Lucian, a referee, asks:
What does this part of Law 14 mean — “If the goalkeeper offends and if the ball misses the goal or rebounds from the crossbar or goalposts, the kick is only retaken if the goalkeeper’s offense clearly impacted on the kicker”? What if the keeper is just a little bit over the goal line?
Answer
Your brief question is fraught with “ifs” all over the place and is why you get the big bucks. As is often the case with the International Board, you have to read into the few words which compose the scenario and imagine mentally what is happening and what could have happened. The importance of a phrase like “clearly impacted” cannot be understood unless compared with what was not said – such as wondering if the goalkeeper’s offense possibly had not impacted on the kicker at all or perhaps only a little. It comes down to what does “clearly” mean.
In the real world (as opposed to the world of merely reading the Laws of the Game handbook), words mean different things and the referee’s job is to figure out what, in practice, the word or phrase actually intends for you to figure out. We can only offer some scenarios.
Here, for example, the core question is whether or not the kicker was adversely affected by the goalkeeper’s action. The analysis you as the referee has to consider (with, perhaps, supporting input from either or both of the ARs) is whether or not the ball would have entered the net regardless of the goalkeeper’s violation of Law 14. Clearly, if the ball did enter the net despite the goalkeeper’s Law violation, you would have given the goal and done nothing to the goalkeeper for his/her early exit off the line between the two goalposts. A different way of looking at the issue is whether or not the goalkeeper’s behavior caused (in whole or part) the kicker to miskick the ball such that the ball, which would otherwise have gone into the net, rebounds instead from the goal frame or misses the goal frame altogether.
As you can see, a decision as to the above possibilities cannot be detailed specifically in the Law without using a lot of words so the IFAB states simply that, although the goalkeeper did step forward illegally into the field, a goal would still be given despite this violation if the ball had gone into the net. If, however, the ball which arguably could have gone into the net but did not because of illegal behavior by the goalkeeper, then the goalkeeper is toast (and the kick retaken). Or, finally, if the kicker kicked the ball badly and would have missed going into the goal anyway, then the PK is over and the infraction by the goalkeeper is either ignored or not punished (or, if way too egregious, merely cautioned). The difference among these three possible events, of course, is “in the opinion of the referee” (i.e., you) – have fun.
