
I have had this before on Pro Evo or Fifa 08 - trying to be cocky passing the ball around, and being caught out by the opposition at the result of an easy goal for them.
Complain about this comment
Wouldn't it be interesting to know what the laws said about repeated exchanges between keeper and defender before the current back-pass rules were introduced?
Did the referee have the power to intervene if the defender repeatedly kicked it back to the keeper who handled the ball each time?
Does anyone know?
Complain about this comment
can people stop cutting and pasting the text from the LOAF as it is boring and this is to generate opinion not show that you can cheat.
Both are yellow carded and indirect free kick to oppo !
Complain about this comment
Re: Comment 17, the defender would not be offside as it is not possible for a player to be offside in his own half of the pitch.
Complain about this comment
HappyHammer73 (post 123):
Is the purpose of this feature really to generate opinion?
It seems to me the point of You Are The Ref is to let us explore our interpretation of the rules, hear from a qualified referee how he interprets the rules, and raise the issue of whether the rules are fair in the context of the extreme scenarios we are discussing.
Extracts from the rules add value, it just doesn't need to be done so many times!
Complain about this comment
The goalkeeper and defender, in law, are not doing anything wrong. The only thing that the opposition can try to do, is intercept the throw; I would not then, personally, penalise an interception.
The other alternative is to caution the goalkeeper for unsporting behaviour and/or defender.
Complain about this comment
also a lot of people are saying that the opposition could just put a man in between keeper and defender but i mean to put the keeper and defender next to each other so that if an opposer tried to intervene, he would have to be hindering the keeper in his distribution of the ball
Complain about this comment
"also a lot of people are saying that the opposition could just put a man in between keeper and defender but i mean to put the keeper and defender next to each other so that if an opposer tried to intervene, he would have to be hindering the keeper in his distribution of the ball"
Not if you challenge the defender, instead of the keeper
Complain about this comment
In response to post 110
"yesterdays scenario: surely if its a goal line clearance, it has happened inside the 6 yard box, and so the resulting indirect freekick should be on the 6 yard line directly opposite where the infringement occured. Any thoughts Mr Hacket??"
it is important to realise that the offence being committed is "entering the pitch without the referee's permission" and thus the offence would occur at the place where the player re-entered the pitch (with usual proviso about if in 6 yard box etc. etc.) - it is possible that the player re-entered from elsewhere and ran across the goal to clear the ball.
Interestingly the fact that the player cleared the ball is completely irrelevant to the punishment he recieves - had he re-entered and watched the ref would have played advantage (ie. gave the goal) but still a yellow card.
A question:
Had a scenario very recently where a striker fell off the pitch during a huge goalmouth scramble - her legs were a bit tangled up and she fell over.
Play went on for a couple seconds and the attacking team had a shot that the keeper saved - by now the striker had untangled herself, got back to her feet and stepped straight back on the pitch to tap in the rebound from a few inches.
Defenders claimed offside - ref said she wasn't because she was off the pitch when the shot occurred;
defenders then claimed that it should be disallowed because she had re-entered the picth without the refs permission - ref said that although she had left the pitch it was during the action of playing normally (ie. not deliberate or tryign to gain an advantage) and that she had returned as soon as she got to her feet (ie. had not tried to play canny and wait for an opportune moment) and that he had not instructed her to stay off the pitch therefore she had committed no offence.
The goal stood.
Didn't matter in the outcome of the game ultimately but, at the time, it did draw the teams level. Much friendly debate after the game.
Keith - was the ref right?
Complain about this comment
Referee should place himself between keeper and defender, catch ball and roll it to opposition striker.
He should then book himself for unsportmanlike behaviour and send off anyone who complained.
Alternatively book goalkeeper for "using a trick" and have a contested drop ball from where the defender was standing.
Complain about this comment
The key to the question is that the goalie and the defender "repeatedly" do this tactic. Sure there are circumstance when a defender would need to head a pass right back out the keeper, but judging from the way the question is phrased and the picture drawn, it's unsporting behavior, cautionable and so both are booked, restart with an indirect free kick to attacking player's team.
Complain about this comment
Re: #129
The offside law says a player is in an offside position if they are closer to their opponents' goal line than both the ball and second last opponent. It does not say that the player must be on the field of play. I'd therefore say the ref should have given offside. Could be wrong though.
As for today's scenario, I'd give an indirect free-kick to the attacking team as I'd consider the actions to be a deliberate trick and therefore circumventing the 'passback' rule. I'd also caution the defender for unsporting behaviour.
Complain about this comment
Indirect free kick to the attacking team.
Circumvention of the Laws of the Game.
Basically means using the laws of the game to gain an obvious advantage.
Complain about this comment
It does say in ther rules that you cannot 'bend' the law of the backpass. Therefore, I think this would be at the referee's discretion, probably resulting in an indirect freekick to the opposing team.
Complain about this comment
This would be very entertaining if it was two very tall defending players and a very small attacker.
If the concern is impeding the keeper from clearing the ball, then surely the attacker is still entitled to prevent the ball going from defender to keeper.
Play on!
Complain about this comment
I would stop the game as soon as they had headed it back a couple of times, this goes against the spirit of the game. Also it is against the laws of the game to simulate a pass to the keeper. I would award an indirect freekick to the attacking side from where the goalkeeper handled the ball. Probably caution the pair and make an example of them.
Complain about this comment
The goal keeper and the defender should be cautioned for delibrate time wasting , a indiret free kick should be given to the opposite team
Complain about this comment
The goalkeeper is obliged to release the ball into play within 6 seconds. In this case he is deliberately delaying play with this time-wasting tactic. He should be cautioned and if he does not comply immediately by releasing the ball into play, an indirect kick should be awarded to the offense.
Complain about this comment
Advice To Referees 12.28.1 states that it is a cautionable offence for a player to engage "in trickery to circumvent the goalkeepers limitation on handling a ball from the team-mate's foot". It points out that the outfield player, not the goalie, should be yellow-carded.
On this basis, there should not really be any need for a Dutch player to 'break up' the trick because the referee should do it first by stopping play, awarding an indirect free kick against the opponent engaging in the trickery and caution the outfield player.
If, however, a Dutch player fouled either of the players involved in the trick in an attempt to break it up - and this foul occurred BEFORE the referee had stopped the game to penalize the trick - then the foul against Holland would stand, along with any caution or send-off that may be appropriate to the foul - and the restart would be a direct free kick to the opponent.
If the foul is committed AFTER the referee stopped the game to penalize the trick, then the restart would still be an indirect free kick to Holland for the trickery - but the referee would still have the option to caution or send off the Dutch player for the foul, but this would be classified as violent conduct since it officially occurred after a stoppage of play.
Complain about this comment
Surelly the play should go on!
1) the goal keeper should be penalized for unsportsmanlike conduct
2) if it is considered a back pass then the attacking player had the right to intercept it
3) there is no throw out rulek once the ball leaves the goalies hand its free for all!
Something should be done about that, if Arsenal were playing manutd or Chelsea, and score first then we ( yes gunners fan, and we took the lead ) should keep throwing it to gallas or toure for 80 mins and head it back! How exciting !
Complain about this comment
There is no rule about this in the laws of the game, however, i think there is a FIFA directive that has been added as an extra point to referees, which states that a player may not use a deliberate trick in order to get around a particular law, which is what is happening in this situation.
Therefore it is an indirect free kick, as a yellow card must given because this should be treated as unsporting behaviour.
Complain about this comment
Indirect free kick against the defending team. Take your pick from either
a) The laws make specific reference to an indirect free kick awarderd against any goalkeeper who deliberately engages in tactics designed to waste time
b) Unsporting behaviour
Complain about this comment
A back pass is illegal if the keeper picks the ball up.
A defender cannot flick the ball up and head it back to the keeper.
Under the same rule I believe that in the above scenario, an indirect free kick would be awarded
Complain about this comment
a) No booking if Ruud or one of his team mates uses the good old shoulder barge on either the goalkeeper or defender while the ball is not in the hands of the goalkeeper i.e. when the ball is in the air between the two and the Dutch player is merely competing for possession.
b) No. I believe there is no ruling that can force the end of this tactic, however this assumes that the header back to the goalkeeper is not deemed a 'manufactured' back pass in the first instance. It should be though. Strangely, the scenario states that the goalkeeper is "assured it would not be judged a back pass"??? It must be.
Complain about this comment
This throwing the ball to the defender so that he can head it back to the goalkeeper in order to circumvent the "6 second" rule would certainly count as attempting to use "a deliberate trick" to get around the law. Both players should be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, and the game should be restarted as it would be for any time-wasting offence, with the ball remaining where it was (ie. the goalkeeper would kick it out as normal).
Complain about this comment
EntertainAtAllCosts, it cannot be a back-pass if it comes off the defender's head.
Complain about this comment
A player uses a deliberate trick while the ball
is in play in order to circumvent Law 12,
the player is guilty of unsporting
behaviour. He is cautioned, sent off if already cautioned, and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the
place where the infringement occurred.
Complain about this comment
I would stop the game, go talk to the keeper and tell him to play the ball within the next 5 seconds, either way, he and the player get a booking and an indirect free-kick is given to the other team at 20 meters.
Complain about this comment
I think, as th most rules in football, it depends on whether Manchester United are the offending team ;-)
Complain about this comment
I think, as with most rules in football, it depends on whether Manchester United are the offending team ;-)
Complain about this comment
a) It all depends on the situation on how does the opposition player stops the goalkeeper from throwing the ball. If he goes directly to the goalkeeper and stop him from throwing the ball, i think he would deserved to receive a yellow card. Secondly, if the opposing player goes to the defender and try to stop him from receving the ball that would be thrown by the goalkeeper then i think he do not received a card.
b) I would restart the game by giving a freekick to the opponent team outside the penalty box.
Complain about this comment
Acting In a manner that would bring the game into disrepute, book them and give an indirect free kick
Complain about this comment
The headed backpasses can be punished as ungentlemanly conduct offence. Indirect free-kick against the defending team.
A similar thing happened (but was not punished) during a pre-season friendly weeks after the back pass law where keepers could pick the ball up had been ruled out. (between Leeds and Forest)
The ball was passed back to the right back who got on his knees and headed the ball at ankle height back to the keeper. Days later I think they addressed this by saying it would be punished as ungentlemanly conduct.
Complain about this comment
In this case, no actual offence has been commited. If the outfield player had juggled the ball with his feet and headed it back to the keeper, it would result in an in-direct free kick to the opponents and both the keeper and outfield player would be cautioned. If an opponent came to break this scenario up by contesting for the ball - my decision would be based on how aggressive any contact was. In short, as soon as there was contact, I would award a free kick to the defending team and warn both players, as their conduct was bordering on ungentlemanly conduct. Time wasting is only an issue when the ball does not come into contestable play.
Complain about this comment
a) No. The player cannot be booked.
b) Yes. The ref (I) can book the keeper and defender (if req.) with a yellow card and ask the keeper to play the ball upfront with a free kick by the keeper.
Complain about this comment
I think they are not breaking any rules as the defender is heading it back to the keeper. i think the only way this could be stopped is if the attacker marks the defender this way the keeper has to release the ball.
Complain about this comment
I think, as th most rules in football, it depends on whether Manchester United are the offending team ;-)
----------------------------------------------------
ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.........................
Complain about this comment
I will give both the goalkeeper and the player a yellow card and then award a free kick
Complain about this comment
Surely just the presence of the attacking player next to the defender and goalkeeper would render the attempted 'trick' too risky. So the 'keeper would then resort to another method of distribution. No need for the ref to do anything.
Of course, if the attacking player got a bit hands-on then free kick to the defending team and opposition players 10 yards away.
Complain about this comment
book both players for time wasting, award indirect free kick on edge of box
Complain about this comment
He is using a trick to pass back to the keeper. This means he is gulity of unsporting behaviour. Caution the player and restart with an indirect free kick to the oposing team where the infringmeant happened.
Complain about this comment
to stevewren 129
I also made this point about the position of the freekick (number 20 ref3 and various in ref2) and the law says the IDFK should take place where the ball was, not where the player entered the field, as Mr Hackett also thinks (correctly). He just didn't note that the ball was in the goal area for a goal line clearance as the scenario tells us it was going in the goal not missing. That's why other people have also made that point.
It's on pg 47 FIFA laws
As for the other situation if a player leaves the field accidentally they can come back on without permission, so the ref was right. If a defender deliberately steps off the field to play someone offside it's a cautionable offence. but if an attacker delays coming back on I don't think it is directly in the rules but maybe a ref could interpret it as unsporting behaviour.
Complain about this comment
shina1886,
I do not dispute your knowledge of the rule book. You may well be stating fact. I can't argue with that. However, I seek justice – what is right and proper.
The back pass rule, and what constitutes a back pass, should be changed for the better.
In my opinion a header back to the goalkeeper is no different to a pass with the foot. (As an aside, I've been to games this season when there have been more headers than kicks - the ball goes back to the keeper a lot via the head of a defender, he kicks it high and long and the head tennis starts all over again, until it arrives back at one of the keepers again - I digress and slightly exaggerate.) Anyway, whatever the mode of back pass, it relieves the defence of the pressure - it gets them out of a hole. There's no difference whether it is with a foot or head, is there? Comments welcome.
I would go further with back passes and not allow the keeper to pick up the ball when the defender deliberately goes to play the ball and it ends up in the gloves of his team mate, even if his original intention was to kick it elsewhere (i.e. out of play or to another defender for example). When this happens the defender is invariably under pressure or has made a mistake, but gets a major break if the goalkeeper grabs the ball. A further example of when the current rule is inadequate is when a defender and striker are chasing a through ball towards the goal, the defender knows if he gets his challenge in just ahead of the striker and pushes it in the general direction of the keeper, the keeper will be permitted to pick it up. This happens a lot. Although it would have been questioned back in 1992 when the rule first came in, it isn't now - it's become accepted. A precedent has somehow been set.
Hence, the rule should change so that the goalkeeper cannot play the ball with his hands directly from one of his team mates under anyway circumstances, unless it is a deflection from a shot on goal, that is: there is no movement of the defender towards the ball directly from an attempt that is goal bound. Okay, this is a judgement call for the official, but it is a judgement as it stands at the moment.
It’s got to be an improvement. Yes or No?
Complain about this comment
A) The attacking player can't interfere with the goalkeeper directly, e.g. harassing him or knocking the ball out of his hands, but he can loiter, so to speak, and when the goalkeeper releases the ball, he can attempt to intercept it.
Normally, however, this does not mean players can jump in front of goalkeepers as they take goal kicks or throw outs.
This case is unusual in that the goalkeeper and defender are keeping the ball live but clearly playing for time.
B) I would consider the behaviour of the goalkeeper and defender as "ungentlemanly" and therefore well within the referee's authority to stop the activity and award an indirect free kick to the opposition.
So, indirect free kick to Holland on the edge of or just inside the penalty area, depending on where the ref deems the conduct to have taken place.
The defensive wall must be ten yards from the ball. Ruud taps to Robben who drives it low and hard into the bottom left hand corner. COME ON THE DUTCH!!!
Complain about this comment
Re: comment 83
Lol deffo agree with you- Some of the decisions Rangers got were outrageous!! glad to see them lose out on the title
Im still not sure about whether it would be a foul or not having thought about it. It would be funny to see the whole opposition team try and win the ball when the keeper releases it though. Doubt it would happen though - dangerous play
:p
Complain about this comment
This one is pretty straightforward.
a) It is not a booking offence to try to stop the keeper throwing the ball out to a teammate. It is an indirect free kick if you stop the keeper releasing the ball from his hands, but it is not a booking and the rules don't say you have to allow him to throw it to a teammate. As long as the player trying to break it up allows the keeper to release the ball and doesn't foul either player, there is no offence. However, if I was the referee I wouldn't allow it to get that far, which brings us nicely onto...
b) It's quite easy to put a stop to this tactic. Ungentlemanly conduct, which some have suggested, has been replaced by unsporting behaviour. This is a clear case of unsporting behaviour so both the keeper and the defender should be booked. The game then restarts with an indirect free kick to Holland. If the referee stops the game to book someone or send them off, it is automatically an indirect free kick to the opposition unless the offence warrants a direct free kick or penalty.
Complain about this comment
to 166 prh47bridge
taking a ball into the corner could also be seen as deliberate time-wasting and unsporting behaviour but I have never seen it punished for this. Pity, as it should be really.
Complain about this comment
a. If he just stood between the goalie and the player, then surely there's no reason that he would be offending.
b. Stop the silly game. Yellow card both players for timewasting and restart with a dropped ball.
Complain about this comment
It is indisputable that the laws of the game state one cannot use a "trick" to "circumvent" the backpass rule. However, it could be argued that they aren't using a "trick." Personally, I wouldn't be inclined to listen to that argument - if that's not a trick, what is?! If nothing else, apply common sense - they can't be allowed to do that, it's unsporting behaviour and makes the game boring. As the ref, I would therefore endeavour to end the procedure in any way I could, so I would bring this rule into play, award an indirect free kick, and tell them not to do it again.
Complain about this comment
It looks like a nice day, by the drawing's lighting..
So, as the ref, I should sit down and invite the other players on the pitch to join me in a nice cool glass of Pims and discuss the way forward.
After which, I would ignore all suggestions from the players and send off all of the offending team's players.
I would then instruct the remaining players on the pitch to carry out a Morris dance for my ammusement before passing out with my last swig of my alcoholic beverage.
The only rational and sensible thing to do in that situation, I think!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As soon as i saw the defender head the ball back into the goalkeepers arms, I would stop play, caution the goalkeeper and defender for unsporting behaviour, and then restart play with a indirect free kick to the oposition where the offence took place.
Complain about this comment
indirect free kick and a yellow card for both the goalkeeper and the defender for circumventing the laws of the game, the first time they tried it.
Complain about this comment
171 - stonao. I think you'll find you are talking out of your 'ass'. No one is saying they should be punished for time wasting. They are being punished for 'Unsporting Conduct' as they are trying to circumvent the back pass law.
Complain about this comment
I would book both players for unsporting conduct and award the opposition an indirect free kick outside the box
Complain about this comment
This scenario could clearly never happen - Ruud van Nistlerooy doesn't take long range shots!
Complain about this comment
also id just like to add that a lot of people are saying that they should be booked for unsporting behaviour but whats the difference between doing this and keeping the ball near the corner flag? surely if one's not a bookable offence then the other cant be?
Complain about this comment
All of you lot that say 'it's time wasting' and should give an indirect freekick and caution the keeper and defenders, are all talking a load of rubbish. time wasting is only applied in a dead ball situation such as a goal kick or free kick. seeing as the ball is in play, the two players are doing nothing wrong. its like taking the ball to the corner. it's very annoying and 'time consuming' yet, as long as the ball is in play and the player in possession is not fouling any of the surrounding players, then the ref is powerless. yes it may be un-gentlemanly, but there are no rules in the game to say you have to be a gentleman, why does everyone assume that you have to be nice? and also, what's to stop the dutch striker closing down the keeper and defender, chances are, they aren't going to do it while he's standing there, unless they plan to throw away their 1 goal lead.
Also, the 'seal dribble' is not against the laws of the game, just because your juggling the ball on your head and running with it does not mean you are cheating, it is in fact the same as juggling the ball with your feet. just because the ball is not at his feet does not mean its a foul, and if it means you break the players legs or his nose by trying to win the ball, then so be it, likelyhood will be he's probably not going to try it again. ok, a red card may be dished out but you would have shown the little show off that its still a man's game.
Complain about this comment
174- fair enough, but a back pass is a deliberate pass with the feet from an outfield player to the keeper, you can head the ball to the keeper however many times you want as it counts as a normal pass, you don't stop two players who are standing in the corner passing it inbetween the two of them, even though its 'time consuming', technically they are not doing anything wrong. the same applies for this scenario. and like i said earlier, whats stopping the dutch team just intercepting the throw out as it is not obstructing the keeper as he has released the ball, it is the same as if he threw it 20 yrds and you intercepted it before his team mate touched it.
Complain about this comment
Just a small point Keith - are the rules of football to include Metric measurement rather than Imperial?
Who invented the game us or the Europeans!? Just remember the USA is still on Imperial! Are we going the way of Golf?
Complain about this comment
The attacking player should allow the goalkeeper to throw the ball out to the defender, but he then can place himself between the defender and the goalkeeper to discourage the defender from heading it back to the keeper. The attacker would not be offside if the defender tried to head the ball back and so would be allowed to place himself in such a position.
Complain about this comment
The goalkeeper and his team-mate are wasting time by their ungentlemanly conduct. Award an indirect free kick against them on the 18-yard line at the spot where the ball last crossed that line.
Complain about this comment
It's fantastic that there should be so many varied responses to this question, some responses are interpretations of Law 12, some I suspect are opinions. So faced with that senario, on the field of play, dont be suprised if you get 22+ answers. As a lowly level 5, and according to the LOAF Law 12 decisions of the IFA board, both players are cautioned for unsporting behaviour and an indirect free kick is awarded where the offence took place as "in the opinion of this referee" both are guilty of deliberately circumventing the spirit of Law 12
Complain about this comment
Obviously the attacking team need to choose the correct player. If you send Shaun Wright Phillips up to challenge for the ball he's likely to get accused of fouling by jumping up, therefore get Peter Crouch just to stand in between them. Doesn't even need to challenge so can't be a foul. If keeper and defender can continue with what they're doing (piggy in the middle) at least it would make it a more interesting spectacle to watch ;)
Complain about this comment
178/179 - stonao
Just showing your ignorance by continuing to say they are doing nothing technically wrong and that it is the same as taking the ball into the corner and passing to each other. It isn't the same.
Read the scenario again carefully - all the clues are in the way the question is phrased.
HarkMalsey (183) has it spot on when he says... ''both players are cautioned for unsporting behaviour and an indirect free kick is awarded where the offence took place as "in the opinion of this referee" both are guilty of deliberately circumventing the spirit of Law 12''
Complain about this comment
Keith Hackett's answer to yesterday's question is incomplete as any free-kick awarded in the goal area would have to be taken from on the goal area line which runs parallel with the goal line and at the point nearest to where the infringement was committed and NOT from the spot where the infringement was committed. Let's at least get the answers right!
Complain about this comment
Most rules are caveated by being "at the referee's discretion". I remember in Italy seeing two teams deliberately playing out a goalless draw as the point put Parma into Europe and kept the other team out of the drop zone. Neither team left their own half of the pitch in the 2nd half. At one point, the ref awarded an indirect free kick against Parma for timewasting while they were passing the ball along their back four. Both sets of players complained about the decision! But clearly, the referee can penalise a player, or group of players for timewasting while the ball is still in play. I say in-direct free kick to the Dutch!
Complain about this comment
If the referee can stop play for ungentlemanly conduct, then why are players allowed to run the ball into the corner at the end of games and shield the ball from the opposition?
Why are defenders allowed to block an attacking player from reaching a pass so it goes over the goal line for a goal kick, when they have obviously no intention of playing the ball?
185, with these in mind I think it's harsh to call 178/179 ignorant.
Complain about this comment
There's a slight flaw with this "Your Are The Ref". In the first sentence it mentions, " a long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud Van Nistelrooy". Come on, that's never gonna happen!
Complain about this comment
I would send of the BBC staff - it's 3pm and still no poser and scenario number 4!
Complain about this comment
poser? that was meant to say answer!!!
Complain about this comment
188 - hoopy_jack
Taking the ball into the corner and shielding it is annoying, but it is a legtimate play by one player and breaks no laws - as a player can keep the ball and shield it from his opponents anywhere on the field...
I tend to agree with you on blocking players off with the ball running out of play. It seems to have become acceptable - even though the defending player is often not close enough to the ball to be able to play it and wuite clearly plays his opponent. It all comes down to the opinion of the referee - and at the top level they sdeem to agree to give a lot of leeway.
My criticsim of Stonao is due to his own rather strident tone - especially as he is so, so wrong. Ignorant on both fronts in my book!
Complain about this comment
It is an official rule that the keeper can not tee up a member of the same team in this way.
I think the result is an indirect free kick to the opposition.
There would be no need for the opposition striker to interfere.
Complain about this comment
there is no reason to stop play if the striker intercepts the ball without fouling the defender or the goalkeeper. there are no rules to prevent this sort of time-wasting as it is perfectly legitimate.
Complain about this comment
I'm sure it's already been said but a yellow card would be shown to the outfield defensive player for unsporting behaviour. It is considered unsporting to use tricks to get around the backpass rule.
The restart would be an indirect freekick to the opposing team from the spot of the 'trick' (i.e. the header) rather than from the place the goalkeeper handles the second time.
Complain about this comment
We will shortly be closing the comments on this post.
Keith Hackett's answer to Question 3 is now on the Euro 2008 blog.
Question 4 will appear next week so please send us any of YOUR suggestions for further scenarios, using the latest blog entry.
Thanks, once again, for the great response this week. It really has delighted Paul Trevillion and Keith Hackett, as well as us here at BBC Sport.
Enjoy the start of the tournament.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS