AR POSITION AT CORNER KICK ON REF’S SIDE OF FIELD

January 19, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
Early on in my referee training in the mid 1980’s, I was instructed as an AR positioning for a corner kick from the oppositte side of the field, that I was to take 1 step inside of the corner flag, so that I would have a clear view and wouldn’t have a problem with my flag banging with the corner flag. I have had assessors advise me to stay off the field and behind the flag. What is the preferred positioning?

USSF answer (January 19, 2009):
Let us consult the oracle, the USSF publication “Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees, and Fourth Officials” (2008-09), which tells us that for a corner kick from the referee’s side of the field:

Assistant Referee
• Provides confirming flag signal (45 degrees downward toward near corner) after referee indicates a corner kick when ball crosses referee’s side of goal
• If referee makes obvious eye contact to ask for assistance on correct restart, signals for corner kick and maintains the signal as referee indicates decision
• If the ball passes out of play and immediately returns to the field, signals with a vertical flag until acknowledged by the referee, then gives the corner kick flag signal
• Steps upfield from goal line to avoid pointing the flag off the field
• Moves to the near corner and takes position on the goal line behind the flag
• Following the kick, recovers to the offside position as quickly as possible

…

"Inventive" Refs

REFEREE DECISION MAKING

January 19, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
I have become frustrated on many occasions when an opposition player, after going down feeling he was fouled, has place his arms around the ball to stop it from moving. It often seems to be the case that before this happens, the referee allows play to continue, but when the player handles the ball, gives the free kick in that players favour.

Recently in a game I was watching, the opposite of this happened, and when the player handled it, a free kick was given the other way. The only obvious reason for this would be hand ball. In this case, why was a yellow, or even red card not given, since it was a deliberate hand ball?

The only other reason that a free kick was given was because of simulation, and in that case, what could be the reason for a yellow card not to be given?

USSF answer (January 18, 2009):
Strange and mysterious are the ways of referees. It would appear that there is a vast difference between what you see happening on the field and what the referees see.

In the first case you cite, it would seem that the referee him- or herself was not certain what was happening and allowed the player to determine the call. We do not like this.

In the second case, it would seem that the referee made a partially correct decision. Several possibilities exist for solutions to this situation: (a) The referee decides it was deliberate handling, pure and simple, and awards the direct free kick. (b) The referee decides it was deliberate handling and dissent, and cautions the player and then restarts with the direct free kick. (c) The referee decides it was dissent and cautions the player and restarts with an indirect free kick.

As to simulation, there is no reason not to give a caution, unless the referee decides that he or she knows better than the Law Givers and flouts their instructions in the Laws of the Game.

Strange and mysterious are the ways of referees.…

Law 11 - Offside

AR WAITING TO JUDGE OFFSIDE PARTICIPATION

January 7, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
I too am sometimes confused by the AR Procedure. Let’s find out.

Should the AR hold his/her position with flag lowered waiting to judge whether the OSP attacker becomes OS, while the ball advances, and then run to catch up to the ball or NTLD if the OS does not develop, or

Run to stay with the ball or NTLD letting play develop, and if then judging the OSP attacker to be OS due to delayed participation, flag it, get Refs attention and then run back to mark the OS position for the IFK?

My personal mechanic has been to hold the position and rush to catch up if the Offside does not develop. Reason being that 95% of the time I will be in the right position when the OSP attacker becomes OS. Or be pretty close and have more time if the Defense takes possession or the ball goes into touch. The other 5% ??? Of those few instances when I see the possibility of an on side attacker coming thru to play the ball, I try to stay with the ball and then only rush back to the original OSP if I judge the OSP attacker to be OS.

Can you provide any references on this.

USSF answer (January 7, 2009):
If your mechanic works for you, that is fine. However, we recommend REMEMBERING where the player was when the ball was played by his or her teammate — a few yards are not going to mean the world falls apart — and staying with play until it is clear that the offside has materialized.

The AR runs down the touch line, maintaining proper position with either the ball or second-last defender, and then raises the flag when the attacker has become actively involved and is thus offside (subject to the decision of the referee). When the referee sees the raised flag and blows the whistle, the AR makes eye contact with the referee and points the flag to the far, middle or near side, whichever is correct. The AR then moves back down the touch line to a point in line with the correct spot for the restart.

Note: There is no specific advice on the matter because it is left to the discretion of the referee to cover the issue in the pregame. The issue, simply put, is that the AR must continue to maintain proper position during the period of time between when an offside position is noted and when the offside violation is clear enough to be flagged. The AR’s position must be maintained in this scenario because of the possibility that an offside violation may not occur. The issue outcome hinges on identifying the correct location of the restart.…

"Inventive Instructors"

RESTARTS AFTER INFRINGEMENTS OF LAW 14

January 6, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
We are having problems with instructor interpretations again and responses to referees in clinics. A thought-when the new laws/interpretations come out, could the federation send out “Official Interpretations” to the instructors/assessors to be used for the standardization of teaching throughout the country. I know these problems happen other areas besides ours.

Question:
Kick taken on a penalty kick and the offensive team encroaches. GK makes the save and controls the ball. What is proper re-start?

USSF answer (January 6, 2009):
We cannot see this item needs any special “official interpretation”; the answer is clearly spelled out in the Laws of the Game and officially interpreted in the Advice to Referees (14.9). Any instructors who are providing interpretations other than this answer would not likely be helped by some new statement from USSF.

If the referee chooses to recognize that the infringement of Law 14 occurred, then the Law spells out the procedure completely:

a team-mate of the player taking the kick infringes the Laws of the Game:
• the referee allows the kick to be taken
• if the ball enters the goal, the kick is retaken
• if the ball does not enter the goal, the referee stops play and the match is restarted with an indirect free kick to the defending team, from the place where the infringement occurred

However, if, in the opinion of the referee, the infringement was trifling, the referee may allow the goalkeeper to retain the ball and release it into play for everyone within the six-second period allowed after the goalkeeper has established possession.…

"Inventive" Refs

MINE!

January 6, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
My players have recently been getting technical fouls called on them for saying “I go” or “Mine”. The referee was very unclear as to what can be said instead of “I go”. So my question is : What can be said? Is there a website where I can go to see official FIFA rules regarding proper and improper word usage?

USSF answer (January 6, 2009):
It is not clear why any referee would caution your players if they are indeed saying what they are saying and then following through. The only matter of concern here would be verbalizations intended to deceive the other team into misidentifying the miscreant as one of their teammates instead of a player on the opposing team. The reason “Mine” would be unobjectionable (unless screamed in the ear as a means of distracting rather than misidentifying) is because it is “team-neutral” — anyone who, upon hearing this, decides to back of from taking the ball deserves whatever happens next.

And referees do not — or certainly should not — call “technical fouls” in soccer. Those are reserved for basketball referees.…