It's not a rule.Oh, your good friend TIM. Who apparently goes by the pen name JIM. You're such an idiot.
BTW, you did remember to falsely state the rule.
Oh, but it does. You are yet to learn the law.Seriously JaP!? You had to create an alternate screen name to defend yourself. Unless this is daddy "Gimpyhip" on to defend his boy. Hmmmm? "Shove it in your pie hole" means exactly what it always has, because you are still wrong. link does nothing to confirm statements made by your boy JaP. Quite the contrary. Confirms My position entirely.
I have no problem letting someone know they were right, if they were. Nor do I have a problem admitting I am wrong. Neither applies in this thread.
Or thigh, or knee or shin.Okay, to clarify the Laws on this and reduce the bickering I will try to help.
It is an Indirect Free Kick if a goalkeeper, inside of his own penalty area, "touches a ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate."
As espola said, if the keeper touches the ball with his hands outside of the penalty area, he is just like any other player and it is a direct free kick.
As JAP mentioned but did not explain, the law has nothing to do with passing. You will see players pass the ball to their own keeper all the time using their head or chest, which is perfectly legal.
Of course you are.As I clarified earlier in this argument, I am referring ONLY to an intentional pass (from the foot) of a field player to thier own goalie, as being an infraction. I know heading is okay. I did NOT know using chest, knee or thigh was okay.
Do I need to clarify for you JrCeasar? Intentional pass WITH ANY PART OF THE BODY EXCEPT THE HEAD, to and picked up by the keeper, is a penalty. Disagree all you want, you'd be wrong.
Your cohort knows I know the man.Oh, your good friend TIM. Who apparently goes by the pen name JIM. You're such an idiot.
BTW, you did remember to falsely state the rule.
You are such a douche! You're arguing semantics. Most understand, with the acception of you.Of course you are.
Doesn't change the fact that the link doesn't support your statements. Good friend? Laughable. I doubt someone like you has friends.Your cohort knows I know the man.
By the way have you learnt it yet? He dumbed it down pretty well so it should be easy to understand it.
Or may be not for everyone . . .
Try again. In English this time.You are such a douche! You're arguing semantics. Most understand, with the acception of you.
As I said, not for everyone . . .Doesn't change the fact that the link doesn't support your statements. Good friend? Laughable. I doubt someone like you has friends.
As I clarified earlier in this argument, I am referring ONLY to an intentional pass (from the foot) of a field player to thier own goalie, as being an infraction. I know heading is okay. I did NOT know using chest, knee or thigh was okay.