Rule Clarification - GK Handling

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by phatneff

Trifling or not, that isn't the question.

It SHOULD be!!! Pretty easy to remember what is indirect vs. a direct kick....Foul involving CONTACT (or attempted contact in the case of spitting, kicking, striking, etc.) is direct (including handling) except for the obscure "charge away from the ball"....which is indirect...
Non-contact fouls/Offside are indirect (including things like OS, DP, Obstruction, etc. AND administrative violations committed by a GK WITHIN his own penalty area)....
In this case, the foul involves the GK OUTSIDE his own penalty area, therefore the penalty is a DFK....

And, once again, unless previously warned OR blatantly obvious..."trifling" IMO....

[phatneff]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

It SHOULD be!!! Pretty easy to remember what is indirect vs. a direct kick....Foul involving CONTACT (or attempted contact in the case of spitting, kicking, striking, etc.) is direct (including handling) except for the obscure "charge away from the ball"....which is indirect...
Non-contact fouls/Offside are indirect (including things like OS, DP, Obstruction, etc. AND administrative violations committed by a GK WITHIN his own penalty area)....
In this case, the foul involves the GK OUTSIDE his own penalty area, therefore the penalty is a DFK....

And, once again, unless previously warned OR blatantly obvious..."trifling" IMO....

Apparently, you're not understanding my question. This isn't about remembering what's an IFK or DFK, nor is it about whether or not it should be called. The question was, because it WAS called by someone, and I tried to explain to him why it should have been a DFK instead of IFK, and him saying that he was told differently, if it was DOCUMENTED somewhere so that it could be shared with him so that he would call it correctly the next time, should he CHOOSE to do that?!?!?! Got it?

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by phatneff

Apparently, you're not understanding my question. This isn't about remembering what's an IFK or DFK, nor is it about whether or not it should be called. The question was, because it WAS called by someone, and I tried to explain to him why it should have been a DFK instead of IFK, and him saying that he was told differently, if it was DOCUMENTED somewhere so that it could be shared with him so that he would call it correctly the next time, should he CHOOSE to do that?!?!?! Got it?

Phat,
I GOT IT the first time. My points remain. When we are on the pitch, we don't have the luxury of being able to find out where it is DOCUMENTED. We have to REMEMBER it. The original reply told you where it was DOCUMENTED. In order to prevent the mistake by your partner from happening again, he or she must REMEMBER what is DOCUMENTED. Obviously you KNEW (and had already REMEMBERED) what is DOCUMENTED. Your partner had not.

Therefore, how to prevent the situation from happening again?
1. Remind referees that the penalty for this foul is very high -- make sure that the game needs this foul to be called to keep the game fair.
2. Remind referees of an easy way to remember the penalty for direct kick fouls vs. indirect kick fouls.

You continue to point out your narrow question/answer. I am merely expanding the thought process to decrease the likelihood that a similar scenario would unfold in a future contest. No more, no less.