goal keeper pocession

[Nick Matrascia]

When is the ball considered to be in the keepers pocession...1 hand, 2 hands?

[evazz]

The answer is one hand, In my case if the goalie has any part of his/her body touching the ball ie, legs , side, back, as far as I am concern they have possesion. If the players are trying to kick the ball while goalie is trying to control, I blow the whistle and signal the goalie to punt the ball. In the eight years that I Ref Soccer I had no injury goalie.
Also if any player strikes the goalie while running in order to try to reach the ball, I immediatly yellow card, and if in my opinion it is reckless and out of control, then I red card them. This fall in the playing the player rather than the ball Rule.. hope this help

Evazz

[Rapmaster]

The goal keeper bouncing the ball is considered by FIFA to be "in possession". This really applies to the maximum 4 steps (now changed to 6 seconds) while possessing the ball in his hands.

Blowing the whistle (stopping play) and then instructing the goalie to punt the ball has no basis in the rules. If you are stopping the play because an opponent is trying to kick at the ball being held by the keeper, the proper call is "dangerous play" sanctioned by an indirect free kick for the keepers team. A caution could also be issued for unsporting behaviour, possibly a red card for serious foul play if they actually hit him (depends on situation)

Immediately yellow-carding a player who strikes the keeper running for the ball is a good idea (depending on age of players and situation) The card would be for unsporting behaviour since nothing else really applies.

Note that if both players (attacker and keeper) are within playing distance of the ball, and they make shoulder to shoulder contact with no pushing/elbows etc, there is no foul. Soccer is a contact sport, but there are limitations. By "striking" I'm assuming you mean there is an actual foul involved. In that case the red card could be given for serious foul play, if it was particulary violent or dangerous, and if a direct free kick is not punishment enough. Giving a yellow then a red is not really needed.

Just giving my opinion on, and elaborating on, what you were saying.

------------------
!

[fshrake]

In my humble oppion , if the ball is touching or seems to be touching keeper then he has possesion. As long as you ar consistent with the call on both sides of the field then you wont have a problem. I was taught this philosophy by National Referees from all over. Mostly especially inside the 6 yard line. The keeper should be a protected player, otherwise they will get hurt.

[Rapmaster]

well if he has the ball in his hands, he can't be touched since there is no way it can be a fair charge (you can't be within playing distance of the ball if its in the keepers hands...)

------------------
!

[galenm]

The instruction I have always received mirrors much of the discussion here-- the keeper is in "possession" of the ball any time that any part of his body is in contact with the ball; this includes having the ball trapped below a knee, or under an outstretched palm, when "control" is questionable

as a goalie myself in high school, I always felt that having a discrete [yes/no] decision rather than a judgment call was a good idea; consistency counts, and part of consistency is a clear guideline of fair/foul; does the keeper have protection/possession if, in handling the ball while blocking a shot, he or she "juggles" the ball, much like a wide receiver in football?? The interests of protection force us to err on behalf of the keeper, and I wholeheartedly support the notion of "any contact" as the delineator

and rapmaster is correct, once you blow the whistle for violating goalie control/possession, the restart is to be an indirect kick; sometimes this restart can be seen as a penalty-- I would much prefer that I be allowed to punt a ball out, but, unfortunately, that's not what the rules say...

[whistleblowerusa]

I know this is quite late for a response but I've only just joined and couldn't resist this one.
The correct interpretation is that the keeper is in possession when any part of his/her body is touching the ball. If a player kicks at the keeper, even if not making contact, it is not an indirect for dangerous play, it is a direct free kick. A direct free kick because the act of kicking is one of the ten offenses that require this restart. (Kicks or attempts to kick an opponent).

[Greyhound]

Would add a caviat. Any ball above the keepers head and in his hands high above his head is not reasonably playable by an opponants head, unless the keeper is 5'2". Any contact on a keeper iin this situation is also a foul. Also if you stop play to see if a keeper is injured with the ball in his hands you can just drop the ball back to him and let him punt it out. Not exactly the same thing though.

[whistleblowerusa]

I must disagree slightly on your statement. A ball is playable by any player on the field of play. The goalkeeper has no special rights to play the ball because it is in the air above his head. Any attacking player has a right to play that ball in a fair manner. If he makes some contact with the keeper in doing so, it doesn't mean that it is always a foul. Who's to say that the keeper was trying to make the contact? You must use your good judgement in this situation and not prejudge the act in your mind simply because the ball is in the keepers area.
Yes you can drop the ball infront of the keeper if play is stopped for an injury. But you must let the other team participate. Hopefully the opponent will be a good sport and just alllow the keeper to pick up the ball, but you can and will get yourself into trouble if you jsut include the keeper on the drop and not ask for the opponent to join.

[Greyhound]

1)If a goal keeper is 6'00" tall and his arms extend another 2 feet above his head AND he can jump another 2 feet in the air he can take a ball from about 10 feet. No forward can jump that high with his head and touch the ball. If he cant reasonably get the ball he isnt PLAYING The ball and is commiting a foul. This isnt givng the keeper any "special"considerations it is recognizing that a field player has limitations that the keepers dont. They will tryy to limit them by fouling. If you arent looking for this you are missing a big part of the game.
2)You dont have to let ANYBODY participate in drop balls. The technique I discribed is common practice. Basic football officiating. If you HOPE that the attacking team lets the ball go to the keeper you are setting yourself up for failure and digging the proverbial hole.

[whistleblowerusa]

I will not argue with you, mainly because you will want the last word. If you read the whole post when they are posted you might understand the post itself.
I never said you needed two opposing players for the drop ball, I said the opponents have a right to participate in that drop ball. You can not exclude them if they want to participate, period. Most players will honor the situation and allow the keeper to pick up the ball. But, if you just drop the ball without inviting an opponent to take part, you my friend, most certainly setting yourself up for problems. You are not a coach nor a teammate of these players and can't act like one. You are there to enforce the Laws and keep the playing field level by making sure that the Laws of the Game are followed. YOU can't bend them to fit your own needs.

[Art N]

"But, if you just drop the ball without inviting an opponent to take part, you my friend, most certainly setting yourself up for problems"

I agree with those who feel that a drop WITHOUT the opponents is warranted in these sp[ecial situations. If you're stopping the play for injury and a clear team control is present, or you couldn't/didn't wait for the ball to kicked away or out of bounds, then this certinly seems to fit into the SPIRIT of the game.

[whistleblowerusa]

Sure in the spirit of the game but the opponent must be allow to participate. There are things you can say to help them choose the sporting thing to do while still staying nuetral, but they must be allowed to take part. If you drop the ball and a player comes running up in a reasonable amount of time and isn't allowed to particiapte you are setting up a definite grounds for protest. Something I say is , "when I was still playing and something like this happened we used to let the keeper pick up the ball, right?" This doesn't tell them what to do directly only suggests the sporting thing to do.
What if it were the attacking team who had the ball and a defender went down on an injury inside the penalty area? Would you just drop the ball without a defender or the keeper? What if they score on the drop ball without the defender taking part? Ok this isn't the same situation but the thinking should be consistent.
The Laws doesn't say that both opponents need to participate, but both opponents have a right to take part.
You can not make that decision for either team or player.
Respect the game and have the players respect the game. Believe in the players more and they will do the right thing. 99% of the time they will do something sporting in this situation.

[Greyhound]

Just want to get another word in(hopefully not the last)

1)If I am bending the rules to aid the spirit of the game, YOU are bending the rules by saying both teams must participate. The laws dont say that, you do.

2) If any team protested the decision to drop the ball to the keeper(they havent yet and Ive done it many times) I would first of all expect any league administratio to deny a protest offhand second of all I would defend it effectively much as I have here. ONCE AGAIN this doesnt matter in the big scheme of things. It isnt going to affect the outcome of the game.

3)If you expect the players to do whats right I encourage you to review the tape of the most recent UEFA cup final and the Arsenal game from last year where a goal was scored from a sporting throwin to the keeper. We cant force an outcome but we can do what is available to us within limits.

4. This is such a common practice (dropping the ball to the keeper)I am incredulous that you havent heard of it before.

5. to compare a dropped ball in the penalty area for injury to the defending goalkeeper to injury for an attacker is comparing apples to oranges. We must tailor our decisions to fit the situation. NOBODY calls everything the same way.

[whistleblowerusa]

Once again you haven't read the post correctly and base your comments on what you thought you read.
Of course the Laws don't say that both opponents must participate, it doesn't even say any players must participate. Just drop the ball, but you can't leave out the opposing player if he/she wants to participate. By dropping the ball without inviting both players to take part is wrong and against the spirit of the laws. You are changing the outcome by dropping it to the keeper Yes it is common practice but that doesn't make it correct. You can't force a player to be a good sport about this but 99% of the time it will be that way. You show no faith in the game nor it's players and feel that you must control the play because the players won't play the way you want them to. Go ahead and keep doing things the way you are, close your mind to the game and others. It will turn around and bite you in the butt one day. Keep thinking that you are correct all the time. Players, coaches, spectators and officials love that.
Good bye here too!!!