Question for the referees on here


Status
Not open for further replies.
Jack Blue said:
OK an honest question; I'll give an honest answer. If the ref thinks a backpass could sensibly have been interpretted as a deflection or an accidental flick of the foot, not intended to go to the keeper - then I wouldnt argue for a card of any sort. In this case an indirect free kick is plenty.

However if its plain as day that the keeper has broken the rules deliberately to prevent a goal then yeah I'd make the case for a red card.

The problem I foresee if you were to give the keeper a red card and award a penalty for such an event is that any back pass on target which is touched by the keeper would therefore need to be given the same punishment irrespective of power or distance.

In addition would this give rise to other changes in the laws (and I think these are correct) ie a gk or outfield player who touches the ball for a second time after he /she takes a gk or freekick would thus be sent off and a penalty given rather than a indirect or direct free kick. Not sure what the punishment would be either for player, I believe a yellow card max.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

OK an honest question; I'll give an honest answer. If the ref thinks a backpass could sensibly have been interpretted as a deflection or an accidental flick of the foot, not intended to go to the keeper - then I wouldnt argue for a card of any sort. In this case an indirect free kick is plenty.

However if its plain as day that the keeper has broken the rules deliberately to prevent a goal then yeah I'd make the case for a red card.

That is his job mind :lol:
 
"Clear goalscoring opportunity and a deliberate handball."

Idont know if people are trying to be funny or if they are just stupid?
Clear goalscoring opportunity can only be ruled if someone fouls another player.
Deliberate handball by a goalkeeper inside his own box? hahaha come on :lol:

Technical offence = no card and a indirect freekick where the keeper picks the ball up.
 
"Clear goalscoring opportunity and a deliberate handball."

Idont know if people are trying to be funny or if they are just stupid?
Clear goalscoring opportunity can only be ruled if someone fouls another player.
Deliberate handball by a goalkeeper inside his own box? hahaha come on :lol:

Technical offence = no card and a indirect freekick where the keeper picks the ball up.

This surely!!??

Are some people on this thread making up laws ?? :-s
 
Will someone please explain what a "techincal offence" is and where it explains this in FIFA's Laws of the Game? Or have you just made it up?

This surely!!??

Are some people on this thread making up laws ?? :-s

Yes, you. There's no such thing as a "technical offence".

OK an honest question; I'll give an honest answer. If the ref thinks a backpass could sensibly have been interpretted as a deflection or an accidental flick of the foot, not intended to go to the keeper - then I wouldnt argue for a card of any sort. In this case an indirect free kick is plenty.
However if its plain as day that the keeper has broken the rules deliberately to prevent a goal then yeah I'd make the case for a red card.

If it wasn't kicked back to the goalkeeper deliberately then it wouldn't be an offence.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

How would you feel if instead of a keeper catching the ball it was a defender?

Keepers are allowed to handle the ball, a defender is not. I.e. the keeper was playing his normal game regardless of who, why, where and how the ball came at him.
 
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
Simples
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

OK an honest question; I'll give an honest answer. If the ref thinks a backpass could sensibly have been interpretted as a deflection or an accidental flick of the foot, not intended to go to the keeper - then I wouldnt argue for a card of any sort. In this case an indirect free kick is plenty.

However if its plain as day that the keeper has broken the rules deliberately to prevent a goal then yeah I'd make the case for a red card.

What kind of ridiculously ambiguous, contradictory and completely unworkable sort of rule is this you've just invented then? If it can be interpreted as a deflection or an accidental flick then it simply isn't a backpass and the game continues.

Your suggestion falls flat because pretty much every backpass would have to result in a red card. Given that an unintentional backpass isn't an offence, but an intentional backpass is an offence, the prospect of a red card in addition to the freekick is a punishment that is far and away excessive for something that comes down to one man ascertaining another man's "intentions".

This is why dangerous play etc is decided on actions and not on the perceived intentions of the player committing them. It isn't an anomaly.
 
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
A goalkeeper can't be given a bloody yellow card for handling a ball in his own box.
Simples

You can say it 400 times but it still won't be true :)
 
Re: Backpasses

Deliberate handball.

Theres a case to say it should be a red.

The reason why this thread rumbled on for so long.

Your first post was an inept two-footed over the top challenge, and since then you've been jumping through ever more ridiculous hoops in a forlorn attempt at justification.

Read LOAF.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top