The Mail Bag
The Laws of The Game Part 2: Jagielka's Back Pass
Comments (24)
There have been a few comments here and in the media about Jagielka?s wonderful goal line clearance against West Brom along the lines of ?it didn?t go backwards therefore it wasn?t a back pass to the goalkeeper?.
However, ?backwards? doesn?t come into it. The Law is:
"An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own penalty area? touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate."
But then I?m sure you all knew that anyway.
In Jagielka?s case, I guess the referee didn?t think he had the necessary skill to contrive such a beautiful little chip to Howard!
Yours anally,
Ben Dyson, Posted 03/03/2009 at 18:20:52
Comments
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
If that was a deliberate pass to Howard, it?s the best bit of ball juggling since Maradona?s (sleight of) Hand of God act.
Regardless of the bloody direction the ball went it was obviously NOT a deliberate pass to the goalie! It was actually quite a bit of fantastic defensive work....to be expected from Jags!
And what enabled Jags to perform this outrageous piece of skill on the goal line was his almost uncanny ability to anticipate events and be in the right place at the right time. Which is really why he is such an awesome defender.
Jags did all he could have done in the situation: get his foot on the ball asap to stop it going over the line. And did it brilliantly. Howard was fortunately in the right place to collect.
If he’d have tried to hoof it away then by the time he’d got any backlift in his leg the ball would have been in the back of the net. It was extremely quick thinking and bloody skilful into the bargain.
If he’d have tried to hoof it away then by the time he’d got any backlift in his leg the ball would have been in the back of the net. It was extremely quick thinking and bloody skilful into the bargain.
That was brilliant from Jags but what sort of attempt was it from Osman to head the ball? If Jags hadn’t have cleared it I’d be fuming with Osman.
It should have been an indirect free-kick on the goal-line. What fun that would have been!
Trevor, if the ref had deemed it a ?back pass? and awarded an indirect free kick, I think the minimum distance from the goal line it could be taken from is 10 yards; if I?m wrong, I'm sure Ben will clear it up. ;)
Ben, what is the point of this post exactly?
Lee Smith: six-yard line. That is the closest to the goal line that a free kick can be given (attacking or defending team). Any free-kick given closer to the goal-line than that can be taken from the six-yard line.
And before anyone says "but the players won?t be able to get back ten yards!" ? the goal-line in this instance provides the edge of the pitch, so players are allowed to stand on the line, as any further back and they would effectively be leaving the field of play without the referee?s permission (which technically, although it never happens, can result in a booking for the player concerned).
And before anyone says "but the players won?t be able to get back ten yards!" ? the goal-line in this instance provides the edge of the pitch, so players are allowed to stand on the line, as any further back and they would effectively be leaving the field of play without the referee?s permission (which technically, although it never happens, can result in a booking for the player concerned).
Lee you are indeed correct. No free kicks can take place inside the 6 yard area, in that instance it would have to be 10 yards back.
Incidentally if for example Jagielka passes the ball backwards to Lescott on the edge of, or indeed inside the box, and Lescott decides to let it roll through his legs, or lets it run to Howard; then Howard is perfectly entitled to pick it up as the original pass was not intended for him, but for Lescott.....so state the laws of the game.
However - this hasn’t occured in the pro game to the best of my knowledge, and therefore would surely be hugely analysed on Sky Sports News bring about a inevitable rule change as it brings a level of conejcture to ’deliberate’.
There’s my musings on the rules of football for the morning anyway.
Incidentally if for example Jagielka passes the ball backwards to Lescott on the edge of, or indeed inside the box, and Lescott decides to let it roll through his legs, or lets it run to Howard; then Howard is perfectly entitled to pick it up as the original pass was not intended for him, but for Lescott.....so state the laws of the game.
However - this hasn’t occured in the pro game to the best of my knowledge, and therefore would surely be hugely analysed on Sky Sports News bring about a inevitable rule change as it brings a level of conejcture to ’deliberate’.
There’s my musings on the rules of football for the morning anyway.
Jagielka wasn’t passing it to Howard though, so why is it a backpass? Jagielka was focused on keeping it from crossing the line for someone else to clear from danger. Correct decision by the ref!
Tim, you are right, it is the 6 yard box.. Here’s the actual law:
"an indirect free kick awarded inside the goal area must be taken on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the infringement occurred".
"an indirect free kick awarded inside the goal area must be taken on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the infringement occurred".
I actually think it was a back pass which the referee didn’t spot. Makes a change for a decison to go for us. If it wasn’t a back pass then what the hell was Jagielka doing. It should have been booted into next week not chipped up for someone (thankfully Howard) to get hold of. He knew the goalie was there to collect it, why else chip it up.
Jon,
No way was it a back pass ? he did well to get his foot to it, he didn?t have time to do anything else.
Jags is good, but he?s not that good to casually flick it into Howard?s arms.
No way was it a back pass ? he did well to get his foot to it, he didn?t have time to do anything else.
Jags is good, but he?s not that good to casually flick it into Howard?s arms.
I think it WAS a "back" pass and I think Jags IS that good but I just think the ref, West Brom's strikers, and, it seems, most of you lot, disagree with me!
Watch it again ? he knew what he was doing and was cool as you like. No way could the ref give the free kick though. He?s my player of the season and a great signing by Moyes!
I remember McFadden did something similar against Charlton and then volleyed in a goal... a bit tenuous, but need no excuses to bring that goal back up.
How the hell can it be a backpass when he kicked it at the end of the pitch (goal line)? Therefore forward not back.
The law was introduced because teams like the RS were wasting time passing it backwards and forwards to their GK when they were holding on to a lead. That is the spirit of the law.
I am absolutely certain that, if any player ever clears the ball off his own goal line and his GK gets it, NO referee in the world (except Clattenburg) would deem it a backpass.
The law was introduced because teams like the RS were wasting time passing it backwards and forwards to their GK when they were holding on to a lead. That is the spirit of the law.
I am absolutely certain that, if any player ever clears the ball off his own goal line and his GK gets it, NO referee in the world (except Clattenburg) would deem it a backpass.
This is one of the funnier (albeit mostly useless) threads ever. Imagine how riled up everyone would be if that had prevented us from scoring.
Just to add to the anal tone of this thread and to put a couple of people straight.
When an indirect free kick is awarded the "offence" is the goalkeepers, it is still a legitimate practise to pass the ball to the goalkeeper (be it backwards, forwards or sideways).
A free kick is only awarded when the Goalkeeper handles the ball. So the free kick wouldn’t take place from the kickers position but the goalkeepers.
Thank You oh and Jay Harris read the whole thread I think you’ll find you are very much in the wrong this time!
When an indirect free kick is awarded the "offence" is the goalkeepers, it is still a legitimate practise to pass the ball to the goalkeeper (be it backwards, forwards or sideways).
A free kick is only awarded when the Goalkeeper handles the ball. So the free kick wouldn’t take place from the kickers position but the goalkeepers.
Thank You oh and Jay Harris read the whole thread I think you’ll find you are very much in the wrong this time!
James, what was the point of your post? Do you telephone friends to tell them you have nothing to say?
I admit my post wasn’t the most startlingly interesting post ever. But it was about football and about Everton. And I hoped to provide a wee bit of education about the Laws of the Game for anybody who was unclear.
Martryn, I can’t argue with that. But for me, the passion that even the smallest matter can inspire is what I love about football. That and seeing my lovely boys in blue win!
Jags did it on purpose, I?m in absolutely no doubt over that, one of the best microcosmic bits of of defending we?re ever likely to see, a total class act and easily player of the season.
I was going to post this question elsewhere but this post seems appropriate. OT regarding Everton but on topic regarding the laws of the game.
There is an EPL team, Stoke City or Hull City I think and forgive me if I am incorrect, that go through this routine when a free kick has been awarded.
Scenario: Ref awards free kick; then spends 10 mintues ensuring the defensive wall is the mandatory 10 yards away from the point of impact; ref blows his whistle to signal the kick can be taken; a player picks the ball up with his hands as a signal to his fellow players; a (different) player takes the ultimately useless kick.
Question: When is the ball active in this scenario? When the ref blows the whistle or when the ball is actually kicked?
If it is when the whistle is blown then surely the team awarded the free kick has committed a handball offence and a free kick should be immediately awarded to the opposing team? If it is when the ball is kicked (as in quickly taken free kicks or the above scenario) then why bother with the whistle at all?
OT I know but this weekend I saw it happen again and it got me thinking - for once!
FAQ - EFC to beat MFC by 2-0. Saha to convert at least one.
There is an EPL team, Stoke City or Hull City I think and forgive me if I am incorrect, that go through this routine when a free kick has been awarded.
Scenario: Ref awards free kick; then spends 10 mintues ensuring the defensive wall is the mandatory 10 yards away from the point of impact; ref blows his whistle to signal the kick can be taken; a player picks the ball up with his hands as a signal to his fellow players; a (different) player takes the ultimately useless kick.
Question: When is the ball active in this scenario? When the ref blows the whistle or when the ball is actually kicked?
If it is when the whistle is blown then surely the team awarded the free kick has committed a handball offence and a free kick should be immediately awarded to the opposing team? If it is when the ball is kicked (as in quickly taken free kicks or the above scenario) then why bother with the whistle at all?
OT I know but this weekend I saw it happen again and it got me thinking - for once!
FAQ - EFC to beat MFC by 2-0. Saha to convert at least one.
Gary, the ball is in play when it is kicked and moved.
© ToffeeWeb
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
-sm.jpg)
1 Posted 04/03/2009 at 02:19:07
Report abuse