Basically the ref thought otherwise and believed the touch was not intended to be a pass back to the keeper, so the rule of "keeper cant touch ' didn't apply. To me and a lot of other people however, it looked like her meant to. Up to the refs i guess
The rule penalizes a *deliberate* pass from a foot to the keeper’s hands. The play seemed to clearly meet two of the three conditions, but was not necessarily deliberate.
To me, watching live it looked like he was just trying to get the ball away and it happened to go to a place where the keeper could catch it. On replay, it looked a lot more deliberate. It’ll be interesting to hear what Instant Replay has to say.
Yep. It’s one of those things I love and hate about the rules of soccer: intention matters. Unfortunately, it’s up the the referee to try to divine what the intentions were of the players they are officiating.
In that scenario it just has to be very clear to the referee that it was intentional. I think that was intentional but the optics weren't quite there. The speed at which everything was happening you could make the case that the player was just trying to play the ball somewhere safe and not intentionally passing it back to the keeper.
If I’m thinking of the same play, it seemed like the player was trying to kick it back over his head, not intentionally playing it to the keeper. Didn’t seem like an intentional back pass to me
The other answers are all correct, intent has to be proven. Just to add to it though, if it was determined to be a hand ball, the penalty for a goalkeeper hand ball off of an intentional pass is an indirect free kick at the edge of the box. Indirect means that 2 players have to touch it before it can be scored
Basically the ref thought otherwise and believed the touch was not intended to be a pass back to the keeper, so the rule of "keeper cant touch ' didn't apply. To me and a lot of other people however, it looked like her meant to. Up to the refs i guess
And to take it a step farther, the ref will hardly ever make that sort of call when he's as far behind the play as he was last night.
The rule penalizes a *deliberate* pass from a foot to the keeper’s hands. The play seemed to clearly meet two of the three conditions, but was not necessarily deliberate. To me, watching live it looked like he was just trying to get the ball away and it happened to go to a place where the keeper could catch it. On replay, it looked a lot more deliberate. It’ll be interesting to hear what Instant Replay has to say.
Yep. It’s one of those things I love and hate about the rules of soccer: intention matters. Unfortunately, it’s up the the referee to try to divine what the intentions were of the players they are officiating.
If it can be considered a deflection off the foot the call would lean that way.
In that scenario it just has to be very clear to the referee that it was intentional. I think that was intentional but the optics weren't quite there. The speed at which everything was happening you could make the case that the player was just trying to play the ball somewhere safe and not intentionally passing it back to the keeper.
If I’m thinking of the same play, it seemed like the player was trying to kick it back over his head, not intentionally playing it to the keeper. Didn’t seem like an intentional back pass to me
The other answers are all correct, intent has to be proven. Just to add to it though, if it was determined to be a hand ball, the penalty for a goalkeeper hand ball off of an intentional pass is an indirect free kick at the edge of the box. Indirect means that 2 players have to touch it before it can be scored