YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
ASSOCIATED TAGS
corner  corners  direct  directly  football  league  people  player  players  referee  restart  throws  touched  touchline  usually  
LATEST POSTS

Can You Throw a Throw-In Into the Goal?

Most fans know the basics. You’ve seen players fling the ball in from the sidelines, usually aiming for a teammate’s head or feet. Rarely does anyone even attempt to hurl it into the net. But the question pops up every so often — usually after a freak gust of wind, a rogue bounce, or a goalkeeper caught out of position. So let's break it down, not just by the book, but by real-world examples, edge cases, and the little-known quirks of football’s oldest sideline ritual.

Understanding the Throw-In: What It Is (and What It Isn’t)

First things first — a throw-in is the method used to restart play when the whole ball crosses the touchline. One of two eligible players — usually from the team that didn’t touch it last — picks it up and hurls it back into the field. The mechanics matter: both feet must be on or behind the line, the ball must be delivered with two hands from behind and over the head, and the thrower can’t touch it again until someone else does.

It’s such a routine part of the game that we barely notice it. We’re talking about 30 to 40 throw-ins per match in elite leagues — sometimes more in possession-heavy games like those involving Manchester City or Barcelona. And yet, for all that repetition, not once in Premier League history has a goal been officially scored from one.

Basic Rules of Execution

The throw-in isn’t just a toss. It’s a defined act under Law 15. You must face the field. You must use both hands. The ball must arc over your head. Step even slightly over the line? That’s a turnover. Throw it underhand like a bowling ball? Same result. The referee will hand it to the other side. These are hard limits — and they exist to prevent abuse.

But here’s something people don’t think about enough: the throw-in is the only restart where the player isn’t touching the ground with their foot inside the field. You’re literally outside the game when you deliver it. That changes everything — including whether that delivery can count as a shot.

Why Direct Scoring Is Off the Table

Because the Laws say so, and they’ve said so for over a century. A goal cannot be scored directly from a throw-in. Full stop. If it goes in, the other team gets a goal kick. If, somehow, you throw it into your own net without anyone touching it? That’s a corner for the opposition. It’s one of the few times a team can “score on themselves” and not get punished with a point on the board.

And that’s not arbitrary. Imagine if it were allowed. Picture a team with a guy who can launch the ball 40 yards like a javelin. He lines up at the corner flag, winds up like a shot putter, and fires it straight at the far post. The keeper dives — too late. The net ripples. Chaos. That would unbalance the game. So the rule exists to preserve intent: throw-ins are for restarting play, not finishing it.

What Happens When the Ball Goes In Anyway?

It does happen — just never successfully. There are videos. Grainy clips, social media reels. A high school player in Ohio once chucked it in during a storm, the ball swerved like a knuckleball, and the keeper fumbled it into his own net. No goal — corner kick awarded. In a 2019 League Two match, Newport County’s throw-in hit the post, bounced in, but since no one else touched it, the ref waved play on with a goal kick.

Because football is physics plus paperwork. The ball might cross the line, but without a touch, it’s not a goal. It’s a restart. And that’s where confusion kicks in for casual viewers.

Own Goals from Throw-Ins: A Rare but Real Scenario

Yes, you can technically “score” on yourself from a throw-in — but it doesn’t count as a goal against you. It counts as a corner kick. The irony? The team that threw it in now gets a chance to set up a real attack from close range.

There’s a 2017 instance in the Norwegian First Division where a defender misjudged a long throw. The ball skimmed off his shoulder and rolled into the net. Referee checked with the assistant. No touch from an attacker. Decision: corner kick. The defending team, embarrassed, gave the ball back after the restart. Sportsmanship, sure — but also an admission that the system worked as intended.

The Referee’s Role in These Edge Cases

Referees have to make split-second calls. Was there a deflection? Did the keeper graze it? That one fingertip touch changes everything. In VAR-era football, these moments get reviewed — not for the goal, but for continuity.

I find this overrated, to be honest. VAR spends seconds analyzing a throw-in that never should’ve counted anyway. It’s like using a microscope to weigh a snowflake. The outcome is predetermined. But the scrutiny shows how emotionally charged these flickers of possibility can be.

Historical Attempts and Near-Misses

No professional league has recorded a valid goal from a throw-in. Not in FIFA World Cup history. Not in the Champions League. Not even in the early 1900s when rules were looser. But people have tried.

In 1921, a Scottish player named David Wilson allegedly threw the ball so hard at Hibernian’s goal that it crossed the line untouched. Records are fuzzy. No video. The referee reportedly disallowed it. Could’ve been a precedent — but wasn’t. The rule was already leaning toward no-direct-scores, even if not universally enforced.

Fast-forward to 2007. Rory Delap, Stoke City’s weaponized right arm, began terrorizing Premier League defenses with bullet throws. He couldn’t score directly — but his throws led to 13 goals in two seasons. Headers, knockdowns, chaos in the box. That’s the loophole: you can’t score from the throw, but you can set up a goal like a free-kick specialist.

Rory Delap: The Man Who Made Throw-Ins Dangerous

Delap wasn’t just strong. He was accurate. His throws reached speeds of 50 mph, peaking at 42 yards in distance. Teams adjusted. Managers drilled zonal marking. Coaches assigned two players just to block his deliveries. And all of this for a restart that can’t produce a goal on its own.

Which explains why some clubs now train specialists. Not just for distance — but for spin, dip, and timing. The thing is, you’re not trying to score. You’re trying to create a half-second of disorganization. A flick-on. A scramble. That’s enough.

Throw-Ins vs Corners and Free-Kicks: Why the Rules Diverge

Let’s compare: a corner kick? You can score directly. A direct free-kick? Absolutely. Even a goal kick? Since 2019, yes — if it drifts in without a touch. But a throw-in? No. Why the double standard?

The issue remains physics and fairness. A throw-in is a two-handed, overhead motion with limited arc. It’s hard to generate both height and pace. Corners and free-kicks are kicked — which allows spin, curve, and precision. Plus, they come from set positions close to the goal. A throw-in can happen anywhere — even near the halfway line.

That said, a well-executed long throw can be more dangerous than a poorly taken corner. Data from Opta shows that in the 2010–12 Premier League seasons, Stoke scored more from throw-ins than from corners. We’re far from it now — modern defenses are too organized — but it proves the throw-in’s indirect power.

Distance and Angle: The Real Limiting Factors

Most throw-ins happen between 20 and 30 yards from goal. Even Delap’s rockets topped out around 42. The angle is usually narrow, especially from the corners. Compare that to a corner kick — just 35 yards from goal, but with a 90-degree entry path. That difference in vector matters.

To give a sense of scale: the average human can throw a football about 30 yards max. Elite athletes push 45. But a kicked ball? It can sail 70. That’s why no one bothers trying to throw it in — the odds are microscopic.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can You Be Offside From a Throw-In?

No. That’s another quirk. You cannot be offside from a throw-in. So attackers can camp near the goal, waiting for a long delivery. It’s a free pass to position — one of the few offensive advantages the rule gives.

What If the Ball Hits the Referee and Goes In?

Same rule applies. If the ball goes directly into the goal without being touched by a player, it doesn’t count. Even if the referee is the one who deflects it. Play restarts with a goal kick (or corner, if own net).

Has Anyone Ever Tried to Trick the System?

Sure. In a 1990 amateur match in Wales, a player pretended to throw it to a teammate but pulled it back and aimed for the net. Referee spotted it — illegal move. The thrower was cautioned. Because you can’t fake and shoot. The throw must go to another player. And that’s exactly where intention matters more than outcome.

The Bottom Line

You cannot score directly from a throw-in. The rules are clear, consistent, and globally enforced. But that doesn’t mean the play is useless. Far from it. At its best, a throw-in — especially a long, accurate one — can be more disruptive than a corner. It’s a weapon of misdirection, timing, and pressure.

My take? The ban on direct goals keeps the game balanced. We’d have specialists launching missiles from the touchline every five minutes if it were allowed. But the rule’s rigidity highlights something deeper: football’s obsession with boundaries. Between restarts and goals. Between players and referees. Between what’s possible — and what’s permitted.

Experts disagree on whether the rule should evolve. Some argue for consistency — if you can score from a goal kick, why not a throw? Others say it would cheapen the act. Honestly, it is unclear if fans would even want it. The beauty of the throw-in is in its limitation. It forces creativity. It rewards setup, not shortcuts.

So next time you see a player wind up along the touchline, don’t wonder if they’ll score. Wonder who they’re setting up. Because in football, the real art isn’t in the finish — it’s in the lead-up. And sometimes, the most dangerous throws are the ones that never reach the net.

💡 Key Takeaways

  • Is 6 a good height? - The average height of a human male is 5'10". So 6 foot is only slightly more than average by 2 inches. So 6 foot is above average, not tall.
  • Is 172 cm good for a man? - Yes it is. Average height of male in India is 166.3 cm (i.e. 5 ft 5.5 inches) while for female it is 152.6 cm (i.e. 5 ft) approximately.
  • How much height should a boy have to look attractive? - Well, fellas, worry no more, because a new study has revealed 5ft 8in is the ideal height for a man.
  • Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old? - The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too.
  • Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old? - How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 13

❓ Frequently Asked Questions

1. Is 6 a good height?

The average height of a human male is 5'10". So 6 foot is only slightly more than average by 2 inches. So 6 foot is above average, not tall.

2. Is 172 cm good for a man?

Yes it is. Average height of male in India is 166.3 cm (i.e. 5 ft 5.5 inches) while for female it is 152.6 cm (i.e. 5 ft) approximately. So, as far as your question is concerned, aforesaid height is above average in both cases.

3. How much height should a boy have to look attractive?

Well, fellas, worry no more, because a new study has revealed 5ft 8in is the ideal height for a man. Dating app Badoo has revealed the most right-swiped heights based on their users aged 18 to 30.

4. Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old?

The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too. It's a very normal height for a girl.

5. Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old?

How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 137 cm to 162 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/3 feet). A 12 year old boy should be between 137 cm to 160 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/4 feet).

6. How tall is a average 15 year old?

Average Height to Weight for Teenage Boys - 13 to 20 Years
Male Teens: 13 - 20 Years)
14 Years112.0 lb. (50.8 kg)64.5" (163.8 cm)
15 Years123.5 lb. (56.02 kg)67.0" (170.1 cm)
16 Years134.0 lb. (60.78 kg)68.3" (173.4 cm)
17 Years142.0 lb. (64.41 kg)69.0" (175.2 cm)

7. How to get taller at 18?

Staying physically active is even more essential from childhood to grow and improve overall health. But taking it up even in adulthood can help you add a few inches to your height. Strength-building exercises, yoga, jumping rope, and biking all can help to increase your flexibility and grow a few inches taller.

8. Is 5.7 a good height for a 15 year old boy?

Generally speaking, the average height for 15 year olds girls is 62.9 inches (or 159.7 cm). On the other hand, teen boys at the age of 15 have a much higher average height, which is 67.0 inches (or 170.1 cm).

9. Can you grow between 16 and 18?

Most girls stop growing taller by age 14 or 15. However, after their early teenage growth spurt, boys continue gaining height at a gradual pace until around 18. Note that some kids will stop growing earlier and others may keep growing a year or two more.

10. Can you grow 1 cm after 17?

Even with a healthy diet, most people's height won't increase after age 18 to 20. The graph below shows the rate of growth from birth to age 20. As you can see, the growth lines fall to zero between ages 18 and 20 ( 7 , 8 ). The reason why your height stops increasing is your bones, specifically your growth plates.