# Passback -- or not???



## espola (Feb 3, 2017)

I already posted this to the referee forum at bigsoccer - looking for reactions here --

HS JV game, so 2-whistle system is in effect. I am working the scoreboard from the press box at top of the stands at midfield. A player on Black team attempts to pass the ball from well beyond midfield (on my right) to a teammate behind him, but fails to connect the pass. The ball bounces and rolls 60 yards or so, with a White attacker chasing behind it. As the ball passes into the penalty area (on my left), the goal keeper runs up and picks it up. Whistle from the referee on my right. Much complaining from Black team, questioning "intentional?". Referees meet down near the ball and have a discussion for about 45 seconds. After the meeting, White is awarded an IDK in the outer reaches of the PA. After the initial kick bounces off Black's wall, a White teammate kicks a screamer past the Black GK.


----------



## TangoCity (Feb 3, 2017)

I'd have to see it to know for sure.  The way you describe it, it was not an intentional pass to the GK so no idk.  Refs may have thought the original pass was intentionally to the GK not to the teammate behind him.  60 yards is a very long ways to play a ball, so I'd have to see the video.  Do you have one?


----------



## DWickham (Feb 3, 2017)

The factors for the foul in high school and FIFA are the same (NB: there is a rules difference for trickery to evade the rule).  Has the  keeper  handled a ball is kicked deliberately by a teammate?   It does not have to be a "pass" nor does it have to be "back."  The defender must kick the ball - meaning, using a foot.

The primary  issue for the referee is whether the defender made a miss-kick of the ball.  The keeper MAY pick up the ball after a miss-kick.   That decision is affected by the age/skill of the players, the field and playing conditions, presence or absence of time/space for the defender to kick the ball, and the presence or absence of opponents marking the defender.   But, once the referee judges it was not a miss-kick,  the keeper may not handle the ball even if the ball might have been intended by the defender to be played by another field player or the ball was  kicked to a spot outside the PA where the keeper went to retrieve it.

The purpose of the rule, however, was to prevent a team from wasting time (prior the rule change, the defender could kick the ball to the keeper, who then released the ball back to the defender, who then passed the ball back to the keeper, etc.) or to prevent a defender from denying  the opponents a fair opportunity to challenge for the ball.   In most cases where the ball is kicked from so far away, particularly in a lesser-skilled JV game,  a wise referee may decide any offense is doubtful or trifling, and allow play to continue. 

YMMV.


----------



## outside! (Feb 3, 2017)

Recently saw a situation where after a corner kick there was some pinball going on in the box. A defender facing the goal and just outside the six yard box took two touches, one to control and one to pass it to the keeper. The keeper picked up the ball. At the time I wondered if the ref just didn't see it, but now I think it may have been a spirit of the game type of thing since it was obviously not an attempt to waste time.


----------



## espola (Feb 4, 2017)

DWickham said:


> The factors for the foul in high school and FIFA are the same (NB: there is a rules difference for trickery to evade the rule).  Has the  keeper  handled a ball is kicked deliberately by a teammate?   It does not have to be a "pass" nor does it have to be "back."  The defender must kick the ball - meaning, using a foot.
> 
> The primary  issue for the referee is whether the defender made a miss-kick of the ball.  The keeper MAY pick up the ball after a miss-kick.   That decision is affected by the age/skill of the players, the field and playing conditions, presence or absence of time/space for the defender to kick the ball, and the presence or absence of opponents marking the defender.   But, once the referee judges it was not a miss-kick,  the keeper may not handle the ball even if the ball might have been intended by the defender to be played by another field player or the ball was  kicked to a spot outside the PA where the keeper went to retrieve it.
> 
> ...


It was not the passing back to the keeper that was the problem, it was repeatedly passing back to the keeper.  FIFA/IFAB could have constructed this rule differently by simply banning the repetition, or by instructing referees to add time when players did it.  Instead, we solved a problem that only existed in the highest levels of the game (pros and international play) and created confusion all the way down to playground rec leagues.

Worst rule change ever.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 4, 2017)

espola said:


> It was not the passing back to the keeper that was the problem, it was repeatedly passing back to the keeper.  FIFA/IFAB could have constructed this rule differently by simply banning the repetition, or by instructing referees to add time when players did it.  Instead, we solved a problem that only existed in the highest levels of the game (pros and international play) and created confusion all the way down to playground rec leagues.
> 
> Worst rule change ever.


Baloney.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

outside! said:


> Recently saw a situation where after a corner kick there was some pinball going on in the box. A defender facing the goal and just outside the six yard box took two touches, one to control and one to pass it to the keeper. The keeper picked up the ball. At the time I wondered if the ref just didn't see it, but now I think it may have been a spirit of the game type of thing since it was obviously not an attempt to waste time.


What does the spirit of the game have to do with it?  If the ball is intentionally passed to the keeper, they CANNOT pick it up.  Plain and simple.  Should have been a PK.


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> What does the spirit of the game have to do with it?  If the ball is intentionally passed to the keeper, they CANNOT pick it up.  Plain and simple.  Should have been a PK.


Indirect kick.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> Indirect kick.


Even if it's in the box?


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> Even if it's in the box?


If it's outside the box, it's a handling violation and a direct kick.  Inside the PA it's a goalkeeper no-no and IDK.  If inside the 6-yard box, it is an IDK at the point on the 6-yard line nearest to the point of infraction.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

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.


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


I was taught that the kick had to come from the foot, so that if the ball is directed with any part of the body shin and up it is legal for the GK to pick it up.  (Except, of course, directed by the hand and arms, but that is a different issue)


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> What does the spirit of the game have to do with it?  If the ball is intentionally passed to the keeper, they CANNOT pick it up.  Plain and simple.  Should have been a PK.


Not quite. Goalkeepers CAN pick up balls intentionally passed to them.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> Even if it's in the box?


Even if.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> Not quite. Goalkeepers CAN pick up balls intentionally passed to them.


Read the whole argument JaP.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


I don't have to disagree with you at all. I just have to inform you that you're wrong on all counts.


Kicknit22 said:


> Read the whole argument JaP.


No.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> I don't have to disagree with you at all. I just have to inform you that you're wrong on all counts.
> No.


Really?!!  Ive misunderstood the rule all these years?  You can intentionally pass the ball back to the keeper for them to pick it up?  Wow!  My bad.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> Really?!!  Ive misunderstood the rule all these years?  You can intentionally pass the ball back to the keeper for them to pick it up?  Wow!  My bad.


No, you haven't "misunderstood" it, you have never known it.

And yes, really. You can intentionally pass the ball to the goalkeeper for them to pick it up. And no, it's not a rule; it's a law of the game.


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> Really?!!  Ive misunderstood the rule all these years?  You can intentionally pass the ball back to the keeper for them to pick it up?  Wow!  My bad.


JaP often bypasses opportunities to educate players, coaches, referees, and fans of the game so he can make a self-righteous ass of himself - just like in this thread.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> JaP often bypasses opportunities to educate players, coaches, referees, and fans of the game so he can make a self-righteous ass of himself - just like in this thread.


Players, coaches and referees know the basics of the game and do not need education on them from me or anyone. 

Know-it-alls on the other hand . . .


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> Players, coaches and referees know the basics of the game and do not need education on them from me or anyone.
> 
> Know-it-alls on the other hand . . .


Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> Thank you for proving my point.


Right . . .


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> Right . . .



A word of advice - you apparently don't realize how big an asshole your appear to be on this forum.

Or maybe you do --


----------



## MarkM (Feb 5, 2017)

This seems to be a good source for the rule.

http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/the-ball-deliberately-kicked-to-the-goalkeeper-yet-again/


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> A word of advice - you apparently don't realize how big an asshole your appear to be on this forum.
> 
> Or maybe you do --


I have no idea why you're telling me this, or why I should care what the likes of you think.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

MarkM said:


> This seems to be a good source for the rule.
> 
> http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/the-ball-deliberately-kicked-to-the-goalkeeper-yet-again/


Thank you MarkM!  I thought I was losing my mind.  Shove that in your pie hole, JaP!


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> I have no idea why you're telling me this, or why I should care what the likes of you think.


He's telling you because it's true, and you do care. Otherwise you wouldn't respond.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> Thank you MarkM!  I thought I was losing my mind.  Shove that in your pie hole, JaP!


Tim, the person who wrote that info whose link was provided, is a good friend. I think I'll call him up and show him this just for a good laugh. 

By the way, did I remember to tell you an intentional pass can be made to the goalkeeper for the keeper to pick it up?


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> He's telling you because it's true, and you do care. Otherwise you wouldn't respond.


I still have no idea why I should care why the likes of him or you think.


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> I still have no idea why I should care why the likes of him or you think.


Of course you don't.  That's the point.


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> I have no idea why you're telling me this, or why I should care what the likes of you think.


The "likes of me" consist of most of the readers and posters on this forum.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> The "likes of me" consist of most of the readers and posters on this forum.


So?


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> Of course you don't.  That's the point.


Right . . .


----------



## espola (Feb 5, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> So?


q.e.d.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 5, 2017)

espola said:


> q.e.d.


And?


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 6, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> Tim, the person who wrote that info whose link was provided, is a good friend. I think I'll call him up and show him this just for a good laugh.
> 
> By the way, did I remember to tell you an intentional pass can be made to the goalkeeper for the keeper to pick it up?


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.


----------



## Gimpyhip (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


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.


----------



## Gimpyhip (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> Thank you MarkM!  I thought I was losing my mind.  Shove that in your pie hole, JaP!


While JAP may be officious and intentionally vague on occasion, that link appears to confirm his statements rather than refute them. Unless you use the phrase, "shove that in your pie hole" to mean  the same as, "I guess you were right" I am not sure why you are saying that.


----------



## DWickham (Feb 6, 2017)

Coaches, players and parents are often surprised when referees refer to the Spirit of the Game as a reason for a decision.  While long a part of soccer, the notion has not always been written in the law book - in part, because IFAB appears to like to remove stuff it thinks that "everyone knows."   The concept has returned in writing in the latest revision of the laws of the game.  Law 5 states that "Decisions will be made to the best of the referee's ability according to the laws of the game and the 'spirit of the game."


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 6, 2017)

Gimpyhip said:


> While JAP may be officious and intentionally vague on occasion, that link appears to confirm his statements rather than refute them. Unless you use the phrase, "shove that in your pie hole" to mean  the same as, "I guess you were right" I am not sure why you are saying that.


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.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 6, 2017)

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.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


It's not a rule.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


Oh, but it does. You are yet to learn the law.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Gimpyhip said:


> 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."
> 
> ...


Or thigh, or knee or shin.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


Of course you are.


Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


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 . . .


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 6, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> Of course you are.


You are such a douche!  You're arguing semantics.  Most understand, with the acception of you.


----------



## Kicknit22 (Feb 6, 2017)

Just a Parent said:


> 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 . . .


Doesn't change the fact that the link doesn't support your statements.  Good friend?  Laughable.  I doubt someone like you has friends.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> You are such a douche!  You're arguing semantics.  Most understand, with the acception of you.


Try again. In English this time.


----------



## Just a Parent (Feb 6, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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 said, not for everyone . . .


----------



## Gimpyhip (Feb 8, 2017)

Kicknit22 said:


> 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.


So the semantics issue is that you keep referring to it as a rule (law) against an intentional pass but it is not. It is very specific that it is a deliberate kick and a pass has nothing to do with it. That is why the other parts of the body are generally okay as using them is not kicking.


----------



## rainbow_unicorn (Feb 21, 2017)

Just reading the initial question and sounds like it was a deliberate pass to the keeper.  If player passing was past midfield and was just trying to pass to another defender behind him then how the heck did it roll 60 yards all the way back??   Sounds like refs got it right.


----------

