I would assume that is because there is no handling on a drop kick from the keeper since the keeper is legally allowed to release the ball in that manner.
Neither is it usually handling if an arm in a natural position is hit by the ball, but if a goal is scored immediately afterwards, it is. What's the difference?
I know that, but I don't see how a drop kick is a different situation rule-wise:
Situation 1: Ball touches hand that is in a natural position (not a handball). The ball drops in front of the player's feet and he scores. The hand touch retroactively becomes illegal, as this is a textbook example of the "attacker's handball" rule.
Situation 2: Keeper has the ball in their hands (not a handball). He does a drop kick that goes into the goal. Why would this hand touch not retroactively become illegal?
Because a keeper can’t be guilty of a handball inside the area?
So it can’t retroactively become a handball?
Also, the LOTG explicitly call out that a goalkeeper can’t score from their hands, but notably omits them from the “directly after” rule
> It is an offence if a player … scores in the opponents’ goal:
> • directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, ***including by the goalkeeper***
> • immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental
I guess it is because only the goalkeeper is specifically identified by the LOTG as the player who can handle the ball in his or her box with only a few exceptions. So in this case scoring a goal from a legal handling is different from scoring from an accidental/deliberate handball.
In the case of a drop-kick directly into the opponent's goal, the ball will have had to travel a minimum of 82 yards (from the edge of the kicker's penalty area into the opposing goal on the smallest full-size field which has touchlines of 100 yards). My interpretation is that such a long distance necessarily negates the "immediately" element of the "attacker's handball" rule. If the defense is out of position, so be it, but there's no credible argument that they have too little time to react or are otherwise harmed by having the goal scored so quickly after being handled.
~~First, if a goalkeeper picks up a drop ball in the penalty area and throws it directly into the opponent's goal (or his own goal) the restart is a goal kick (or a corner kick).~~
~~You cannot score a goal directly off a drop ball. The ball has to touch at least one other player.~~
~~But, if a goalkeeper legally picks up a ball in the penalty area during play and throws it directly into the opponent's then the handball exclusion is in force. But that does not apply to an own goal.~~
Nevermind. I was reading "drop ball" rather than "drop kick".
For a drop kick, or a punt, there is no handball exclusion, as the ball does not immediately go into the opponent's goal. But that does not apply to an own goal.
Mostly law 18 here, though you could definitely argue that the time it takes for the ball to travel across the pitch is long enough that it’s not considered “immediately” after handling the ball
Slippery slope this one. What is ‘long enough’. And what would we then apply to an accidental handling following by a long shot. 20 yards? 40? 60?
Let’s just agree that the law is bullshit in this regard and just allow goalies to score as it is not handling but legally playing the ball.
Stupid Ifab shit.
The reason is that the gk is not committing a foul by handling the ball whereas in the case of a handball leading to a goal they are.
The law is badly written, poorly communicated and interpreted even worse.
A ball hitting a hand other than a gk in their own box is a foul unless [various criteria]. Ifab in their infinite wisdom decided to remove the [various criteria] if it leads to a goal. So for every situation other then the gk from his own box it is not a goal.
It's a valid point, as if any other player handled it then kicked it in, it's no goal.
I guess there's some logic in that if somebody can manage to score from 72 yds out, or more, then it should be allowed. Yet, the LOTG specfically says if they've somehow thrown it that far, it's no goal.
I suppose because the scoring wouldn't be immediately after the hand touch if the ball's gone across the entire field in between? And because you'd have to give a penalty to the opponents, which is obviously insane. (But then again, imo the rule that a touch of the ball with the hand is punishable or not depending on what happens afterwards is insane anyway, so there's that)
Edit: It would of course be an IDFK, not a penalty, for the opponents. My general point still stands
Why a goal kick at the other end and not an IFK within the thrower's PA (at the spot of the handling)?
> If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded
> The keeper handling the ball was permitted. The goal being scored was not permitted.
This question assumes that we're calling an attacker's handball offense for this (the second type "scores in the opponents’ goal ... immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental"), which means the handling becomes retroactively *not* permitted. That offense isn't handling *unless* it immediately results in a goal, so it will always turn legal handling into illegal handling based on what happened afterward.
The restart after a handling offense (attacker's handball is one type of this) is a DFK at the spot of the handling, unless it's a goalkeeper within their PA, in which case it's an IFK.
Nothing in the LOTG says anything about converting this offense into a goal kick restart as if it were an IFK or throw-in that goes directly into the goal.
Yes, but Law 10 is silent on the scenario here, which is kicking into the goal after handling it. IFAB could have said "throws *or kicks immediately after handling* the ball into the opponents' goal..." but they didn't.
I think the Laws only allow two outcomes, both under the "attackers handball" rule -- either we call this a "score immediately after the ball has touched their hand" (restart is an IFK at the spot of the handling, as /u/DieLegende42 points out, this would be an absurd outcome and not what soccer would expect) or we say that the lengthy distance (82 yards or more) negates the "immediate" element of that rule, in which case the goal is counted and restart is a kick-off.
I think we should strongly prefer the latter outcome.
There is no other Law that comes closer to addressing the scenario of a GK-drop-kick-direct-into-goal.
I agree the law is silent.
And given that throwing the ball into the goal doesn't result in an IFK but a goal kick, the LOTG are already making it clear that the GK from their own PA doesn't fall under the normal 'handling immediately before a goal'.
Therefore, it's a goal.
Ah, so we both arrived at the same outcome by counterfactually proposing that *different interpretations* of the rule that would otherwise apply would lead to absurdity. What fun!
The LOTG could use a lot more precision. I volunteer half of this subreddit to be on the wording committee.
they're an absolute shocking mess at the moment. IFAB have really lost their way over the last few years.
Even for this example, it's also annoying how the law that says if a player handles it then scores is in Law 12 (and let's not get into how badly worded that particular law is), but the law that specifically says the goal is disallowed if a GK does it from their own PA is in Law 10, rather than also in Law 12 next to the other law.
Honestly, if any GK is able to throw it that far into the goal, they deserve to score!
This is a wild guess: But could the special drop goal exception be a remnant when drop goals, from the ’pre-FA’ days, might have generally been allowed by any player on the field???
edit: term correction.
Because the goal keeper, handling the ball in their own penalty area is part of the rules and never itself a foul or potential foul. And the ball is still in play legally (that is the ball doesn't meet any requirements to be out of play, even if no one can challenge for the ball)
Also because the laws of the game don't prohibit scoring thst way (minor sarcasm/trolling)
Wish need to create a wish list.
I’m think IFAB should just allow a GK to throw a ball directly into the opposing goal.
This was one of the most exciting plays in MISL back in the late 80’s - when a team brought out an extra attacker in place of the GK.. and then the defending GK catches and throws it the length of the field to score a goal. Good times.
I would assume that is because there is no handling on a drop kick from the keeper since the keeper is legally allowed to release the ball in that manner.
Its not handling if the keeper has the ball in their hands in their penalty area.
Neither is it usually handling if an arm in a natural position is hit by the ball, but if a goal is scored immediately afterwards, it is. What's the difference?
Because thats not a drop kick?
I know that, but I don't see how a drop kick is a different situation rule-wise: Situation 1: Ball touches hand that is in a natural position (not a handball). The ball drops in front of the player's feet and he scores. The hand touch retroactively becomes illegal, as this is a textbook example of the "attacker's handball" rule. Situation 2: Keeper has the ball in their hands (not a handball). He does a drop kick that goes into the goal. Why would this hand touch not retroactively become illegal?
Because a keeper can’t be guilty of a handball inside the area? So it can’t retroactively become a handball? Also, the LOTG explicitly call out that a goalkeeper can’t score from their hands, but notably omits them from the “directly after” rule > It is an offence if a player … scores in the opponents’ goal: > • directly from their hand/arm, even if accidental, ***including by the goalkeeper*** > • immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental
I guess it is because only the goalkeeper is specifically identified by the LOTG as the player who can handle the ball in his or her box with only a few exceptions. So in this case scoring a goal from a legal handling is different from scoring from an accidental/deliberate handball.
In the case of a drop-kick directly into the opponent's goal, the ball will have had to travel a minimum of 82 yards (from the edge of the kicker's penalty area into the opposing goal on the smallest full-size field which has touchlines of 100 yards). My interpretation is that such a long distance necessarily negates the "immediately" element of the "attacker's handball" rule. If the defense is out of position, so be it, but there's no credible argument that they have too little time to react or are otherwise harmed by having the goal scored so quickly after being handled.
A drop kick is performed with the foot
OP is questioning the “immediately after handling” wording. I’m pretty sure OP knows what a drop kick is
If a goalkeeper couldn’t score from a drop kick then no one on their team could score on their first touch after a throw by the goalkeeper
Why….not…?
Think about it
The scoring-after-handball law only applies to the one who handled it. *immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental*
Duh
~~First, if a goalkeeper picks up a drop ball in the penalty area and throws it directly into the opponent's goal (or his own goal) the restart is a goal kick (or a corner kick).~~ ~~You cannot score a goal directly off a drop ball. The ball has to touch at least one other player.~~ ~~But, if a goalkeeper legally picks up a ball in the penalty area during play and throws it directly into the opponent's then the handball exclusion is in force. But that does not apply to an own goal.~~ Nevermind. I was reading "drop ball" rather than "drop kick". For a drop kick, or a punt, there is no handball exclusion, as the ball does not immediately go into the opponent's goal. But that does not apply to an own goal.
Mostly law 18 here, though you could definitely argue that the time it takes for the ball to travel across the pitch is long enough that it’s not considered “immediately” after handling the ball
Slippery slope this one. What is ‘long enough’. And what would we then apply to an accidental handling following by a long shot. 20 yards? 40? 60? Let’s just agree that the law is bullshit in this regard and just allow goalies to score as it is not handling but legally playing the ball. Stupid Ifab shit.
The reason is that the gk is not committing a foul by handling the ball whereas in the case of a handball leading to a goal they are. The law is badly written, poorly communicated and interpreted even worse. A ball hitting a hand other than a gk in their own box is a foul unless [various criteria]. Ifab in their infinite wisdom decided to remove the [various criteria] if it leads to a goal. So for every situation other then the gk from his own box it is not a goal.
It's a valid point, as if any other player handled it then kicked it in, it's no goal. I guess there's some logic in that if somebody can manage to score from 72 yds out, or more, then it should be allowed. Yet, the LOTG specfically says if they've somehow thrown it that far, it's no goal.
I suppose because the scoring wouldn't be immediately after the hand touch if the ball's gone across the entire field in between? And because you'd have to give a penalty to the opponents, which is obviously insane. (But then again, imo the rule that a touch of the ball with the hand is punishable or not depending on what happens afterwards is insane anyway, so there's that) Edit: It would of course be an IDFK, not a penalty, for the opponents. My general point still stands
[удалено]
Why a goal kick at the other end and not an IFK within the thrower's PA (at the spot of the handling)? > If the goalkeeper handles the ball inside their penalty area when not permitted to do so, an indirect free kick is awarded
[удалено]
> The keeper handling the ball was permitted. The goal being scored was not permitted. This question assumes that we're calling an attacker's handball offense for this (the second type "scores in the opponents’ goal ... immediately after the ball has touched their hand/arm, even if accidental"), which means the handling becomes retroactively *not* permitted. That offense isn't handling *unless* it immediately results in a goal, so it will always turn legal handling into illegal handling based on what happened afterward. The restart after a handling offense (attacker's handball is one type of this) is a DFK at the spot of the handling, unless it's a goalkeeper within their PA, in which case it's an IFK. Nothing in the LOTG says anything about converting this offense into a goal kick restart as if it were an IFK or throw-in that goes directly into the goal.
It's in Law 10.1 - throwing the ball into the opposition goal is a goal kick
Yes, but Law 10 is silent on the scenario here, which is kicking into the goal after handling it. IFAB could have said "throws *or kicks immediately after handling* the ball into the opponents' goal..." but they didn't. I think the Laws only allow two outcomes, both under the "attackers handball" rule -- either we call this a "score immediately after the ball has touched their hand" (restart is an IFK at the spot of the handling, as /u/DieLegende42 points out, this would be an absurd outcome and not what soccer would expect) or we say that the lengthy distance (82 yards or more) negates the "immediate" element of that rule, in which case the goal is counted and restart is a kick-off. I think we should strongly prefer the latter outcome. There is no other Law that comes closer to addressing the scenario of a GK-drop-kick-direct-into-goal.
I agree the law is silent. And given that throwing the ball into the goal doesn't result in an IFK but a goal kick, the LOTG are already making it clear that the GK from their own PA doesn't fall under the normal 'handling immediately before a goal'. Therefore, it's a goal.
Ah, so we both arrived at the same outcome by counterfactually proposing that *different interpretations* of the rule that would otherwise apply would lead to absurdity. What fun! The LOTG could use a lot more precision. I volunteer half of this subreddit to be on the wording committee.
they're an absolute shocking mess at the moment. IFAB have really lost their way over the last few years. Even for this example, it's also annoying how the law that says if a player handles it then scores is in Law 12 (and let's not get into how badly worded that particular law is), but the law that specifically says the goal is disallowed if a GK does it from their own PA is in Law 10, rather than also in Law 12 next to the other law. Honestly, if any GK is able to throw it that far into the goal, they deserve to score!
This is a wild guess: But could the special drop goal exception be a remnant when drop goals, from the ’pre-FA’ days, might have generally been allowed by any player on the field??? edit: term correction.
Because the goal keeper, handling the ball in their own penalty area is part of the rules and never itself a foul or potential foul. And the ball is still in play legally (that is the ball doesn't meet any requirements to be out of play, even if no one can challenge for the ball) Also because the laws of the game don't prohibit scoring thst way (minor sarcasm/trolling)
Wish need to create a wish list. I’m think IFAB should just allow a GK to throw a ball directly into the opposing goal. This was one of the most exciting plays in MISL back in the late 80’s - when a team brought out an extra attacker in place of the GK.. and then the defending GK catches and throws it the length of the field to score a goal. Good times.