DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 93791--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: bmb
Date: August 3, 2025, 5:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JCFC link ---
>
> I am not well-versed in current football law, as many referees
would gladly attest. It may be, therefore, that there are simple
answers to the silly queries below, but the Stentorian Ex-ref
could not give me an answer.
>
> For the last-minute corner, the Frickley keeper came to join
the attack, taking off his cap and dropping it in the Brighouse
half
> Very sensible and nothinng untoward occurred. However some
keepers are not always sensible.
>
> If a keeper did not remove his cap and somehow "nebbed" (used
the peak) the ball into the net, would a goal be allowed?
>
> Alternatively if the cap accidentally fell off or was knocked
off, a deflection leading to a goal?
>
> Or in the "sensible" scenario, if the ball was cleared and
struck the cap that the keeper had discarded, what would be the
verdict? Cricket has a five run penalty, but that could not work
in football.
>
> All very unlikely situations, but one day, somewhere...
>
>
--- End Quote ---
I've put that to my IFAB man, who loves it when I send him
obscure questions! Seriously loves it!
#Post#: 93793--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: August 4, 2025, 3:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: aaa link ---
>
> [quote author=JCFC link=topic=7047.msg93785#msg93785
date=1754254302]
> I am not well-versed in current football law, as many referees
would gladly attest. It may be, therefore, that there are simple
answers to the silly queries below, but the Stentorian Ex-ref
could not give me an answer.
>
> For the last-minute corner, the Frickley keeper came to join
the attack, taking off his cap and dropping it in the Brighouse
half
> Very sensible and nothinng untoward occurred. However some
keepers are not always sensible.
>
> If a keeper did not remove his cap and somehow "nebbed" (used
the peak) the ball into the net, would a goal be allowed?
>
> Alternatively if the cap accidentally fell off or was knocked
off, a deflection leading to a goal?
>
> Or in the "sensible" scenario, if the ball was cleared and
struck the cap that the keeper had discarded, what would be the
verdict? Cricket has a five run penalty, but that could not work
in football.
>
> All very unlikely situations, but one day, somewhere...
>
--- End Quote ---
Very interesting an great questions which is making my head spin
:)
The only answer I can think of is that Law 4 allows goalkeepers'
caps so therefore, it is part of the game. Same as protective
equipment, such as players headgear, facemasks, knee and arm
protectors.
This is the only conclusion I can come up with but I'm sure some
with vast knowledge of the Law will come up with the alternative
answer.
[/quote]
I am no great expert in the Laws but I do concur in part. If the
goalkeeper were to stop the ball going into his own net by it
striking the peak of his cap and deflecting over the bar, then
that would be entirely legal I believe since Law 4 allows for a
goalkeeper to wear a cap. Presuming the Law is not specific as
to in which part of the field of play the goalkeeper may wear
the cap ( eg only in his own penalty area ) therefore it should
make no difference, in Law, if the goalkeeper were up in the
other penalty area, where he is allowed to be, and the ball
strikes the cap peak and a goal is scored.
Where I would be less certain is the cap discarded on the field
of play where it surely becomes an external and extraneous
object once it is no longer on the head and therefore fulfilling
its original purpose. Is a cap still a cap when no longer worn ?
We delve into Platonic speculation here. Is it the construction
or the usage which defines it ? What do the Laws say about
extraneous objects on the field of play ( the case of a balloon
in years past might be pertinent here ) ?
A splendid poser, worthy of A P Herbert's 'Misleading Cases'
#Post#: 93796--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: slimref
Date: August 4, 2025, 4:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Firstly on law: As long as the GK uses the cap within the area
its an extension of his arm and therefore legal within law. As
pointed out as part of players equipment its legal.
I recall a game at step 5 where a defender lost a boot in a
tackle and then threw said boot at the ball before a shot to put
off said shot was sent off for DOGSO as the boot became extended
use of the arm (thrown by hand). This was sent through the
channels to IFAB and backed the decision of the referee.
Back to the usage of the forum, as a coach on CORE and other
programmes, I take great interest in reading the posts for
current, future and former coachees whom I have interest in -
one former members of my coaching alumini you've already visited
this year. I have previously used 2 examples of observations in
my coaching chats so rest assured whilst I do not contirbute
much, I am a keen reader for input offline. Appreciate the
efforts and yes echo further contributions would be welcome.
#Post#: 93798--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: JCFC
Date: August 4, 2025, 4:16 am
---------------------------------------------------------
How splendid to have Whistleblower's legal opinion - and free of
charge! Perhaps he did not wish to be the recipient of a
negotiable cow. His verdict rather agrees with my own, in my
case based on very little. I take it that if a keeper held his
cap in his hand and reached up to tap the ball into the net, it
would count as an extension of his arm and be treated as
handball.
After posting, I too was reminded of Misleading Cases at the
thought of "When is a cap not a cap?" This was a rare example
of a television series living up to Herbert's written version.
The thought of a benevolent Alastair Simpson as the smiling
arbiter of goalkeeper Roy Dotrice's twinkling legal footwork in
some celestial court still raises a smile.
As the Houghton Weavers sang - they don't write them like that
anymore.
#Post#: 93803--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: August 4, 2025, 7:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: slimref link ---
>
> Firstly on law: As long as the GK uses the cap within the area
its an extension of his arm and therefore legal within law. As
pointed out as part of players equipment its legal.
>
> I recall a game at step 5 where a defender lost a boot in a
tackle and then threw said boot at the ball before a shot to put
off said shot was sent off for DOGSO as the boot became extended
use of the arm (thrown by hand). This was sent through the
channels to IFAB and backed the decision of the referee.
>
> Back to the usage of the forum, as a coach on CORE and other
programmes, I take great interest in reading the posts for
current, future and former coachees whom I have interest in -
one former members of my coaching alumini you've already visited
this year. I have previously used 2 examples of observations in
my coaching chats so rest assured whilst I do not contirbute
much, I am a keen reader for input offline. Appreciate the
efforts and yes echo further contributions would be welcome.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am puzzled as to why the cap should be an extension of the arm
rather than an extension of the head. If it is indeed an
extension of the arm then a goal scored using it in the
opponents' goal would surely not be deemed legal as the
goalkeeper may only use his arm in his own penalty area. As an
extension of the head it is absolutely fine to use it anywhere
on the field of play.
#Post#: 93804--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: August 4, 2025, 7:50 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JCFC link ---
>
> How splendid to have Whistleblower's legal opinion - and free
of charge! Perhaps he did not wish to be the recipient of a
negotiable cow. His verdict rather agrees with my own, in my
case based on very little. I take it that if a keeper held his
cap in his hand and reached up to tap the ball into the net, it
would count as an extension of his arm and be treated as
handball.
>
> After posting, I too was reminded of Misleading Cases at the
thought of "When is a cap not a cap?" This was a rare example
of a television series living up to Herbert's written version.
The thought of a benevolent Alastair Simpson as the smiling
arbiter of goalkeeper Roy Dotrice's twinkling legal footwork in
some celestial court still raises a smile.
>
> As the Houghton Weavers sang - they don't write them like that
anymore.
>
--- End Quote ---
The wonderful Alastair Sim surely rather than Simpson
#Post#: 93805--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: August 4, 2025, 7:55 am
---------------------------------------------------------
If the goalkeeper were to punch holes in the cap and thread his
fingers through them then surely it would become a glove. I
favour the definition of usage over form.
Such arguments may seem very pedantic but some quite lucrative
patent law cases have plumbed even more ridiculous depths than
this !
#Post#: 93807--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: JCFC
Date: August 4, 2025, 8:28 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> [quote author=JCFC link=topic=7047.msg93798#msg93798
date=1754298962]
> How splendid to have Whistleblower's legal opinion - and free
of charge! Perhaps he did not wish to be the recipient of a
negotiable cow. His verdict rather agrees with my own, in my
case based on very little. I take it that if a keeper held his
cap in his hand and reached up to tap the ball into the net, it
would count as an extension of his arm and be treated as
handball.
>
> After posting, I too was reminded of Misleading Cases at the
thought of "When is a cap not a cap?" This was a rare example
of a television series living up to Herbert's written version.
The thought of a benevolent Alastair Simpson as the smiling
arbiter of goalkeeper Roy Dotrice's twinkling legal footwork in
some celestial court still raises a smile.
>
> As the Houghton Weavers sang - they don't write them like that
anymore.
>
--- End Quote ---
The wonderful Alastair Sim surely rather than Simpson
[/quote]
Of course. Why this silly device has never heard of Alastair
Sim, I can understand, but why does it feel the need to add an
unwanted pson? More fool me for trusting it and not checking.
#Post#: 93808--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: JCFC
Date: August 4, 2025, 8:39 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Whistleblower link ---
>
> [quote author=slimref link=topic=7047.msg93796#msg93796
date=1754298279]
> Firstly on law: As long as the GK uses the cap within the area
its an extension of his arm and therefore legal within law. As
pointed out as part of players equipment its legal.
>
> I recall a game at step 5 where a defender lost a boot in a
tackle and then threw said boot at the ball before a shot to put
off said shot was sent off for DOGSO as the boot became extended
use of the arm (thrown by hand). This was sent through the
channels to IFAB and backed the decision of the referee.
>
> Back to the usage of the forum, as a coach on CORE and other
programmes, I take great interest in reading the posts for
current, future and former coachees whom I have interest in -
one former members of my coaching alumini you've already visited
this year. I have previously used 2 examples of observations in
my coaching chats so rest assured whilst I do not contirbute
much, I am a keen reader for input offline. Appreciate the
efforts and yes echo further contributions would be welcome.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am puzzled as to why the cap should be an extension of the arm
rather than an extension of the head. If it is indeed an
extension of the arm then a goal scored using it in the
opponents' goal would surely not be deemed legal as the
goalkeeper may only use his arm in his own penalty area. As an
extension of the head it is absolutely fine to use it anywhere
on the field of play.
[/quote]
I take it that slimref was not meaning (as I was) that the
attacking keeper had kept his cap on.
I am more puzzled as to which of his protégés I have seen this
year. I think I recall his home ( unless it is the gentleman
with the same name that I saw at Rutherglen) and have struggled
to find a referee from that area seen this year.
#Post#: 93811--------------------------------------------------
Re: Pyramid Patrol 2025/26
DIR By: Whistleblower
Date: August 4, 2025, 9:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: JCFC link ---
>
> [quote author=Whistleblower link=topic=7047.msg93803#msg93803
date=1754311642]
> [quote author=slimref link=topic=7047.msg93796#msg93796
date=1754298279]
> Firstly on law: As long as the GK uses the cap within the area
its an extension of his arm and therefore legal within law. As
pointed out as part of players equipment its legal.
>
> I recall a game at step 5 where a defender lost a boot in a
tackle and then threw said boot at the ball before a shot to put
off said shot was sent off for DOGSO as the boot became extended
use of the arm (thrown by hand). This was sent through the
channels to IFAB and backed the decision of the referee.
>
> Back to the usage of the forum, as a coach on CORE and other
programmes, I take great interest in reading the posts for
current, future and former coachees whom I have interest in -
one former members of my coaching alumini you've already visited
this year. I have previously used 2 examples of observations in
my coaching chats so rest assured whilst I do not contirbute
much, I am a keen reader for input offline. Appreciate the
efforts and yes echo further contributions would be welcome.
>
--- End Quote ---
I am puzzled as to why the cap should be an extension of the arm
rather than an extension of the head. If it is indeed an
extension of the arm then a goal scored using it in the
opponents' goal would surely not be deemed legal as the
goalkeeper may only use his arm in his own penalty area. As an
extension of the head it is absolutely fine to use it anywhere
on the field of play.
[/quote]
I take it that slimref was not meaning (as I was) that the
attacking keeper had kept his cap on.
I am more puzzled as to which of his protégés I have seen this
year. I think I recall his home ( unless it is the gentleman
with the same name that I saw at Rutherglen) and have struggled
to find a referee from that area seen this year.
[/quote]
Ah yes, I now understand that slimref was responding to your
point about using the cap in the hand ( a Cap of Maintenance as
it were ) thus stating that the only place the cap, held in
hand, could legally be used, as an extension of the arm, is the
goalkeeper's own penalty area. The cap worn on, and so
presumably an extension of, the head may be used anywhere on the
field of play. Thus Their Lordships have agreed without
dissension. We await to see whether the Supreme Court, in the
person of bmb, takes a view.
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 52
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page