Was this a kick

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sure it does. He blocked the pass with his hand....legal. If the foot was in the original path of the ball, and the ball still hit it after a minor deflection, I could agree with still calling a kick as the foot was put in the path of the ball and became relevant.

Where in the rule does the kicking violation say it applies only to a pass? If this pass deflected off another player's hand and then was kicked, wouldn't you be calling the violation? What difference does it make whose hand it deflected off?

The player intentionally contacted the (live) ball with his leg. Doesn't matter what it touched before that. Violation.

It sounds to me that you're ruling that this was not intentional contact: the initial attempt to kick failed, the ball deflected off his hand, and then the ball accidentally hit his leg. I'd be OK with that ruling, if that's what you're judging happened.

[tjchamp]

Originally Posted by just another ref

How do we know from the OP which of these happened?

It actually was bam bam. The hand hardly changed direction of the ball, the foot was barely behind hand at point of contact. Less than a foot away.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by tjchamp

It actually was bam bam. The hand hardly changed direction of the ball, the foot was barely behind hand at point of contact. Less than a foot away.

In that case, I'd say a kick violation is probably a good call. If it's a significant deflection, I'd lean towards no call.

[tref]

Is intentionally striking the ball with the leg the same thing as an attempt to strike the ball with leg that deflects off the hand first?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

Is intentionally striking the ball with the leg the same thing as an attempt to strike the ball with leg that deflects off the hand first?

I don't think so.

As I see it, the rule means "placing the leg in the current (or expected next, if it's jsut before the ball is released) path of the ball."

New path, as on a (anything other than minor) deflection, means the leg need to be moved again.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by tjchamp

Defender B1 reaches low, and sticks his foot out to block a pass. The ball deflects off his hand, then hits his extended foot/ankle.

I have " ".

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I have " ".

Did you mean Ø?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't think so.

As I see it, the rule means "placing the leg in the current (or expected next, if it's just before the ball is released) path of the ball."

New path, as on a (anything other than minor) deflection, means the leg need to be moved again.

I was just about to reply with more or less what bob said.....

So, what bob said.

If it has missed the hand, would it have then missed the foot? If so, no kick.