RUMOR OF NEW UNIFORMS FALSE!

Question:
I am aware that as of 2008 the referee uniform rumor had been addressed as merely a rumor. However, it has been two years since that time and I’m writing tin inquire as the status of those claims that OSI contract is expiring and a new brand will be taking over. If you could please clarify this for me it would be greatly appreciated.

USSF answer (February 28, 2010):
It was and remains a rumor with no facts whatsoever connected with it.…

REF OR AR AS FIRST AID PROVIDER

Question:
If during a game, a player is injured and no trainers or first-aid providers are available but one of the referees has extensive medical training; is it appropriate for that referee to assess the injury and provide advice to the coach on how to treat the injury or instruct the coach to seek emergency medical care for the player?

USSF answer (February 20 2010):
Only as an absolute last resort. In this litigious society of ours, a referee who is not a licensed medical practitioner would be well advised to stay out of any medical emergency that occurs during the game that referee is working.

The situation is generally controlled by state law (sometimes called a “good Samaritan” law, but also laws that cover specific professions). In some states, you are expected to perform whatever emergency services you are trained/certified to do. An EMT who is also a referee must therefore take off his referee hat and put on his EMT hat if faced with a serious injury on the field. Otherwise, stay out of it and remember that there are other important referee things you could be doing while staying out of it.…

‘KEEPER THROWS BOOT AT BALL

Question:
goal keeper throws his shoe to deflect a ball from going into the goal. The ball goes out of bounds over the endline.

What is the call and what is the restart?

USSF answer (February 20, 2010):
The goalkeeper is cautioned for unsporting behavior and the match is restarted by an indirect free kick to be taken from the place where the ball was when it was struck by the boot or similar object (see Law 13 for position of free kick).

The correct action for the referee depends on where contact with the ball occurred, not where the goalkeeper was when he threw his boot. If the place of contact was inside the penalty area, caution for unsporting behavior and indirect free kick where the goalkeeper was when he threw his boot. If the place of contact was outside the penalty area, red card for denying the obvious goalscoring opportunity and direct free kick where contact with the ball was made. If it was a defender other than the ‘keeper, red card for denying the obvious goalscoring opportunity regardless of where contact was made and a direct free kick if that location was outside but a penalty kick if inside.

The boot or similar object is considered as an extension of the player’s arm. Play would be stopped. If the boot struck the ball inside the penalty area, a penalty kick would be awarded and the offending player would be sent off for preventing a goal by deliberately handling the ball. If the boot struck the ball outside the penalty area, a direct free kick would be awarded and the offending player would be sent off for preventing a goal by deliberately handling the ball (see Law 13 for position of free kick).…

PROPER PLAYER UNIFORMS

Question:
When in a match can you wear small white socks over the original colours of your kit like so many players do in the premiership?

USSF answer (February 16, 2010):
In theory, never, unless all players on a side wear them. Each player’s kit (other than the goalkeeper’s) is expected to be exactly like his/her teammates’ kit as regards color and the color of any under- or overgarments. For answers pertaining to the EPL, you should direct your question to the appropriate authorities.…

INDOOR QUESTION

Question:
Perhaps this slightly outside of your purview, but since USSF does sanction Indoor Referees and Indoor Rules, let’s assume that was the rule of competition instead of this house league.

A player committed a reckless foul and was issued a 2-minute Time Penalty and shown the blue card. On his way out of the arena, he slammed the door in anger. Similar to the act of throwing a water bottle on the field, which I know the WIRs have defined as violent conduct, I equated this as the same, and sent him off. Was I justified? If so, is this an absolute (and also, is the act of throwing water bottles in anger always an act of 100% misconduct mandating punishment by a send-off/dismissal?), or does the Referee have “wiggle room” to manage the situation?

USSF answer (February 13, 2010):
Unless there is some other rule in this competition, under indoor rules the act of slamming the door falls under the category of “misconduct” and should be handled by showing an immediate yellow card and giving that player an additional 5-minute misconduct penalty for the dissent. The team must then have a substitute join the original player in the penalty box; the sub would serve the original 2-minute penalty and come out to put the team at full strength if a goal was scored against them, or at the end of the 2 minutes. Since the penalties would be concurrent, the original offender would serve 7 full minutes, and cannot leave the box until a guaranteed substitution opportunity after the 7 minutes expires, because his team is not playing shorthanded.…

MANAGING FREE KICKS

Question:
I have a question about free kicks. If a defender, less than the required distance, intercepts a free kick by moving/lunging to the side (NOT forward) is this acceptable per the new parameters involving free kicks? The 2009 directives were not especially clear on this point.

USSF answer (February 13, 2010):
You would seem to have not read quite far enough in the Directive on Free Kick and Restart Management. The second bullet point under 4.

Quick Free Kick — Deliberately Preventing the Free Kick from Being Taken reads:

* Intercepts the QFK after the kick is taken: The referee may exercise discretion depending upon whether he/she felt the defender deliberately prevented the ball from being put into play. The referee must take into consideration whether the attacking team had the opportunity to play the ball and whether the attacker knew the position of the defender at the time the QFK was taken.
– If the attacker knew where the defender was at the time the QFK was taken, then the likelihood that the defender prevented the free kick from [being] taken is minimal. In this case, it can be assumed that the attacker “assumed the risk.”

This point is nicely illustrated in the new USSF DVD, Managing the Free Kick. Your State Director of Referee Instruction should have a copy of the DVD.

The DVD differentiates between Interference and Interception. In brief (see the video for full details), the video encourages to “wait and see” when an opponent stands too near the ball and the kicking team does not ask for the full distance. Interference occurs when the defending player, as the ball is kicked, steps TOWARD the kicker and plays the ball. This is failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a free kick, a cautionable offense.

Interception occurs when the defending player, as the ball is kicked, either moves to the side or sticks his/her foot to the side to play the ball; there is NO forward motion.

These changes in procedure have been made on the advice of FIFA, based on training they are giving to referees around the world.…

‘KEEPER HANDLES BALL FROM OWN TEAM’S DIRECT FREE KICK

Question:
Defending team has been awarded a free kick outside the penalty area. The kicker pass back the ball to his goalkeeper. The keeper touches the ball with his hands but the ball, anyway, enters the goal.

How the referee should reiniciate the game?

1. Awarding an IFK against the goalkeeper because he used his hands after the ball was passed to him by a team mate?

2. Allowing the goal because the goalie touched the ball before it entered the goal? or

3. awarding a corner kick because a team can not kick a free kick into its own goal?

USSF answer (February 12, 2010):
For direct free kicks taken outside the penalty area, the Law requires only that a ball is kicked and moved to be in play and thus be eligible to enter the goal for a score (or a corner kick, if taken by the defending team). That happened. The ball was kicked by a player directly to his own goalkeeper. If the goalkeeper had let the ball go, it would have been a corner kick for the opponents. If the goalkeeper had stopped the ball with his hands, it would have been an indirect free kick for the opponents. Unfortunately for his side, the goalkeeper touched the ball but allowed it to continue on its way to goal. The referee should invoke the advantage clause and record the goal. Restart with a kick-off for the defending team.…

ADVICE 12.25 AND INTERPRETATIONS P. 120

Question:
Player leaves without permission and commits obvious violent conduct that referee is going to punish. Does he first caution for leaving and then send-off for VC and show yellow/red? Or is it ok to go to straight red? I know if it’s not VC it’s yellow/yellow/red. My gut says who cares if he left during normal course of play, it’s VC so just go straight to that.

USSF answer (February 11, 2010):
The referee’s decision in this case rests on the needs of the game and how the referee must manage the game. While it may seem natural simply to reach for the red card and send off the player who has left the field without permission, that player has committed a cautionable offense prior to the violent conduct — and the cautionable offense governs the restart if the violent conduct occurs off the field of play: if the player leaves the field of play to commit the offense, play is restarted with an indirect free kick from the position in which the ball was located when play was stopped (see Law 13 — Position of Free Kick).…

INFRINGEMENT BY KICKER AT PENALTY KICK

Question:
At a major state recertification seminar today, we discussed deception on the taking of a PK – more specifically, the case when a player goes beyond legal deception and on to infringement.

The case in question is a player who approaches the ball, overruns it, then backs up.

My position was simple: LotG state that if the kicker infringes, the ref allows the kick to be taken, and either orders a rekick or orders an IFK out, depending on if the ball entered the goal or not.

Our instructor stated that the correct procedure is to blow the whistle at the point when the kicker backs up, without allowing the kick to be taken, and award the IFK immediately. He stated this was direction from FIFA.

At a break, I asked our guest speaker, a former FIFA ref, and that ref did not know. It was suggested that I contact you.

If our instructor was correct, please direct me to the appropriate FIFA publication. I pride myself on knowing the laws and would like to understand this better.

USSF answer (February 8, 2010):
We are not aware of any changes in Law 14 as published for 2009-2010:

Infringements and Sanctions
If the referee gives the signal for a penalty kick to be taken and, before the ball is in play, one of the following occurs:

the player taking the penalty 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

See also this excerpt from Advice to Referees 14.9 INFRINGEMENTS OF LAW 14:

Infringements after the referee’s whistle but before the ball is in play may be committed by the kicker, the goalkeeper, or by any of their teammates.  Violations of Law 14 by the kicker in particular include back heeling the ball (14.12), running past the ball and then backing up to take the kick, excessively changing directions in the run to the ball or taking an excessively long run to the ball (which, in the opinion of the referee, results in an unnecessary delay in taking the kick), or making any motion of the hand or arm which (in the opinion of the referee) is clearly intended to confuse or misdirect the attention of the ‘keeper.  In almost all such cases, the referee should let the kick proceed and deal with the violation in accordance with the chart [given in the excerpt from the Law, above], which outlines the proper restarts for clear infringements of Law 14.  However, in the case of a kicker creating an unnecessary delay in taking the kick, the referee should intervene, if possible, warn the kicker to proceed properly, and signal (whistle) again for the restart.

So, only in the case of the kicker taking an excessively long run to the ball should the referee intervene (“if possible”) before the kick is taken — the implication being that, if intervention even in this case is not possible, the referee follows the general advice on Law 14 violations. The Federation has dealt with one or more aspects of this situation in Memos in 2005, 2007, and as recently as August 2009 (a “stutter step kick” with a clip).

NOTE: Feinting at penalty kicks is going to be a topic of discussion at the IFAB meeting of March 6, 2010. it is possible that this answer might change based on the outcome of the discussion.…

ONE CARD OR TWO? (EACH)

Question:
At a game in which I was the AR, there was a situation in which I felt multiple players should have been issued two yellow cards. However, the referee chose only to give each player one caution:

With a few minutes remaining, players A, B, and C were unhappy with the referee. The outcome of the game was already decided (it was a 3-0 game), so during a stoppage of play, the players took off their shirts and stormed off the field without the referee’s permission.

The referee gave players A, B, and C only one caution for deliberately leaving the field without permission. I felt that the players should have been given two cautions: 1) dissent and 2) deliberately leaving the field without permission. This would therefore mean each of the players got a red card.

What would be the proper way to administer the cautions in this situation?

USSF answer (February 8, 2010):
We cannot comment on a decision to send off both players without full details (and they are not necessary to answer your question). However, If you were to choose to caution both players twice and then show them the red card, a decision that is entirely up to you, then this is what you would do::

Show each player the yellow card twice in a row (each time explaining what it was for) and then, separately, the red card. Ex;plain to them what you are doing, make full notes, and submit a complete report to the competition authority and to any other persons required by your association.…