• Home
• About
• Ask A Question

Question:
In order to play there are X number of players and a specifically appointed goalkeeper. This is a two part question. If the goalkeeper is injured does play stop? If the keeper is injured for a period of time and play is continuing does the goal count if it crosses the goal line?

USSF answer (July 29, 2010):
A two-part question gets a two-part answer.

1. Play is stopped only if, in the opinion of the referee, the player is seriously injured. That includes all players, whether field player or goalkeeper.

2. If the goalkeeper is not, in the opinion of the referee, seriously injured and play continues, a goal would be counted if the whole of the ball completely crosses the entire goal line between the goalposts and beneath the crossbar.

Question:
While watching the local sports highlights of the recent MLS game between Toronto and Dallas, it appeared that the Referee showed a red card to somebody on the sideline that obviously was not a player or substitute. I think it was in Toronto. Do the local youth leagues supply referees for MLS games in Canada? Seriously, what was going on there, or was the card for a player standing behind the technical area?

USSF answer (July 27, 2010):
The referee showed the red card to Dario Sala, reserve goalkeeper for FC Dallas, after he threw a ball on the field, for using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures. Hence, this instance was handled correctly by the referee.

Question:
A back-door uniform question.

I purchase all my equipment from OSI and noticed they are offering English Premier League referee shirts and international shirts for purchase, as well as the standard USSF fare.

As OSI is the official provider for USSF uniforms, are these legal for use by USSF referees? I cannot believe they would be, but thought I would ask.

USSF answer (July 14, 2010):
Your intuition is correct: The EPL shirts may not be worn by referees working games affiliated with the U. S. Soccer Federation.

Question:
I was at a high level youth tournament this summer and we had an interesting discussion amongst the referees, as one of the referees had an affinity for the long-sleeved jerseys. My understanding up until now had been that the referee crew was to be wearing sleeves of the same length, all long, or all short. (This is frequently not the case in other matches I have seen such as EPL and some WC matches, and I believe possibly on a MLS match or two.) When I looked at the most recent Administrative Handbook edition under the uniform, I found no such direction. The referee I worked with at this tournament said a recent memo/position paper had just come out from US Soccer saying referees could wear whichever sleeve length they wanted, and just be comfortable. Can you confirm or put to rest the rumors that any such memo exists? Thanks.

USSF answer (July 14, 2010):
No, there is no such memo. Here is the reply from the authority at U. S. Soccer:
“We have never sent a position paper on sleeves. It is up to each person to decide and they do not all have to match.”

Question:
The [recent] memo [on managing feinting by the kicker at a penalty kick or kick from the penalty mark] says that, if a kick from the penalty mark needs to be retaken, a teammate of the original kicker may take the kick if he/she is eligible. The memo goes on to say, ‘The kicker is, however, credited with having taken the kick….’ Does the blue wording refer to the original kicker? If so, this is a new interpretation, right? (I say that because our kicks-from-the-penalty-mark checklist says that the original kicker whose kick is retaken by a different eligible player is not counted as having taken a kick.)

USSF answer (July 13, 2010):
We regret any possible confusion. The source for the information is the checklist for kicks from the penalty mark:

“The original kicker whose kick is retaken by a different eligible player is not counted as having taken a kick.”

The language in question is in footnote 2 of the position paper and refers to a situation in which there is no retake. Therefore, “the kicker” in this case means the player who actually performed the kick, not the player who originally took the kick that had to be retaken.

Question:
Watching a girls U12 game, the ball was passed to the keeper from her own teammate with an attacker bearing down on the keeper. As the ball, and the attacker, got closer to the keeper she fell to her knees. As she landed, the ball was trapped between between her knees and under her butt (she was sitting on the ball). It wasn’t clear if she stumbled or dropped to block the impending shot, but it was pretty obvious that she didn’t intend to trap the ball on purpose.

The attacking team had not touched the ball yet and the keeper has not handled the ball.

The ref quickly (and correctly, I think) blew the whistle to stop play so the attacker wouldn’t kick at the keeper. But then the keeper was allowed to pick up the ball and send it out to her team, same as if she had just saved a shot on goal.

What should the ref have done to restart in that situation? Can the keeper stop the ball and guard it (either accidentally or purposefully) with her body so the ref will stop play to prevent a dangerous situation?

USSF answer (July 7, 2010):
If it was obvious that the ‘keeper did not purposely trap the ball in the way you describe, then no foul was committed. The referee’s quick thinking was laudable, but the restart was totally wrong. Once the referee has stopped play for something that was not a foul or an act of misconduct, the only proper restart is a dropped ball.

If, on the other hand, the referee believes that the goalkeeper purposely sat on the ball to prevent others from playing it, then the correct restart is an indirect free kick for the opposing team.

Question:
hi my question is this if the player is on the line and puts his hands up to stop the ball from crossing the line in what happen.

I thought it was called a goal and a red card is given .

USSF answer (July 6, 2010):
You are not alone in your wish that this was true, but not in soccer, or at least not yet. There is a rule in both forms of rugby that allows the referee to award what is called a “penalty try” when an opponent commits misconduct, and thus prevents a try — the equivalent of a goal or touchdown in rugby — being scored. However, there is no such rule in soccer. The referee sends off the player who prevented the goal or the obvious goalscoring opportunity and restarts in accordance with the nature of the foul that led to the misconduct. In the situation you describe, that would be a penalty kick.

Question:
I was recently officiating a U12 boys match (as an assistant referee) and I encountered a situation that was very conflicting for me as a referee.

An attacking player was making an advancement on goal when he was cut off by a defender and the ball was played in the opposite direction.

As play moved downfield, the attacker stayed behind (about 6 yards from my position) and he was obviously mad about his performance. I then heard him mutter the “s” word under his breath.

From what I could tell, he uttered the word simply because he was upset with his own performance. He was not directing the word towards any opponent, referee, coach or fan, and as I mentioned it was “under his breath” (yet still audible by myself).

Now I am aware that the FIFA Laws of the Game insist that a player is to be shown the red card and sent off for using abusive language. My question is though, if the abusive word is not directed towards anyone and is simply used out of frustration, is the player still to be sent off?

As you can imagine, red carding a player in a U12 game is a fairly big deal. Although as a referee, I did not think I could let this go. So after hearing the abusive word, I signaled the center official over and explained to him what happened. He proceeded to show the yellow card and caution the player in question.

I am very conflicted with what happened. In a way, I think a yellow card was the more appropriate form of punishment (I support my center referee!), but at the same time, I cant help thinking that this situation was not handled as it should have been under FIFA law.

So basically my question is, should a player be red carded and sent off for using any curse word, at any time, under any circumstances, period? And did the center official make the correct decision in giving a caution in ths game?

Thank you for the help.

USSF answer (July 2, 2010):
This excerpt from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” may be helpful:

The referee should judge offensive, insulting, or abusive language according to its content (the specific
words or actions used), the extent to which the language can be heard by others beyond the immediate
vicinity of the player, and whether the language is directed at officials, opponents, or teammates. In
other words, the referee must watch for language that is Personal, Public, or Provocative. In evaluating
language as misconduct, the referee must take into account the particular circumstances in which the
actions occurred and deal reasonably with language that was clearly the result of a momentary
emotional outburst.

Referees must take care not to inject purely personal opinions as to the nature of the language when
determining a course of action. The referee’s primary focus must be on the effective management of
the match and the players in the context of the overall feel for the Spirit of the Game. “

Beyond that, one of the first lessons a referee should learn is that he (or she) should hear only what needs to be heard to do one’s job well. In other words, the referee should only “hear” what is vital to good game management. All the rest is simply background noise, to be shut out and not processed.

What possible harm has this player who used the “s” word done? None. He was not cursing another player, a team official, a spectator, the referee, or you,

Could the word be heard by spectators or others? Probably not.

There are too many referees who look for reasons to punish players for totally unimportant and inconsequential events. Let it go.

So your answers are these: No, you should not have brought this matter to the referee’s attention. No, the referee should not have cautioned the player.

Let it go.

Question:
I know this has been asked before, but having just watched Japan and Parguay go to PKs to determine a winner I need some input.

On almost every kick the keeper from Japan came off the line prior to the ball being kicked which is against the rules. The keeper can move side to side, but can not move forward until the ball has been struck.

With one ref and two linesmen positioned specifically to observe the action I don’t see how this could be missed. Is it just ignored at this level of play? Perhaps the most well documented example of this was Brianna Scurry coming off the line way early against China to make a dramatic save. I believe Scurry later acknowledge bending the rules to the press after the match.

Given the game deciding weight these plays carry, why is this common rule violation tolerated? It seems crazy to play 90 minutes, plus 30 minutes to let it all rest on these kicks when rules are ignored. It brings in to question the intergrity of the game.

If we had all week I move on from this topic to the blatant diving, shin clutching and face holding that seems to accompany any hard contact these days. Here is how it works: Get hit, go down hard, fake a mortal injury, get on the stretcher and then get right up and jog around once they are brought off the field. Really classy.

USSF answer (July 2, 2010):
Yes, the ‘keeper is required to remain on the line until the ball has been kicked. If he (or she) moves forward before the ball is kicked and moved forward (and thus in play), the kick should be retaken. However, if the kicker scores anyway, then the referee disregards the infringement — but should warn the goalkeeper against further violations.

As to why the officials do not act on these infringements and the others you suggest, we cannot comment and must leave the solution to the officials and their assessors.

Question:
If the second to last defender’s momentum pushes him or her out of bounds while playing a ball, do you just presume that he or she is out of the play and you just line up with the new second to last defender (for offside) or what do you do?

USSF answer (July 2, 2010):
Any defender who leaves the field over the goal line without the permission of the referee, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, is still counted for offside purposes.

You will find this paragraph in the back of the Law book, under Law 11 in the Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees:

Any defending player leaving the field of play for any reason without the referee’s permission shall be considered to be on his own goal line or touch line for the purposes of offside until the next stoppage in play. If the player leaves the field of play deliberately, he must be cautioned when the ball is next out of play.

Question:
As as assistant referee focusing on an offside situation I am mostly looking for the scoring part of the player in determining offside most time the head is the farthest point ahead. With that in mind as I am looking at players lined up along the center half I am looking for the same thing. So if a head is over the line and the feet may not be is this technically an offsides call? Many people seem to think that where feet are is an issue but referees aren’t typically looking at feet for offsides calls.

USSF answer (July 2, 2010):
Your first sentence has it all: When judging the offside position, we look solely at the body parts that can score a goal in a legal play on the ball: the head and the feet, but NOT the hands.

There is, of course, no offense called “offsides.”

Question:
We were in a PK situation to decide a match. One of the kickers placed the ball correctly then kicked it prior to the referee’s whistle. The referee warned the kicker to wait for his signal and allowed another attempt. The kicker replaced the ball correctly and proceeded to kick the ball again prior to his whistle.

Once again the warning and a third kick was allowed which eventually decided the game. Is this the correct ruling? I can see possibly allowing one restart but when the player repeats the offending action shouldn’t the kick be nullified?

USSF answer (July 2, 2010):
The referee has no choice but to allow the kicker to continue taking the kick. See below, taken from the Laws of the Game 2010/2011, Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees:

LAW 14- THE PENALTY KICK
//deleted//
Preparing for the penalty kick
The referee must confirm the following requirements before the penalty
kick is taken:
* The kicker is identified
* The ball is properly placed on the penalty mark
* The goalkeeper is on the goal line between the goal posts and facing the kicker
* The team-mates of the kicker and the goalkeeper are
– outside the penalty area
– outside the penalty arc
– behind the ball

Infringements – After the whistle and before ball in play
Outcome of the kick
Infringement
for encroachment Goal No Goal
Attacking Player Penalty is retaken Indirect free kick
Defending Player Goal Penalty is retaken
Both Penalty is retaken Penalty is retaken

However, if the kicker repeats this after being warned, the referee has the option of cautioning ( yellow card) and, upon further repetition of the act, of sending the player off and showing the red card. Even though the kicker may be warned, cautioned or sent off for repeating his offending action, the penalty kick will still be retaken (by any player on the kicking team).