"Obstructing the view of the goalie"

[phatneff]

In a high school regional semi-final game (Div. I in Ohio, big schools), I was told that a goal was called back after much deliberation due to a player "obstructing the view of the goalie". Apparently, this was in the midst of normal play and there were about 10-12 players in the penalty area. Given, I don't know the full facts, but this is my opinion of the call:

There is no such foul as "obstructing the view of the goalie" unless it involves a player in the offside position, so the call would be Offside. A goalie can also be "obstructed", but that is during a set play, such as a corner kick or a direct/indirect kick. If a player obstructs the goalie from his/her attempt to get the ball, without he/she him/herself going to play the ball, then "obstruction" is the call. If in the midst of play, the goalie is shielded by players and a goal is scored, it is an incorrect call for it to be called "obstructing the view of the goalie" unless the player was in an offside position. There should have been no call and the goal allowed.

Can I get some clarification on this? Nevadaref?

[CecilOne]

There is no special rule about obstructing the keeper, just the same as obstructing anyone else.
The keeper is protected while in "possession" of the ball.

[Nevadaref]

phatneff,
If you would change "without he/she him/herself going to play the ball" to "without he/she him/herself being within playing distance of the ball", then I would agree with your post 100%.

You understand the line of sight concept properly. It only applies to a player in the offside position and would fall under interfering with an opponent.

The best example is the US v. Italy game in the 2006 World Cup. FIFA put out a paper stating that the offside call against Brian McBride for blocking the goalkeeper's line of sight, even though he did not touch the ball, was the proper decision.

[phatneff]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

phatneff,
If you would change "without he/she him/herself going to play the ball" to "without he/she him/herself being within playing distance of the ball", then I would agree with your post 100%.

That's actually what I meant. Mind was ahead of my fingers.

[BCer]

The description isn't really enough to figure out what the call was.

Most likely was an attacker in an offside position who blocked the keeper's view of a shot on net. Very difficult call to make (takes a very well positioned ref and a very knowledgeable one), but definitely a correct call if the circumstances fit.

The only other one I can think of is actually impeding the goal keeper from getting to the ball. I've only called this on set plays - corners or FK from deep areas near the corner. It tends to be obvious what the attacker is try to do if the keeper moves around (if the keeper is stationary, then it is almost impossible to call). I can't imagine calling impeding if this was not a set play.

[Sylverwyng]

The other use of the obstruction foul is when the offensive player stands in front of a goalkeeper during a free kick, and throws his hands up in the air. There is no reason for a players hands to be in the air as an offensive player, ever, and doing so is ONLY good to block the view of the goalie from the shot. I have had this called against players trying to impede my line of sight, and I have had referees tell me there is no such call. So, it may be a judgement call on the part of the officials.