Question Number: 24399

Law 10 - Method of Scoring 12/3/2010

RE: comp Adult

Richard Marnhout of pleasant hill, california usa asks...

In the 'mosh pit' in front of the goal, an attackers' shoe comes off while taking a shot and strikes the keeper in the face, rendering him temporarily incapacitated.
The ball is deflected into the post, but rebounds into the goal, for an apparent score.Mind you, this is a real 'BANG-BANG', i.e. FAST scenario.
so....does the goal stand?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Richard
A flying boot that hits a player in the face is a reason to stop the game and deal with the situation. It is a very unusual and one that is rarely encountered. The test is whether the ball crossed the line before the boot hit the GK. If it did then the goal is awarded as the incident happened after the goal.
If the boot hit the GK before the ball crossed the line then I would stop play, attend to the goalkeeper and restart with a dropped ball on the 6 yard line

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

While players are allowed to temporarily continue play if they lose a shoe, I agree with Ref McHugh's analysis. The shoe striking and distracting/disabling an opponent would be cause to stop play.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Interesting situation, and one that tests both the referee's understanding of the game and his knowledge of the laws.

I think it would be extremely unfair on the keeper to allow the goal to be scored, and I doubt that anybody would argue with that.

But what can we do about it, under the laws of the game?

We can stop play and restart with a drop ball (disallowing the goal), stating that play is stopped for any reason not otherwise mentioned in the laws of the game.

However, the other option would be to consider the attacker to have carelessly kicked the goalkeeper (remembar that a player throwing an object is considered an extension of his hand, I think we can apply the same principle here) and award a direct free kick in favour of the defence. The 'careless' act is in not securing his equipment properly. Certainly not what the law was written for, but astute referees need to be prepared to bend the laws and their interpretations in order to uphold safety and fairness.

A drop ball is probably the less controversial option and the one that doesn't require manipulation of the laws, but I believe either option would be correct.

If the referee believes that the keeper wouldn't have stopped the ball anyway (say, had no chance of reaching it) then he does have the option of allowing the goal - but I'm having a hard time seeing this as the correct option. I'd probably go for the drop ball.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Tough call to be sure. From your description, the shoe came off with the shot so the ball likely hit the post before the shoe hit the keeper. If this is the case, and the shoe coming off an accident, that's the breaks. By the time you even decided to stop play for the shoe, the ball likely is in the back of the net.

So, you have to decide if the shoe had any bearing on the play. Sounds as if it did not. Another thought is: what if the player whose shoe came off had repeatedly been told to tie his laces? If that's the case, I'd caution him for unsporting behavior, call off the goal and restart with an IDFK coming out of the penalty area.

Unless you know the shoe impacted the keeper's ability to play the ball or the attacking player should have had his shoe secured, I think you have to award the goal