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
2 Posted 04/03/2009 at 03:05:52
3 Posted 04/03/2009 at 03:31:37
4 Posted 04/03/2009 at 08:07:50
5 Posted 04/03/2009 at 08:15:53
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.
6 Posted 04/03/2009 at 08:36:19
7 Posted 04/03/2009 at 08:45:07
8 Posted 04/03/2009 at 08:54:14
9 Posted 04/03/2009 at 08:55:36
10 Posted 04/03/2009 at 09:27:25
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).
11 Posted 04/03/2009 at 09:28:04
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.
12 Posted 04/03/2009 at 11:00:20
13 Posted 04/03/2009 at 10:53:43
"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".
14 Posted 04/03/2009 at 11:08:48
15 Posted 04/03/2009 at 11:16:31
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.
16 Posted 04/03/2009 at 11:55:17
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!
17 Posted 04/03/2009 at 11:59:04
18 Posted 04/03/2009 at 13:46:44
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.
19 Posted 04/03/2009 at 16:01:40
20 Posted 04/03/2009 at 19:35:59
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!
21 Posted 04/03/2009 at 19:31:50
22 Posted 05/03/2009 at 00:17:49
23 Posted 05/03/2009 at 03:08:14
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.
24 Posted 05/03/2009 at 13:47:09


1 Posted 04/03/2009 at 02:19:07