A question for refs

[stedders]

Embarrassed to say I am even asking this question, but here goes:

If a goalkeeper has his feet clearly inside the penalty area, but his hands (with the ball) are outside the area; does that constitute handball?

 

[rebus]

Yes. It's the ball that counts.

 

[Montreal Bee]

I think it does.

If the keeper's facing the goal with his feet on/in front of the line, but the ball he's holding is over the line then it's a goal.

Would have thought the same principal applies for handball at the edge of the box.

 

[Aberdeen flyer]

Embarrassed to say I am even asking this question, but here goes:

If a goalkeeper has his feet clearly inside the penalty area, but his hands (with the ball) are outside the area; does that constitute handball?

In a word..yes..the keeper can have any part of his body outside the box as long as his hands (presumably holding the ball) are inside the area.

But if his feet are planted in the area but his hands are outside it becomes a handball ofeence if he touches the ball with his hands.

 

[Les Beeavinu]

Didn't we have a similar incident with an opposition goalkeeper last season? Anyone?

 

[Edmundo]

It's definitely where the ball is that matters.

 

[Banana]

Embarrassed to say I am even asking this question, but here goes:

If a goalkeeper has his feet clearly inside the penalty area, but his hands (with the ball) are outside the area; does that constitute handball?

Credibility? What credibility!

 

[murphalot]

yep handball

 

[stedders]

I suppose the answer is glaringly obvious:

The incident I had in mind was in the second half of yesterday's game against Brighton when the goalie appeared to stretch outside of the area to claim the ball. This was on the New Road side of the penalty area.

If the example had been for the goalie to reach across the goaline to attempt to stop the ball crossing the line, then it would obviously have been a goal, irrespective of where the goalie stood, so yes the answer should have been obvious.

And I am a fool!

 

[difford]

Kirkland did it today in Wigan's game as well.

Yet in rugby the opposite applies - if you have long arms or jump, you can catch a ball a yard over the touchline and as long as neither feet are touching the ground on or over the line you have kept it in play.

Ditto cricket - where you can lean over a boundry rope to make a catch as long as you dont touch it.

Shows what silly games they are.

 

[TW1Bee]

As opposed to rugby and basketball where you can be in possesion of the ball inside of the line but if you step on or over the line then its out of play.

 

[Youngbee2]

What about this, a play is running towards the goal, and is bought down on the edge of the area, but he has just pushed the ball in front of him, so the balls in the box like this
---|---
--x|o--
---| ---

Penalty or Freekick?

 

[WisBee]

What about this, a play is running towards the goal, and is bought down on the edge of the area, but he has just pushed the ball in front of him, so the balls in the box like this
---|---
--x|o--
---| ---

Penalty or Freekick?

...............if it is at Old Trafford, and ManU are attacking, then it is a penalty............if the opposing team are attacking, then the attacker gets a yellow for diving...............

 

[Youngbee2]

Thanks for that

 

[WisBee]

..............you're welcome.........I'm happy to contribute to your education........

 

[Boston Bee]

Free kick. The player was fouled, not the ball so his position is all.

Penalty or Freekick?

 

[beesbeesbarmyarmy]

I suppose the answer is glaringly obvious:

The incident I had in mind was in the second half of yesterday's game against Brighton when the goalie appeared to stretch outside of the area to claim the ball. This was on the New Road side of the penalty area.

If the example had been for the goalie to reach across the goaline to attempt to stop the ball crossing the line, then it would obviously have been a goal, irrespective of where the goalie stood, so yes the answer should have been obvious.

And I am a fool!

I remember the incident. The whole Braemar side appealed but those of us on the New Road Side could see the ball was clearly inside the area. Correct decision in the end.

 

[Matty D]

I remember the incident. The whole Braemar side appealed but those of us on the New Road Side could see the ball was clearly inside the area. Correct decision in the end.

Yeah, from the left side of Brook Rd it was clear he just managed to keep it in the area. Close though.

 

[emel bee]

also worth remembering its the whole of the ball over the whole of the line

 

[jay1310]

Embarrassed to say I am even asking this question, but here goes:

If a goalkeeper has his feet clearly inside the penalty area, but his hands (with the ball) are outside the area; does that constitute handball?

:yes: but only when all of the ball is over the line!

With regards to the incident on Saturday the ball was not over the line so not a handball!

 

[bees78]

Yes. It's the ball that counts.

:yes: Definately handball.

 

[wanderer paul]

Kuipers didn't take the ball when it was outside the penalty area......he took in inside......i was directly behind the incident on Brook Road terrace.......if he did get it from outside the box there would've been a load of shouts from us!

 

[pompeybee]

Since we don't have a separate thread on this, could I just take this opportunity to say what a fine job Keith Hill did as ref on Saturday. Offhand I can't think of anything he got seriously wrong, and overall a pretty frantic match went off very well. I liked the way he did Mayo for persistent foul play, giving him a verbal warning after about three, then yellow, then red - so he had no excuses for not knowing what was coming to him. Seemed to be more handshakes than usual between both teams and officials at the end, which is a good sign.

 

[RodBee]

Since we don't have a separate thread on this, could I just take this opportunity to say what a fine job Keith Hill did as ref on Saturday. Offhand I can't think of anything he got seriously wrong, and overall a pretty frantic match went off very well. I liked the way he did Mayo for persistent foul play, giving him a verbal warning after about three, then yellow, then red - so he had no excuses for not knowing what was coming to him. Seemed to be more handshakes than usual between both teams and officials at the end, which is a good sign.

I think that he has always reffed well in our matches.

It is a change for me to say that about a ref!!!!

 

[jay1310]

Since we don't have a separate thread on this, could I just take this opportunity to say what a fine job Keith Hill did as ref on Saturday. Offhand I can't think of anything he got seriously wrong, and overall a pretty frantic match went off very well. I liked the way he did Mayo for persistent foul play, giving him a verbal warning after about three, then yellow, then red - so he had no excuses for not knowing what was coming to him. Seemed to be more handshakes than usual between both teams and officials at the end, which is a good sign.

He was certainly one of the better ones I have seen this season...... still a couple of strange decisions though.... but overall a lot better than some of the other garbage I have witnessed so far this season!!!!

 

[bees78]

What about this, a play is running towards the goal, and is bought down on the edge of the area, but he has just pushed the ball in front of him, so the balls in the box like this
---|---
--x|o--
---| ---

Penalty or Freekick?

Freekick everytime. It's where the foul/infrigment took place, not where the ball is or where the player lands

 

[LboroBee]

Freekick everytime. It's where the foul/infrigment took place, not where the ball is or where the player lands

shame the ref in 2001, auto windscreen final, v Port Vale didnt know those rules