Advice on the Laws of the Game

[lawman]

from what i read here, ref should try to get all issues corrected before kick off. From rules of the game I think all he would need is field of play markings(all the outside lines) and half way line and penalty area. surely spotter mark, centre circle, and 6 yard box can be measured or guessed. ref should only refuse to play if its dangerous..


Opposition can refuse to play ANYTIME..... But when ref report goes in they are are aathe mercy of the league officials.. they will definitely not get the 3 points but surely have something to lose....

[bald eagle]

Question At the taking of a penalty, the kick is taken and saved by the keeper, but a defender is standing inside the penalty before the kick is taken.
The referee awards a retake as per rule. The team taking the kick ask to switch kickers and have someone else take the retake. The referee gives permission for this
to happen and a goal is scored.. IS THIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE GAME.

[The Ref]

Question At the taking of a penalty, the kick is taken and saved by the keeper, but a defender is standing inside the penalty before the kick is taken.
The referee awards a retake as per rule. The team taking the kick ask to switch kickers and have someone else take the retake. The referee gives permission for this
to happen and a goal is scored.. IS THIS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE GAME.

There is nothing within the Laws of the Game that either permits or otherwise but as the kick is being retaken, I would consider that it is permissible for the kicker to be changed (I cannot see why the same kicker should be made take it again).

[bald eagle]

After I posted the question and searched through the sites of the ref's assoc and the ISRS I contacted a retired FIFA referee friend of mine and He said that it WAS absolutely the right decision to allow a switch of kicker. Thank YOU for your speedy response.

[Xatraps]

Hi ref.
Hopefully your not the same the Ref on another website. And apologies if this has been answered before.

Anyway. The offside rule. My question relates specifically to the placement of the ball.
A player being offside is not breaking the rules, its when he becomes active.
Is active movement toward the ball or oppenent in possession? Or is it touching the ball or engaging the oppenent?

For example. A player is in the center of the opponents half. 30 yards from the endline. A long ball is played wide right. The keeper moves to the ball and attempts to shepard it out of play. The ball slows up and now the forward chases it down and engages the keeper 1 yard from the endline attempting to keep it in. Whistle blows, offside free kick awarded. Where is the ball placed for the free. Centre of the half 30 yards from goal? Or 1 yard from the end line?
If it is 1 yard from the end line, does this not seem incredibly rewarding to the forward for originally being offside?

Thanks

[The Ref]

Hi ref.
Hopefully your not the same the Ref on another website. And apologies if this has been answered before.

Anyway. The offside rule. My question relates specifically to the placement of the ball.
A player being offside is not breaking the rules, its when he becomes active.
Is active movement toward the ball or oppenent in possession? Or is it touching the ball or engaging the oppenent?

For example. A player is in the center of the opponents half. 30 yards from the endline. A long ball is played wide right. The keeper moves to the ball and attempts to shepard it out of play. The ball slows up and now the forward chases it down and engages the keeper 1 yard from the endline attempting to keep it in. Whistle blows, offside free kick awarded. Where is the ball placed for the free. Centre of the half 30 yards from goal? Or 1 yard from the end line?
If it is 1 yard from the end line, does this not seem incredibly rewarding to the forward for originally being offside?

Thanks

Good Question.

You are correct in your summary above.

The Law-book states in its interpretation section "When an offside offence occurs, the referee awards an indirect free kick to be taken from the position of the offending player when the ball was last played to him by one of his team-mates."

so in your example 30 yards from the centre of the goal.

[Round Tower]

This is a question you are probaly expecting,in the Man. U. game tonight Nani lost his boot by acident and the Referee gave a free against him was this a correct decision which led too the third goal for Bilbao.

[Aldo]

Was wondering if my question could be answered. A junior match I was a referee blow for a foul against an attacker , as the attacker got up he kicked the ball away . The referee then called him over and gave him a yellow for a tackle and a yellow for kicking the ball and the attacker was sent off. I have never seen two yellows produced together for two different incidents at the same time . Is this referee allowed to do this.

[The Ref]

This is a question you are probaly expecting,in the Man. U. game tonight Nani lost his boot by acident and the Referee gave a free against him was this a correct decision which led too the third goal for Bilbao.

In the Law Book and it's interpretation states "If a player loses his footwear accidentally and immediately plays the ball and/or scores a goal, there is no infringement and the goal is awarded because he lost his footwear by accident."

The only reason I can see the referee awarding a free kick is for dangerous play. Playing in a dangerous manner is defined as any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player himself). But in all honesty I think that's pushing it a little bit.

So was it the correct decision I say no.

However I don't agree that it led to the third goal, United's inability to defend cost the goal.

[The Ref]

Was wondering if my question could be answered. A junior match I was a referee blow for a foul against an attacker , as the attacker got up he kicked the ball away . The referee then called him over and gave him a yellow for a tackle and a yellow for kicking the ball and the attacker was sent off. I have never seen two yellows produced together for two different incidents at the same time . Is this referee allowed to do this.

I would say the referee showed two yellow cards for clarity. If he had produced a straight Red Card, every one would have wondered for what. If a player who has committed an offence and is about to be cautioned, commits a second offence, worthy of a caution, both acts need to be punished.

If I deemed that the kicking the ball away was either an act of dissent or an attempt to delay the restart of play and the tackle was a yellow card I would have produced a straight red card.

[Aldo]

I would say the referee showed two yellow cards for clarity. If he had produced a straight Red Card, every one would have wondered for what. If a player who has committed an offence and is about to be cautioned, commits a second offence, worthy of a caution, both acts need to be punished.

If I deemed that the kicking the ball away was either an act of dissent or an attempt to delay the restart of play and the tackle was a yellow card I would have produced a straight red card.
Thanks very much for the answer , couldn't get a answer from the offical in charge . Didn't think it was against the laws just had never seen it before. Thanks again.

[lawman]

I would say the referee showed two yellow cards for clarity. If he had produced a straight Red Card, every one would have wondered for what. If a player who has committed an offence and is about to be cautioned, commits a second offence, worthy of a caution, both acts need to be punished.

If I deemed that the kicking the ball away was either an act of dissent or an attempt to delay the restart of play and the tackle was a yellow card I would have produced a straight red card.

???? and you would have been incorrec..... Correct decision is 2 individual yellow cards for the 2 seperate cautionable infringements. 1. reckless foul tackle. 2. Dissent, cannot be caution for delaying restart of play as play could not be restarted quickly as referee was already dealing with the player for the foul tackle and was about to administer a caution.

[Aldo]

???? and you would have been incorrec..... Correct decision is 2 individual yellow cards for the 2 seperate cautionable infringements. 1. reckless foul tackle. 2. Dissent, cannot be caution for delaying restart of play as play could not be restarted quickly as referee was already dealing with the player for the foul tackle and was about to administer a caution.
so are you saying that the player should not have been sent off as he had not recieved the first caution before kicking the ball away. The player was never cautioned for the foul before kicking the ball .Only after when he recieveed 2 yellows at once. Im totally confused by it as i never seen it happen before.

[lawman]

so are you saying that the player should not have been sent off as he had not recieved the first caution before kicking the ball away. The player was never cautioned for the foul before kicking the ball .Only after when he recieveed 2 yellows at once. Im totally confused by it as i never seen it happen before.

If a player commits two cautionable offences he must receive two cautions., no matter if they occur within 5 seconds of each other or 5 minutes of each other. The example you quoted yourself is a perfect example. Another would be, a player has committed a reckless foul tackle that the referee has decided to caution him for and as the referee is speaking to him the player strarts to shout back or argue back (dissent) the referee will show the second caution followed by the red or two cautions and the red if he has not already shown the first one.....

[Aldo]

If a player commits two cautionable offences he must receive two cautions., no matter if they occur within 5 seconds of each other or 5 minutes of each other. The example you quoted yourself is a perfect example. Another would be, a player has committed a reckless foul tackle that the referee has decided to caution him for and as the referee is speaking to him the player strarts to shout back or argue back (dissent) the referee will show the second caution followed by the red or two cautions and the red if he has not already shown the first one.....

Thanks for clearing it up

[old git]

ref..

can you advise on following goalkeeper has ball in arms challanged by forward referee does not award any free out goalkeeper shouts at referee looking for his free , referee warns keeper to keep quiet or he will book him and award penalty, keeper keeps shouting ( not sure if bad language was used) referee books keeper and awards penalty , keeper then gets second yellow and sent of for shouting / roaring at ref.. is referee correct to award penalty ??

[Innishvilla]

ref..

can you advise on following goalkeeper has ball in arms challanged by forward referee does not award any free out goalkeeper shouts at referee looking for his free , referee warns keeper to keep quiet or he will book him and award penalty, keeper keeps shouting ( not sure if bad language was used) referee books keeper and awards penalty , keeper then gets second yellow and sent of for shouting / roaring at ref.. is referee correct to award penalty ??

Not a ref but I would have though it was an indirect free kick for dissent...

[old git]

Not a ref but I would have though it was an indirect free kick for dissent...

i would have thought the same myself..

[lawman]

ref..

can you advise on following goalkeeper has ball in arms challanged by forward referee does not award any free out goalkeeper shouts at referee looking for his free , referee warns keeper to keep quiet or he will book him and award penalty, keeper keeps shouting ( not sure if bad language was used) referee books keeper and awards penalty , keeper then gets second yellow and sent of for shouting / roaring at ref.. is referee correct to award penalty ??

still waiting and curious to see the response to this from any referes on here. have my own thoughts on it but would like to see how a ref interprets it.

[Dixie's Cousin]

Dissent has to be an indirect free kick because it isn't a direct fowl on an opposition player.

[old git]

still waiting and curious to see the response to this from any referes on here. have my own thoughts on it but would like to see how a ref interprets it.

was talking to two current refs from 2 different leagues over the last week and both confirmed an indirect free kick should have been awarded.

[Stuttgart88]

Hypothetical but interesting question for the ref:

I'm a goalkeeper and I decide to take a short goalkick to one of my defenders, who is in the penalty box but I intend to play the pass in front of him so he can wait until it's outside the box before he touches it.

I take the kick carelessly and the ball is going to an opponent instead.

My defender, still inside the box, deliberately handles the ball to prevent it going to the opponent.

Is this a penalty, or is the goal kick not yet valid, because it hasn't been played outside the penalty box yet?

[The Ref]

ref..

can you advise on following goalkeeper has ball in arms challanged by forward referee does not award any free out goalkeeper shouts at referee looking for his free , referee warns keeper to keep quiet or he will book him and award penalty, keeper keeps shouting ( not sure if bad language was used) referee books keeper and awards penalty , keeper then gets second yellow and sent of for shouting / roaring at ref.. is referee correct to award penalty ??

Indirect Free kick should have been given

[The Ref]

Hypothetical but interesting question for the ref:

I'm a goalkeeper and I decide to take a short goalkick to one of my defenders, who is in the penalty box but I intend to play the pass in front of him so he can wait until it's outside the box before he touches it.

I take the kick carelessly and the ball is going to an opponent instead.

My defender, still inside the box, deliberately handles the ball to prevent it going to the opponent.

Is this a penalty, or is the goal kick not yet valid, because it hasn't been played outside the penalty box yet?

The ball is not in play until it leaves the penalty area - the goal kick should be retaken

However, a referee may caution the defender

[etoo]

ref;
hypothetical question;
2 players charging through on goal against the defender(who has already been yellow carded) and the keeper. the defender takes down 1 of the players which would result in a red card/defo second yellow but the ref plays on as the other player takes control of the ball and is through 1 on 1 with the keeper. the advantage played does not result in a goal and the ball does not go out of play for the ref to go back and caution the defender that took down the attacking player. and from the resulting play that occurs from the advantage played by the ref the defender that should have been sent off(and will be sent off as soon as the ball goes out of play) scores a goal.
long question but would the goal count?

[The Ref]

ref;
hypothetical question;
2 players charging through on goal against the defender(who has already been yellow carded) and the keeper. the defender takes down 1 of the players which would result in a red card/defo second yellow but the ref plays on as the other player takes control of the ball and is through 1 on 1 with the keeper. the advantage played does not result in a goal and the ball does not go out of play for the ref to go back and caution the defender that took down the attacking player. and from the resulting play that occurs from the advantage played by the ref the defender that should have been sent off(and will be sent off as soon as the ball goes out of play) scores a goal.
long question but would the goal count?

As referee played an advantage, and even though no advantage accrued - the play should be allowed to continue. The defender remains a player until such time as the referee cautions and expels him from the field of play. The goal should stand, but the player should immediately be cautioned and as he has already received a caution, dismissed from the field of play..

[Subprime]

As referee played an advantage, and even though no advantage accrued - the play should be allowed to continue. The defender remains a player until such time as the referee cautions and expels him from the field of play. The goal should stand, but the player should immediately be cautioned and as he has already received a caution, dismissed from the field of play..

I only noticed this one and have to ask The Ref, surely you mean that the advantage was played and nothing came of the play as opposed to no advantage gained at which point the referee is supposed to stop play and allow a free to be taken and punish the offender? If the ball was cleared, then no advantage was gained and thus should he have recalled play?

"allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been
committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original
offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time."

I know it looks like a hard one to call, but if they were that close to the goals and the anticipated advantage/benefit (2 on 2) did not ensue, then would you not have stopped play, punished the offender and restart with a free kick? Are you not drawing possible conflict from both teams by allowing the end result that ensued? Wonder what the reaction was from the teams involved on the day! :confused:

[Sheep Farmer]

Ref, you might help clear this up for me.
Example: A team scores late in a game and are still one or two down. Scorer goes into the net to retrieve ball from net to bring to the half way line to save some time for a possible equaliser, but the keeper takes the ball and refuses to let it go. ( Maybe he was going to kick it to the half way or maybe he was going to waste time and hold on to it for twenty minutes who knows! it was his sides tip off again) anyway the scorer then starts to try and pull the ball away from the keeper who stands his ground and keeps hold of the ball. A second player gets involved with the keeper and between the two of them they knock the keeper to the ground. Things get heated and calm down shortly after. Result: Keeper gets booked. ? The second player ran twenty wards to get involved with the keeper which there was no need for in my opinion. whay do you think ? Cheers

[Innishvilla]

Ref, you might help clear this up for me.
Example: A team scores late in a game and are still one or two down. Scorer goes into the net to retrieve ball from net to bring to the half way line to save some time for a possible equaliser, but the keeper takes the ball and refuses to let it go. ( Maybe he was going to kick it to the half way or maybe he was going to waste time and hold on to it for twenty minutes who knows! it was his sides tip off again) anyway the scorer then starts to try and pull the ball away from the keeper who stands his ground and keeps hold of the ball. A second player gets involved with the keeper and between the two of them they knock the keeper to the ground. Things get heated and calm down shortly after. Result: Keeper gets booked. ? The second player ran twenty wards to get involved with the keeper which there was no need for in my opinion. whay do you think ? Cheers

Not a referee but I thought they had brought in a rule there a while back to discourage this exact thing from happening - something along the lines of trying to stop the 1st player from running in to retrieve the ball - but I could be wrong. I would definitely say that the player running from a distance to get involved should have also found his name being taken.

[maninthemiddle]

Ref, you might help clear this up for me.
Example: A team scores late in a game and are still one or two down. Scorer goes into the net to retrieve ball from net to bring to the half way line to save some time for a possible equaliser, but the keeper takes the ball and refuses to let it go. ( Maybe he was going to kick it to the half way or maybe he was going to waste time and hold on to it for twenty minutes who knows! it was his sides tip off again) anyway the scorer then starts to try and pull the ball away from the keeper who stands his ground and keeps hold of the ball. A second player gets involved with the keeper and between the two of them they knock the keeper to the ground. Things get heated and calm down shortly after. Result: Keeper gets booked. ? The second player ran twenty wards to get involved with the keeper which there was no need for in my opinion. whay do you think ? Cheers

any player running 20 yards to get involved in any incident should be booked as well.

[RedzD3]

Have two questions both involving penalty shootout - 1) Does the ref have to blow the whistle before each spot kick?(was at a game and the ref blew the whistle before each kick till one player placed the ball and kicked it straight in before the keeper and ref where even set for the kick) 2) The keeper dives to save penalty at the point of diving his feet are on the goal line but when he lands his out from the goal line does this count as the keeper moving off his line to gain an advantage to save the penalty? (This happened in the same shootout and the ref made it be retaken even other team wondered what the ref was on about) Thanks.

[old git]

REF, one question keeper out of position at edge of six yard box on groung defender on line moves upper body to block shot on line using top of arm from elbow to shoulder to stop ball crossing line , referee awards penalty and only produces yellow card any reason why he would not send off player.

[Langerdan007]

Hey I've a question on an offside decision.

Player is 10-15 yards off - a ball gets played through - the player who is offside is running back out from being offside BUT runs straight at the ball and lets it run through his legs
Another player runs onto this ball and squares for a goal.

Is this offside? Although the offside player doesnt touch the ball, he allows it to run through his legs completely throwing the defense off as they expect such a blatent offside to be called!

[Referee09]

....If the situation happened as you've described I would deem that the offside player has interered with play and therefore an indirect free kick should be awarded to the defending team.

[Round Tower]

Is there different rules for a player coming back on after going off injured and a player coming back on for another reason. It happened in the Barcelona match last night, a player who went off to tie his pacers had to wait for a stoppage in play while a injured player was waved on immediately.

[The Ref]

Is there different rules for a player coming back on after going off injured and a player coming back on for another reason. It happened in the Barcelona match last night, a player who went off to tie his pacers had to wait for a stoppage in play while a injured player was waved on immediately.

If the player changes his equipment - the referee must not allow him re-enter the field of play until his equipment has been inspected, either by himself or another official (depending on where the player left the field to change his equipment, the referee may decide to wait for a stoppage). If it only a case of tying his laces he maybe waved on immediately. For an injury as the player hasn't changed his equipment he may be waved on immediately.

[etoo]

just wondering what would happen if i played the ball back to the keeper(back pass), who missed it and the ball was heading straight in the goal. the keeper then saves the ball with his hands stopping a certain goal.....should the keeper be sent off and a penalty be given as he should be treated as an outfield player once a back pass has been played?? or is it just an indirect free kick (which would be harsh)?

[DerekMcKenna]

As far as Im aware (as a new referee), there is no provision for sending off a goalkeeper for handling a back pass. As far as Im aware, there is only the provision for an indirect free kick and a possible yellow card. (I could be wrong).

[football fan]

The only offence commited by the keeper is to handle a back pass. The referee should award an Indirect Free Kick only. No caution (yellow card) to be issued.

[Round Tower]

The only offence commited by the keeper is to handle a back pass. The referee should award an Indirect Free Kick only. No caution (yellow card) to be issued.
There has been a number of occasions where the goalkeeper has been sent off because they have stopped a certain goal, right by the rules, the games I can't tell you off the top of my head

[football fan]

Like I said above, per the LAWS of the game, the only offence committed by the keeper is to handle a back pass. The referee awards an Indirect free kick, no caution and no sending off!! I am aware of the game recently involving the Sunderland keeper and the referee awarded an indirect free kick and a issued a caution.... The indirect free kick was correct, the caution was incorrect. It is NOT a sending off offence.

[Round Tower]

Like I said above, per the LAWS of the game, the only offence committed by the keeper is to handle a back pass. The referee awards an Indirect free kick, no caution and no sending off!! I am aware of the game recently involving the Sunderland keeper and the referee awarded an indirect free kick and a issued a caution.... The indirect free kick was correct, the caution was incorrect. It is NOT a sending off offence.
That is debateable, by handling the ball the keeper is deliberately denying the goal illegaly, as the saying going reffs differ.

[football fan]

There is NO debate..... The keeper is entitled to handle the ball inside the penalty area. In Law 12, the 7 sending off offences are listed including the one about denying a goal scoring opportunity by a deliberate hand ball BUT the law then adds except the goal keeper.... As I said the keeper can handle the ball inside his penalty area except when he receives the ball from a back pass or a throw in from a team mate. The sanction is an indirect free kick ONLY.... The ONLY offence the keeper commits is to handle a back pass. If referees differ, its because their knowledge of the Laws of the Game needs to improve and not because such a situation is open to opinion.

[Horse24]

Sorry lads if this came up already....too lazy to flick back! I hear of a new offside rule involving the re-definition of interfering with play.....but no sign of it on Fifa website or no notice of it? Am I dreaming??

[The Ref]

There is NO debate..... The keeper is entitled to handle the ball inside the penalty area. In Law 12, the 7 sending off offences are listed including the one about denying a goal scoring opportunity by a deliberate hand ball BUT the law then adds except the goal keeper.... As I said the keeper can handle the ball inside his penalty area except when he receives the ball from a back pass or a throw in from a team mate. The sanction is an indirect free kick ONLY.... The ONLY offence the keeper commits is to handle a back pass. If referees differ, its because their knowledge of the Laws of the Game needs to improve and not because such a situation is open to opinion.

Here is my opinion.

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct sets out the seven offences that should a player, substitute or substituted player commit, that player should be sent off:

• serious foul play
• violent conduct
• spitting at an opponent or any other person
• denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
• 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
• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
• receiving a second caution in the same match

The correct section is the fifth offence (not the forth offence as used above).


The interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees (Page 130 of the 2013/14 Laws of the Game Lawbook) states "the offence which denies an opponent an obvious goalscoring opportunity may be an offence that incurs a direct free kick or an indirect free kick"

As the offence denies a goalscoring opportunity and is punishable by an indirect free kick, the correct decision is to dismiss the goalkeeper.

[The Ref]

Sorry lads if this came up already....too lazy to flick back! I hear of a new offside rule involving the re-definition of interfering with play.....but no sign of it on Fifa website or no notice of it? Am I dreaming??

The last two points are new to The interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referee (page 108)

In the context of Law 11 – Offside, the following definitions apply:
• “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition
• “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate

• “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball
• “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball
i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent having been in an offside position
ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent having been in an offside position

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage

[football fan]

Here is my opinion.

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct sets out the seven offences that should a player, substitute or substituted player commit, that player should be sent off:

• serious foul play
• violent conduct
• spitting at an opponent or any other person
• denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
• 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
• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
• receiving a second caution in the same match

The correct section is the fifth offence (not the forth offence as used above).


The interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees (Page 130 of the 2013/14 Laws of the Game Lawbook) states "the offence which denies an opponent an obvious goalscoring opportunity may be an offence that incurs a direct free kick or an indirect free kick"

As the offence denies a goalscoring opportunity and is punishable by an indirect free kick, the correct decision is to dismiss the goalkeeper.


And there is the problem for players, managers and spectators in this country, referees that clearly do not understand the LOTG. Nice to see you have you law book handy but like I said you have misunderstood the law. Denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or penalty kick refers to a defender or keeper fouling an opponent and denying the opponent a goal scoring opportunity. Again, I make the point. The keeper is guilty of handling a back pass only. Indirect free kick only. Ask your observer, get confirmation from the referees department in the FAI but learn the LOTG because you clearly have misunderstood the law. If you are still confused pm me.

[The Ref]

just wondering what would happen if i played the ball back to the keeper(back pass), who missed it and the ball was heading straight in the goal. the keeper then saves the ball with his hands stopping a certain goal.....should the keeper be sent off and a penalty be given as he should be treated as an outfield player once a back pass has been played?? or is it just an indirect free kick (which would be harsh)?


And there is the problem for players, managers and spectators in this country, referees that clearly do not understand the LOTG. Nice to see you have you law book handy but like I said you have misunderstood the law. Denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or penalty kick refers to a defender or keeper fouling an opponent and denying the opponent a goal scoring opportunity. Again, I make the point. The keeper is guilty of handling a back pass only. Indirect free kick only. Ask your observer, get confirmation from the referees department in the FAI but learn the LOTG because you clearly have misunderstood the law. If you are still confused pm me.

Ok, hold my hands up time - I misread the original question!

Firstly I thought that there was a forward going to score - there is no mention of a forward, so I' was wrong (lesson always read the question).

In the question as outlined above, only an indirect free kick is awarded as the goal keeper did not deny an opponent an opportunity to score. Apologies for the confusion.

Football Fan is indeed correct

The Ref

[Round Tower]

The last two points are new to The interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referee (page 108)

In the context of Law 11 – Offside, the following definitions apply:
• “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent. The arms are not included in this definition
• “interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a team-mate

• “interfering with an opponent” means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or challenging an opponent for the ball
• “gaining an advantage by being in that position” means playing a ball
i. that rebounds or is deflected to him off the goalpost, crossbar or an opponent having been in an offside position
ii. that rebounds, is deflected or is played to him from a deliberate save by an opponent having been in an offside position

A player in an offside position receiving the ball from an opponent, who deliberately plays the ball (except from a deliberate save), is not considered to have gained an advantage
Put this in simple terms, if a player fires a shot comes back off say the crossbar or post to a player who in a offside position when the shot went in as Van Persie against W. Ham last year, under the new guidelines is he off side or not.

[lawman]

not sure if post above is a question or not... I haven't played for a few years but my sons play now and if I remember correctly the picture painted above was always an offside scenario.... anyone remember it any differently? unless it was before the keeper could pick it up numerous times when it was played back to him by foot from one of his own players etc