• Home
• About
• Ask A Question

Question:
For clarification purpose, I would like for you to honestly assist with normal procedure and correct interpretation of the law and in accordance to; and in US Soccer and FIFA opinion the correct procedure and your recommendation to the following.

In the first half of a competitive match, a corner kick was being taken from the leading AR side. Properly, the Assistant referee applied the distance of encroachment and the team taking the corner kick tricked the defense as the kicker walked away and another player acted as if he was going to take the kick started dribbling the ball towards the goal when he got to the corner kick spot. I made eye contact with the leading AR who did nothing and I let the play go.

In the same half, a corner kick was awarded to the same offense, but now in my quadrant. The ball was set, and the kicker stood over the ball with his foot on the ball but made no movement because the defense this time were encroaching. When I realized the the attacker won’t play the ball, I instructed the defense to respect the distance of which they obliged. While we were waiting for the corner kick to be taken, number 7 of the team taking the corner kcik who was behind me in the goal area loudly yelled to his team mate on the the ball. “Leave it, let me take it.” He then ran past me and the defenders while his team mate walked away from the ball. When he got to the ball, he took position as if he was going to put the ball back in play, then he started dribbling the ball towards the goal. All these happened while I was still holding back the defense from encroaching. When I realized he was in active play, I blew the whistle walked to him and cautioned him for unsporting behavior. I then restart the play with an indirect kick to the defense for double touching a direct kick restart. 

As usual, the cautioned player pleaded his case and claimed that was their trick and my response was that you were deceptive. I told him it’s legal to apply trick fairly, and by audibly being deceptive, you gained unfair advantage.

USSF answer (February 6, 2010)
The kicking team is allowed to use a certain amount of trickery at any kick restart, including corner kicks. If the kicker actually kicks at the ball, then it is now in play. Observe these two video clips of corner kicks, one of which was not allowed by the referee. However, both were totally legal, as the ball was played in a kicking motion by the original player on the ball.

First clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nBoKNy7j0Y&feature=related

We responded to a question on this clip back on January 30, 2009:
It is perfectly legal to do this. How could anyone object to this tactic? The player has put the ball in play in accordance with the Laws of the Game. The kicking team is allowed to use such deceptive tactics and SHOULD NOT be punished for them. However, if the kicking player had merely stepped on top of the ball and then left it for the next player, who dribbles it away, that would not have been a legal restart. But even that is not punished with a caution, as it is not misconduct; in that case, the referee would call the second player for a double touch and award an indirect free kick to the opposing team.

Second clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWWm1H1DC-Q&feature=related

The assistant referee’s flag was incorrect and the referee should have waved it down; the resulting goal should have been allowed.

So, what is NOT allowed?
The ball must move a perceptible distance from “here” to “there” to be considered in play through a kick. If the “kicker” only steps on top of the ball and does not kick it, and therefore the ball has NOT moved from “here” to “there,” the kick was not properly taken and must be repeated. It is not a cautionable offense.

Question:
The attacking team is awarded a corner kick. Player A from the attacking team lines up to take the corner kick. Player B from the attacking team leaves the field of play – about three yards past the touch line. Player A taps the ball from the corner kick and Player B runs from his position off the field of play onto the field of play and kicks the ball towards the goal.

Has Player B infringed on the laws of the game by leaving the field of play without the permission of the center referee and then played the ball. Leaving the field of play has allowed Player B to develop more speed at the point he plays the ball from Player A and perhaps also involves some trickery as the other team might not have accounted for this player to defend.

USSF answer (February 5, 2010):
Players are permitted to leave the field without the referee’s permission (1) during the course of play to avoid an obstacle (opponent, teammate, referee), (2) to retrieve the ball when it has left the field, (3) to put the ball back into play at a throw-in or a kick restart, (4) to signal that they are not involved in play during a possible offside situation.

Players are not allowed to leave the field of play simply to station themselves conveniently for a restart being taken by another player. As we said in an earlier response, with the exceptions noted above, players are expected to be and remain on the field of play. Leaving under the circumstances described would NOT be in the course of play and, if the referee decided that it was being done for unfair tactical reason, the action would be cautionable.

Question:
Our Breakfast Club (which meets to watch soccer games) is in an uproar about the famed Five Pound soccer ball of yore. Some say that a Five Pound weight is nonsense, some say it’s a fact due to the leather uptake in water.

A one pound ball cannot absorb four pints of water to equal Five Pounds in weight. BUT, say the myth believers, the ball was once much heavier than the current one pound limit.

So, when did the current weight limit get established and what was allowed before that?

USSF answer February 5, 2010):
Since 1889 the weight of the ball has always been specified as its measure “at the start of play.” Without waterproofing, leather balls became heavy when wet and sometimes dangerous to head because of protruding lacings. Absorption of moisture is no longer a real problem. The original limits of weight, 12 to 15 ounces (“at the start of play”), were raised in 1937 to 14 to 16 oz and have remained so.

Question:
At halftime, one player from each team went to the toilet with the referee’s permission. Under the rules of the competition, the halftime break is 15 minutes. The referee started the second half after ten minutes without both the missing players, as both captains agreed it was too cold to hang around. I believe the referee was correct in invoking the part of Law 8 which states that the duration of the interval may be altered with the consent of the referee. Also Law 8 states that the interval must not exceed 15 minutes, not that players are entitled to 15 minutes. In addition competition rules can stipulate the interval duration, which could, of course, be 10 minutes. Was this a correct action by the referee?

USSF answer (February 5, 2010):
No, the referee’s action was not correct. Consider the history of the halftime interval:
* The interval was in the game before 1896 because an FA Cup Rule of that year says, “THE interval at half-time shall not exceed five minutes, except by special permission of the Referee”
* 1906: The FA decided “Players have a right to an interval of 5 minutes at half-time.” Reason not given, but believed to allow players a breather.
* 1919: Another FA decision – “Referees must observe the Regulation that the halftime interval must not exceed 5 minutes, except with their consent, which is only to be given in exceptional circumstances.”
* 1961: An IFAB Decision stated “Players have a right to an interval at half-time.”
* 1995: “Halftime interval not to exceed 15 minutes” One reason recognized that dressing rooms were sometimes ‘a long way from the field,’ but a more practical view is that coaches wanted more time to have injuries treated and to confuse their players with more tactical mumbo-jumbo. Also, top players need more time to fix their makeup for TV!
* 1997 to now. “Players are entitled to an interval at half-time. The halftime interval must not exceed 15 minutes. Competition rules must state the duration of the half-time interval. The duration of the half-time interval may be altered only with the consent of the referee.”

Now to the question: You will not find it in any official statement, but traditionally the clause clearly applies to ALL players and if ONE requests the full allotted period he must not be denied. Because he is occupied with a call of nature is no reason to prevent him from taking part in the game – even for a minute or two. We cannot imagine any committee issuing a formal statement allowing a referee to reduce the period for the reason given by the captains in your question. They would be better employed organizing their teams in warming-up exercises for 5 minutes.

Question:
In the USSF training (at least in my area) for many years now the instruction has been that for out of bounds calls for which the officials do not see/know which team ought to get the possession, a throw in or a goal kick should be awarded to the “defense.”

I assume this has been USSF’s preference all along as well. Given the emphasis today by FIFA and USSF on “scoring” and “offensive play” for soccer should we officials now be awarding throw ins and corner kicks for the “attacking” team rather than the defense when we are uncertain who last touched the ball? (Yes, I know this circumstance should never occur – esp. with 3 officials – but unfortunately it does!)

USSF answer (February 1, 2010):
Although INFORMAL advice for many years was to award the ball to the defending team on any questionable situation where the ball had passed out of play across one of the boundary lines, that WAS NOT and IS NOT the Federation’s formal guidance on a ball passing out of play.

Referees should take care not to use any unofficial option as a means of avoiding a difficult but necessary decision as to which team should have the restart. Nor should the referee use the dropped ball to restart play as a crutch in those cases where there is some question about the correct restart. The referee must make a decision and announce it firmly.

This excerpt from the Advice to Referees 2009/2010 should give referees all the guidance they need:

9.3 SIMULTANEOUS TOUCHES
The referee should promptly signal a clear decision on the direction for the restart when the ball appears to have gone off the field from “simultaneous” touches by members of both teams. Under the Laws of the Game, it is not permissible to give a dropped ball restart in situations where the referee cannot decide which team has possession. The players quickly identify referee indecision, and will use it to their advantage.

To emphasize the point: MAKE A DECISION, REFEREE!

Question:
My question is, when does the authority of a Referee start and end. I seen a ref giving a red card to a none playing coach of a team that just finished their game about 10 seconds after the game ended for making a comment but not using bad language about the game.

Thank you for your answer.

USSF answer (January 30, 2010):
Your answers are contained in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” which is also intended for reading by coaches, players, and spectators.

5.2 REFEREE’S AUTHORITY
The referee’s authority begins upon arrival at the area of the field of play and continues until he or she has left the area of the field after the game has been completed. The referee’s authority extends to time when the ball is not in play, to temporary suspensions, to the half-time break, and to additional periods of play or kicks from the penalty mark required by the rules of the competition.

For a synopsis of when cards may be shown to players, substitutes, or substituted players, see Advice 5.17.

BEGIN NOTE: Cards may never be shown to team officials, unless this is specifically permitted by the rules of your competition. See Advice 5.10

5.10 BEHAVIOR OF COACH AND BENCH PERSONNEL
Coaches or other team officials, one at a time, may provide tactical advice to their players, including positive remarks and encouragement.  The referee should only take action against coaches or other team officials for irresponsible behavior or for actions that bring the game into disrepute. A coach or other team official may not be cautioned or sent off nor shown any card; however, at the discretion of the referee, such persons may be warned regarding their behavior or expelled from the field of play and its immediate area. When a coach or other team official is expelled, the referee must include detailed information about such incidents in the match report.

The maximum numbers of substitutes and substitutions are set by the competition authority and with the agreement of the two teams within the requirements of Law 3. Additional people in the technical area, such as team members who are not named as players or substitutes (for the current game) on the roster or parents or other persons involved with the team, are permitted to be seated with the team in the technical area (or other designated team area) only if this is allowed by the competition authority. Such persons will be considered team officials and are therefore held to the same standards of conduct specified in Law 5 as other team officials. Although team officials cannot commit misconduct or be shown a card, they may be ordered from the field for irresponsible behavior. Full details must be included in the match report.

The “Ask, Tell, Remove” process is recommended for all officials to follow relative to conduct within the technical area:
* Ask
If a situation arises where there is irresponsible behavior, the official (referee, assistant referee, or fourth official) should ASK the person(s) to stop.
* Tell
If there is another occurrence of irresponsible behavior, the official should inform that person that the behavior is not permissible and TELL them (insist) to stop.
* Remove
If the non-accepted actions continue, the referee must REMOVE that person immediately.

These are the recommended steps, but they are not necessary if the behavior and conduct of personnel within the technical area requires immediate dismissal. Remember, where circumstances permit, match officials should use a “gentle escalate” approach so that referee team responses match the nature of the bench behavior. Try to use the least intrusive response that will solve the problem.
END NOTE

5.17 DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER THE GAME
Misconduct committed by a player or a substitute prior to the start of the match, during the match, and during breaks between playing periods is subject to a formal caution or a send-off, as appropriate. Yellow and red cards, which are now mandatory indications of cautions and send-offs, may be shown only for misconduct committed by players, substitutes, or substituted players during a match. “During a match” includes:
(a) the period of time immediately prior to the start of play during which players and substitutes are physically on the field warming up, stretching, or otherwise preparing for the match;
(b) any periods in which play is temporarily stopped;
(c) half time or similar breaks in play;
(d) required overtime periods;
(e) kicks from the penalty mark if this procedure is used in case a winner must be determined.
(f) the period of time immediately following the end of play during which the players and substitutes are physically on the field but in the process of exiting.

Cautions issued prior to the start of the game or during breaks between periods are recorded and they are counted for purposes of sending a player from the field for receiving a second caution during the match. To prevent misunderstandings, the referee should inform officials of both teams before the first period of play begins of any cautions or send-offs occurring prior to the start of the match.

If a player or substitute is cautioned or dismissed for misconduct which has occurred during a break or suspension of play, the card must be shown on the field before play resumes.

If a player is dismissed before the match begins, the player may be replaced by a named substitute, but the team is not allowed to add any names to its roster and its number of permissible substitutions is not reduced.

The referee may send off and show the red card for violent conduct to a player, substitute, or substituted player after the game has been restarted if the assistant referee had signaled the offense before the restart.

Players or substitutes who have been sent off may not remain in the team area, but must be removed from the environs of the field. If this is not practical because of the age or condition of the player, the team officials are responsible for the behavior of the player or substitute.

There can be no “temporary expulsion” of players who have been cautioned, nor may teams be forced to substitute for a player who has been cautioned.

Postgame: Any misconduct committed by players or substitutes after the field has been cleared must be described in the game report and reported to the competition authority. The referee may display cards as long as he or she remains on the field of play after the game is over. Referees are advised to avoid remaining in the area of the field unnecessarily.

Question:
Bolton v Arsenal 1.20.2010, around minute 34 if i recall…

Bolton foul at about 25 yards from their goal, and the ball ends up with Fabregas. Advantage is indicated by the referee: Fabregas dribbles twice and loses the ball.

The referee subsequently awards the free kick from the 25, as the advantage is not realized.

Or is it? After all, the offended team did maintain the possession and move the ball forward, however briefly.

It seems that once advantage is determined, the foul should be ignored unless it rose to the level of a caution (this one did not).

I am aware that in the penalty area, if an attacker is fouled but retains possession, often the penalty call is deferred until it is known if an effective shot on goal is achieved.

In this case, however, it seems that the defenders suffered double jeopardy.

Do you have advice as to how much opportunity, whether it be time of possession or effectiveness of attack, should be given the team/player who is fouled to realize advantage?

USSF answer (January 29, 2010):
The referee in this game followed established principles by invoking the advantage clause and then determining that the advantage had not accrued to Arsenal. His decision was correct. If, after observing a foul or misconduct by a player, the referee decides to apply advantage and within a second or so the player loses possession of the ball, the referee may still penalize the original offense.

It all pivots on the time lapse (which you didn’t define beyond “dribbles twice” and “however briefly”). It is important to note that even the International Board’s measure of time (“2-3 seconds”) is itself imprecise, so it all comes down to the opinion of the referee.

Some citations from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” (2009/2010) seem appropriate here (all from Advice 5.6):
One way to determine when to invoke the advantage is to apply the Four Ps: Possession, Potential, Personnel, and Proximity. Possession means active and credible control by the player who was fouled or a teammate. Potential means the likelihood of continuing an immediate and dangerous attack on the opponents’ goal. Potential is evaluated by judging the Personnel involved (the number and skills of the attackers relative to the number and skills of the defenders within 2-3 seconds of the offense) and Proximity (the distance to the opponents’ goal; the less the distance, the greater the potential).

In cases where the referee is applying the advantage clause, the advantage signal should be used to demonstrate that the game is being allowed to flow. Use of the advantage signal sends a visual message to the players/spectators that the referee saw the infraction, thereby mitigating potential negative feedback

Question:
My question is regarding Assistant Referee mechanics and signaling. Particularly for goal and corner kicks.

As an AR I am level with the 2nd to last defender, which is outside of the penalty area. The attacking team takes a hard shot, and I chase the ball down to the goal line. Being that it is a hard shot, it crosses the goal line by the time I am level with the penalty mark.

Where do I make my signal for goal kick? Do I continue to run towards the goal line until I am level with the goal area (6 yards from the goal line) and then signal? Or signal from where I am standing when the ball crosses the goal line?

I have the same question regarding corner kick signals. If the shot deflected off a defender and crosses the goal line when I am level with the penalty mark. Do I continue my run until I am beside the corner flag before signaling?

Great site! I check it every day for new advice. I hope you can give me some good advice for this one.

USSF answer (January 28, 2010):
Thank you. Flattery is always acceptable here. As to your question:

First, make every effort to follow the ball down the field. That said, we all know that a ball can travel faster in the air than most ARs can run along the line.

Therefore …

If you are close to the goal line (e .g., 2-3 yards) or if it is clear that the restart will be a goal kick, continue on down to the goal line and signal for the goal kick. However, if under the circumstances you are caught fairly far away from the goal line when the ball leaves the field OR if there is likely to be controversy about the restart, it is generally better to stop where you are, make eye contact with the referee, and signal so that the referee gets your information quickly. Then, after the referee clearly agrees, proceed to the position on the line which the Guide to Procedures advises you take initially for a goal kick restart.

This advice would be equally true if the ball left the field for a corner kick — except that, if you do go down to the goal line, take a step or two back upfield before signalling so that the flag is not pointing off the field.

Question:
In Jan 24 2010 game between Inter Milan and AC Milan, at the later time in the second half, Inter Milan defender Lucio standing in the goal area to defend and AC Milan’s forwarder shot towards him.

Lucio dodged with a hand waved over his shoulder and stopped the ball.

AC Milan was awarded a penalty. Lucio was shown the 2nd yellow card and sent off.

We got two questions:

1. should this dodge and pat action be viewed as undeliberately handling the ball, which is not a foul, and avoid the penalty?

2. if it is a deliberate handling of the ball, should this be viewed as prevent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and send off Lucio?

USSF answer (January 27, 2010):
1. No, this was clearly deliberate handling. Lucio “made himself bigger” by raising his hand to an unnatural position and thus deliberately handled the ball.

2. That is certainly possible, but the referee on the game saw it as a cautionable offense. U. S. referees are advised that the criterion for denying a goal by handling is that if the handling had not occurred, would the ball have gone into the net. If the referee decided that the ball wasn’t going to go into the net without the handling, then a red card would not be correct.

Question:
With time running out at the end of a game the blue team scores to tie the game. A player from the blue team runs into the goal to retrieve the ball so that they can hurry up to try and get the ball back into play. While doing this, he gets into a tussle with the goalie from the red team who was also trying to get the ball. What should the call be? Should either player be cautioned for unsportsmanlike conduct? or for delay of the game?

USSF answer (January 23, 2010):
After the referee has stopped play for a goal, the ball, although “dead” until play is restarted with a kick-off, does belong to the team against which the goal was scored. Traditionally the ball is carried back to the center spot by the team against which the goal was scored (Red). A player who provokes confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play may be cautioned for delaying the restart of play. (See Law 12, “Delaying the restart of play,” in the Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees in the back of the Laws of the Game 2009/2010.) This would be the case of the player from the scoring team (B) who was interfering with the Team A player carrying the ball to the center of the field.

The team which has possession (Red) may “allow” the opposing team to hold/transfer/carry/etc. the ball by acceding to the action (i. e., not disputing it). However, the opposing team does this at its peril. In your game, Blue, perhaps believing that Red was moving too slowly to carry the ball back to the center circle for the kick-off, tried to take the ball that “belonged” to Team Red. Blue has no right at any time to request that the ball be given over to it (including such childish behavior as attempting to grab the ball or punch the ball out of the Red player’s control.

Rather than immediately cautioning either player, the true owner (against whose team the goal was scored) and the “wannabe” owner (whose team will be defending at the kick-off), it would be better if you simply spoke quickly to both players, admonishing the wannabe owner to leave the ball alone. You could also tell the player that you will judge whether there is any “delay” in getting the ball back to the center spot and will, if necessary, add time to make up for any time lost.

There is little reason to immediately caution either player if you do what we suggest above. In any event, the possibility of a caution would depend on HOW the Blue player attempts to gain possession (i. e., how aggressively, how prolonged, etc.). We cannot see how the mere fact of attempting to gain possession is itself cautionable.

The critical fact that makes the player’s action cautionable is that his attempt to retrieve the ball caused a tussle with the true “owner” of the ball, the GK. If this hadn’t been inserted into the scenario, then the referee could well have ignored the whole thing . . . because there would in fact have been no delay.

Question:
Offside or not?

Attacker A1 has the ball. Defender is about 7-10 yards from A1. Behind defender are attackers A2 and A3 about 3-4 yards in an offside position (no question about their offside position).

A1 attempts to play ball in direction of A2 and A3 but ends up kicking it directly to Defender, who gains control of the ball. Defender, for whatever reason, kicks the ball over the goal line.

We had half the room saying offside because when the ball was played his teammates were in an offside position.

Other half said no offside. Based on A2 or A3 not touching/playing the ball or that they did not interfere with the defender, and the defender clearly gained control…no offside and re-start corner kick.

USSF answer (January 23, 2010):
If it is clear to the referee (and the AR) that A2 and A3 did not interfere with either play or an opponent while in the offside position, and that the defender established possession of the ball (i. e. it was not a deflection), then there is no offside. It is not an offense to be in an offside position so there should be NO QUESTION that a flag could EVER go up simply because there are one or more attackers in an offside position. Restart with a corner kick.

Question:
The same question(s) applying to two different codes, football (soccer as you call it) and futsal:

A team, who was ahead by two goals is scored against with two minutes left to play, leaving them with only a one goal lead. The ball is correctly placed for kick-off (as are all players), and the referee signals for the kick-off to be taken. The team taking the kick-off, after a reasonable amount of time, refuses to take the kick-off.

1) Should the player closest to the ball be cautioned for delaying the restart of play?

2) If after being cautioned, the player still refuses to take the kick-off, what action should the referee take?

3) Is abandoning the match a possibility, should the team refuse to take the kick-off in a timely manner (especially in competitions with no additional time)?

4) Do your answers differ between futsal and football?

USSF answer (January 23, 2010):
Football/Soccer:
1. If the kicking team excessively delays the taking of the kick-off, the referee certainly has the power to caution a player for that reason.

2. a. If, after the caution, the player still refuses to take the kick-off, the player could be cautioned a second time and then sent off for receiving a second caution in the same match.
2. b. The referee would then suggest to the team that someone else should take the kick-off — and add that time is being added for the entire time of the delay, so that the team knows their refusal to restart will save them no time at all.

3. Yes, abandoning the match is a possibility, but the referee should work to get it finished properly. (See 2.b., above, which could also be applied at Steps 1 or 2.a.)

4. Yes, they do differ.

Futsal:
A caution is not mandated in the Futsal Laws of the Game because the referee should simply call the 4-second violation for failing to restart play within the 4 seconds, and then award an indirect free kick to the opposing team. However, if the previous offending team then interferes with the indirect free kick restart, a caution would be in order for the player who interferes with the restart.

It is noteworthy in the scenario you describe that in the Futsal laws of the game, the clock is not restarted until the ball is correctly put back into play. Hence, there is no real advantage for the team to delay the restart.