Bristol Rovers G/Keeper Yellow card

[SimonRav]

I know it was a while ago but there was so much confusion (including mine) over whether the keeper for deliberately handling the ball outside of his area should have got a red or yellow card. I e-mailed Graham Poll in the Daily Mail and this was his response:
Thanks for your question.
The answer is, as usual, it depends.
When a GK comes out of his area then he should be treated as a normal outfield player.
Therefore if he deliberately handles the ball and it is deemed unsporting he should be cautioned.
If it denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity then he should be sent off. If there are covering defenders who the referee feels mean that the hand ball did not deny the opportunity then he should not be sent off.
Hope that's clear and note no reference to last man as it does not appear in Law!

Kind regards,

Graham

 

[Shrimper2thecore]

That's still rather vague, still a red card for me

 

[fredheim_holm]

Deliberate handballs surely should be a sending off. Can I just pick up the ball and run throw it off the pitch and get a yellow?

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Surely has to be a red card, wasn't like it just hit him, he even dived for it.

 

[Blue_Shrimper1959]

Wouldn't pay too much attention to Graham Poll. He'd probably have sent the keeper off but kept him on the pitch.

 

[Basildon Blue]

i thought that it could have been a goal. Clear red card for me.

 

[RobM]

Graham Poll is a decent bloke. He took the time and trouble to reply as well.

 

[Blue_Shrimper1959]

Graham Poll is a decent bloke. He took the time and trouble to reply as well.

Not questioning the man at all, it's good to see another point of view in the media these days (dermot gallagher is another example). Just a tongue in cheek comment on some of the very controversial decisions he's made during his career. :whistling:

 

[londonblue]

Deliberate handballs surely should be a sending off. Can I just pick up the ball and run throw it off the pitch and get a yellow?

I think you need to read the laws of the game regarding a direct free kick:-

A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following three offences:

• 
  holds an opponent

• 
  spits at an opponent

• 
  handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)

i.e. for an offence to be committed the handball has to be deliberate. There is no distinction between deliberate and not. Not all handballs are straight red cards.

Moreover, the sending off offences section says this:-

A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off if he commits any of the following seven offences:

• 
  ...

• 
  denying an opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball.

• 
  ...

The debate therefore isn't whether or not the hand ball was deliberate. The debate is whether or not it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity. From where I was in the ground it was impossible to say one way or the other. As much as I would like it to have been a sending off, it is difficult to say we were denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity...

 

[Mick]

I know it was a while ago but there was so much confusion (including mine) over whether the keeper for deliberately handling the ball outside of his area should have got a red or yellow card. I e-mailed Graham Poll in the Daily Mail and this was his response:
Thanks for your question.
The answer is, as usual, it depends.
When a GK comes out of his area then he should be treated as a normal outfield player.
Therefore if he deliberately handles the ball and it is deemed unsporting he should be cautioned.
If it denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity then he should be sent off. If there are covering defenders who the referee feels mean that the hand ball did not deny the opportunity then he should not be sent off.
Hope that's clear and note no reference to last man as it does not appear in Law!

Kind regards,

Graham

Wow, that's a relief, Graham agrees with me !

http://www.shrimperzone.com/vb/showthread.php?t=48631

On second thoughts ......

 

[Mick]

That's still rather vague, still a red card for me

I thought we'd done this to death, but obviously not.

The Law is not vague. What is "vague" is whether it was an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. The referee thought not.

 

[ldnfatso]

I know it was a while ago but there was so much confusion (including mine) over whether the keeper for deliberately handling the ball outside of his area should have got a red or yellow card. I e-mailed Graham Poll in the Daily Mail and this was his response:
Thanks for your question.
The answer is, as usual, it depends.
When a GK comes out of his area then he should be treated as a normal outfield player.
Therefore if he deliberately handles the ball and it is deemed unsporting he should be cautioned.
If it denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity then he should be sent off. If there are covering defenders who the referee feels mean that the hand ball did not deny the opportunity then he should not be sent off.
Hope that's clear and note no reference to last man as it does not appear in Law!

Kind regards,

Graham

This is from an idiot that shows 3 yellows before a red at the World Cup! Red in my view!

 

[Sean 2]

"The debate therefore isn't whether or not the hand ball was deliberate. The debate is whether or not it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity. From where I was in the ground it was impossible to say one way or the other. As much as I would like it to have been a sending off, it is difficult to say we were denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity... "



As others have stated who were in line with Dougie's shot, including myself, that bugger was flying into the net and no way would there have been a covering defender!!

 

[Suffolk Blue]

I'd love to let this lie, but...

Surely a ball being played into the goalmouth where there are attacking players (there were some Southend players there weren't there, or is my memory playing up.. again) and the goalie is not able to play any part in the proceedings must be an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Personally, I'd regard any ball being played in the direction of attacking players in the penalty box as a goal scoring opportunity.

I'd be interested to know what the assessment report said about this incident, as well as some of the others for that matter.

 

[C'mon you Shrimpers]

I would be a good example for discussion at the ref school if they have one. I bet almost all would think it was 100% red. After all why would the keeper in effect make a save 10 yards out of his box if he didn't think the ball was going in the direction of the net.

Get him orrrrffff ref. :)

 

[Mick]

I'd love to let this lie, but...

Surely a ball being played into the goalmouth where there are attacking players (there were some Southend players there weren't there, or is my memory playing up.. again) and the goalie is not able to play any part in the proceedings must be an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Personally, I'd regard any ball being played in the direction of attacking players in the penalty box as a goal scoring opportunity.

I'd be interested to know what the assessment report said about this incident, as well as some of the others for that matter.

You've left out the key word - "obvious" in your second paragraph. Not just a goal scoring opportunity but an obvious goal scoring opportunity. The Laws give no guidance as to what constitutes "obvious". For me, it's a goal is more likely than not. However it is not an exact science and like so many things, it's down to the referee's opinion and interpretation during the split second he has to make his decision.

 

[Mick]

Graham Poll is a decent bloke. He took the time and trouble to reply as well.

If you sent it to the Daily Mail address, he's paid to deal with it.

 

[Mick]

Not questioning the man at all, it's good to see another point of view in the media these days (dermot gallagher is another example). Just a tongue in cheek comment on some of the very controversial decisions he's made during his career. :whistling:

Dermot Gallagher is an active assessor and his responses therefore tend towards the bland and defensive. Poll and Jeff Winter on the other hand are trying to eke a living out of their previous careers.

 

[londonblue]

"The debate therefore isn't whether or not the hand ball was deliberate. The debate is whether or not it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity. From where I was in the ground it was impossible to say one way or the other. As much as I would like it to have been a sending off, it is difficult to say we were denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity... "



As others have stated who were in line with Dougie's shot, including myself, that bugger was flying into the net and no way would there have been a covering defender!!

That indeed is the debate, and your view was obviously better than mine. If that really is the case then it would have to be red. However, again in fairness to the ref, there were a number of players (from both teams) between the 'keeper and the goal, so could it be said with absolute certainty that the ball would have ended up in the back of the net?

Your view was better than mine, so I would accept your opinion. (Although, let's be honest, the only neutral in this equation is the ref!)

 

[Suffolk Blue]

You've left out the key word - "obvious" in your second paragraph. Not just a goal scoring opportunity but an obvious goal scoring opportunity. The Laws give no guidance as to what constitutes "obvious". For me, it's a goal is more likely than not. However it is not an exact science and like so many things, it's down to the referee's opinion and interpretation during the split second he has to make his decision.

Mick, I left the word out intentionally in order to differentiate between the fact that a ball played into the box is a goalscoring opportunity, and that this opportunity is even more obvious when the goalie isn't there to defend it. Also, isn't this a case where the ref can actually consider his response to an action rather than have to make a split-second decision.

... again in fairness to the ref, there were a number of players (from both teams) between the 'keeper and the goal, so could it be said with absolute certainty that the ball would have ended up in the back of the net?

Which gives us yet another interpretation of what "an obvious goalscoring opportunity" means.

What is blatantly obvious, is that this law is very poorly worded if it's aim is to provide an unambiguous definition of the lawmaker's intent; or marvellously well written if the whole idea was to allow referees to make up their own minds on a case by case basis. Assuming the ref saw the offence, it appears he could have given a free kick, yellow card, or red card, and all of these responses would have been in accordance with the law. As football fans, all we want to know is that, if Mildenhall committed exactly the same offence next Saturday, he'd only get a Yellow; I suspect not.