Question Number: 35862

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 1/16/2025

RE: College

Tristan Zhang of Beijing, Beijing China asks...

Dear sirs:
I am a little bit confused by a part of Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct which says
'An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area,
commits any of the following offences:
touches the ball with the hand/arm, unless the goalkeeper has clearly kicked or attempted to kick the ball to release it into play, after:
• it has been deliberately kicked to the goalkeeper by a team-mate
• receiving it directly from a throw-in taken by a team-mate '.

I found out that this sentence was changed in 2019/2020, adding 'unless the goalkeeper has clearly kicked or attempted to kick the ball to release it into play'.

So for the following scenarios, is it a foul or not?

S1: the centerback passes the ball to the goalkeeper, and then the goalkeeper stops the ball with his foot, and then pick up the still ball with his hands.

S2: the centerback passes the ball to the goalkeeper, and then the goalkeeper tries to kick the ball away but fails to do so, which lets the ball running toward the goal. Then the goalkeeper catches the ball with hands.

S3: the centerback passes the ball to the goalkeeper, and then the goalkeeper tries to stop the ball but fails, and his toe touches the ball letting the ball jumping up. Then the goalkeeper catches the jumping ball with hands.

Thank you so much if you can explain these to me. And apologize for my terrible English

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Tristan,
no need to apologise your English is far superior to my Mandarin!
The answer lies within the reasoning of WHY they altered the LOTG in the first place.
The INTENT was to prevent time wasting when defenders and their goal tender could play keep away by passing the ball between the two of them. Whenever the opponent came to challenge the keeper could pick the ball up and thus start it all over again.

SO this illegal handling addition was -never- to stop the keeper from doing their job which was to defend the goal just not waste time. It is in fact not derived from the foul interpretation of careless reckless or excessive but rather INTENT!

In your examples ask yourself, DID the keeper make an honest attempt (in the opinion of you the referee) to clear the ball using anything BUT his hands? If you say 100% yes then their use of hands is not likely to be punished . It could be a miskick into the wind or a simple bobble where the ball just has some weird movement and it glances off the attempt by the keeper.

S1 is a definite infraction there was no reason to use the hands! He made a deliberate choice, gained control and illegally used their hands! This was no accident it was a bad decision, INDFK

While S2 & S3 could be a deflection both are plausible mistakes where you as the referee -may- see them as an accident and not punish the use of the hands. S2 a swing and a miss or deflection, although the direction of the ball towards the goal is in your favour of a non call. Whereas if you merely waved a foot with no contact rather than it just a poor clearance you might suffer the wrath of the referee for illegal use of hands and give up a scoring opportunity.
There is no guarantee, as my colleagues noted! To not be found guilty of an illegal use of hands any subsequential action is identified as a sincere effort to save a goal not just a recovery of a bad decision. S3 could easily be seen as a flick up and punished accordingly.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Tristan
Thanks for the question.

On S1 it is a clear offence punished by an IDFK from where the goalkeeper touched the ball with the hands. It makes no difference that a foot is used. Indeed if the goalkeeper controls the ball outside the penalty area on a deliberate kick from a team mate it will also be an offence should the goalkeeper subsequently touch the ball with the hands inside the penalty area.

On S2 the law was changed to provide for situations where the goalkeeper mis kicks the ball in an attempt to clear the ball and then has to use the hands to make a save or pick the ball up.
So in your example there is no offence.

On S3 the decision will be determined on the judgement of the referee whether it was a mis control or an attempt to clear the ball that went astray. If it was a mis control of the ball it will be an offence should the goalkeeper subsequently use the hands while a failed clearance will not result in an offence.
For me an attempt to stop the ball by way of control will make it an offence while what would look likes a kick away will unlikely be punished like S2
As a coach I would advise any goalkeeper not to take the risk on anything other than an attempt to stop a goal by not using the hands when a ball is deliberately kicked by a team mate to the goalkeeper.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Tristan,

Thanks for your question.

What has changed is that in the past, if a GK tried to kick the ball after a defender has deliberately kicked it to them, and mucked up the kick, they couldn't handle it. Now, they're allowed to.

For your S1, that was an IFK before this change and it still is. The change is about trying to kick the ball away.

S2 this used to be an IFK, but no longer is. That's the change.

S3 this is still an IFK. The LOTG has only mentioned clearing the ball as negating the handling, not a miscontrolled trap.