• Home
• About
• Ask A Question

Question:
In the context of this question, I am the coach; but I am also a referee.

There was a miscommunication on the sideline while coaching my daughter’s U10 team and I accidentally sent 1 extra player onto the field. (I know I screwed up.)

The referee started the second half, and after several of the parents started yelling, noticed the extra person after play had already started. At which time, he randomly picked a player and told her to leave the field. When I called a different girl, he told me he was making the decision who to remove. At no time was play stopped and no cards were shown.

The ATR states that play is to stop on the discovery and the extra player is to be removed. However, I question whether the referee has the authority to determine which player is the extra one. Should the referee, after stopping play, ask the coach to remove a player or can he/she decide who needs to leave the pitch?

Thanks, in advance.

USSF answer (September 29, 2009):
First let us praise the referee for exercising a bit of good management skill: He had the wit to remove a player and not punish her, you, and your team for your screw-up. As you know, he could easily have cautioned her for entering the field of play without his permission.

However, he does NOT necessarily have the right to determine which player must leave. Only the team can do that, unless the competition is playing strictly under the Laws of the Game, in which case Law 3 will have required the team to have a roster and the referee must go by what is on the roster.  If there is a roster and if they are using Law 3 substitution rules, then it is indeed the referee who determines who is the “extra” player based on his record of who was a valid player at the end of the first half as modified by any valid substitutions he recorded prior to the start of the second half.  Failing either to have a roster or to be using Law 3 substitution rules, then clearly it is the coach who should declare who is the “extra” player.

So, while being thankful for the referee’s first bit of good sense, let the lapse as to who must leave the field go until the next stoppage and then substitute correctly (if that is permitted in your rules of competition).

Question:
More Law 11 Interpretation Craziness?! I was the AR on a U16 Boys Division 1 game this weekend where I made an offside call against the attacking team. I did not get any complaints from the coaches or players but another more seasoned referee with many years under his belt told me after the game that I made the call premature.

The Setup: The Attacker started off in an offside position on the opponent’s half of the field before the ball is passed.

The Action: The ball is passed up over the head of both the defender and the offside attacker. The attacker slows his run marginally to let the ball drop over his head and as he does so the defender catches up to him. They are now shoulder to shoulder racing for the ball.

The ball is now about four yards away from the two shoulder bumping opponents who are racing for the ball. The attacker appears to me to have the advantage in position to obtain the ball and there are no other attacking players within 30 feet of the ball. So I figure it is a no brainer and I throw up the flag and do not bother to wait for the attacker to touch the ball. I justify this by saying to myself that the offside attacker made a play for the ball and at the same time interfered with play by jostling for position with the defender. I am sure I made the right call when I did and that there was no reason to wait for the attacker to touch the ball.

The other more seasoned referee told me that I should still wait until the attacker actually touches the ball before I throw up the flag. I don’t think it matters as the attacker was clearly offside and interfering with play.

What are your thoughts?

USSF answer (September 29, 2009):
The attacker is interfering with the opponents — both by drawing the opponent into a competition for the ball and by actively challenging the opponent while both are racing for the ball.  Our thoughts? Pop that flag upon the very first indication that the attacker was acting to distract or deceive the opponent while in an offside position.

Question:
The following situation arose in a recent game I watched:

Attacking player with a breakaway towards opposing goal is pursued and illegally tackled by a defender right about 18 yards from goal.

Attacking player had possession, only keeper to beat, and was moving in the direction of goal (4 Ds fulfilled). Referee whistles foul and awards DFK outside of box. The referee apparently “loses track” of the offending player and does not remember a number/who to send-off (though he was certain that a send-off for DOSGO was warranted). Play is restarted without any recognition of the misconduct that took place, just a DFK. After the match the referee claims that there is “nothing [he] could have done in the situation.” He just messed up…

Is this true? Shouldn’t someone have been sent off from the offending team even if the referee was unsure exactly who? If that is true where does that authority come from in the laws, interpretations, and other sources governing the beautiful game and how should the referee go about selecting a player to send off?

Thank you for all you do!

USSF answer (September 29, 2009):
Back in 2004 we stated quite clearly that “The resourceful referee will do everything possible to punish the correct person for serious misconduct. In doing so, the referee is expected to make appropriate use of the assistant referees and the fourth official.” That answer and the following exception, based on guidance from the IFAB over the past two years (see the Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees in the back of the Law book), apply to this situation: If the AR had seen the misconduct, had raised his flag, and had maintained it through the ensuing play, the referee could give the card and the send-off once he became aware of the AR’s flag. Unfortunately, in this case the AR does not appear to have seen the incident. If the ARs and the fourth official are unable to provide the necessary information, then the referee has a problem — one that should never have occurred.

Thus, under the strict interpretation of the Laws, the referee was correct: if no member of the officiating team could identify the miscreant, he could legally do nothing. Players cannot be sent off willy-nilly simply because the referee failed to attend to his duties. However, this sort of situation is a case in which the referee might ask that the captain of the offender’s team provide the necessary information. The captain cannot be forced to do this, but the referee might suggest that the game will be abandoned if the miscreant is not produced. In all events, the referee must provide full information (or at least as much as he has retained) in the match report.

Question:
This one has been asked in one form or another before, once by me, so please forgive the redundancy, but …

The rules allow players to stand where they wish for the most part (10 yards, etc not withstanding) and when it comes to a corner kick it is not uncommon to see an attacker attempt to disrupt a keepers concentration or ability to see or play a ball prior the the kick when everyone is jostling for position. I also know that keepers get no special consideration with regard to contact unless they are in control of the ball with thier hands.

That said, what can a keeper or coach do in a situation where the CR seems indifferent to hard body contact and what would seem to most observers to be an attacker impeding the keeper pre-kick. I know that if the CR determines that the keeper was interfered with once the ball is in play they can waive off the kick or possible score, and give the defense a free kick, but that does not address the issue all that well.

This seems to be a coached tactic and is used quite a bit at the U11 through U14/15 ages. It seems unfair to the keeper and puts them in a risky situation trying to keep their stance and make a play when being “guarded” almost like in a basketball game. Should/can the keeper or coach ask the CR from relief from this while the jostling is occurring?

USSF answer (September 29, 2009):
First let us repeat the answer we gave you back on May 14, 2008:

If the referee sees the situation developing, there are two choices: wait until the ball has been kicked to see what happens or step in proactively.

1. If the referee waits until the ball has been kicked to see what happens, there are two possibilities. If the player who is posting on the goalkeeper is attempting to play the ball, his tactics are legitimate. On the other hand, if the player is clearly attempting to interfere with the goalkeeper’s ability to play the ball, the tactics are not legitimate and the referee should call the player for impeding the goalkeeper and award an indirect free kick to the goalkeeper’s team from the point of the foul — bearing in mind the special circumstances applying to infringements within the goal area.

Unless this tactic is repeated, there is no need to caution the impeding player.

As to countermeasures taken by the goalkeeper against the marking player, they should be punished only if the opposing player is clearly attempting to play the ball and not playing the goalkeeper. The referee must exercise common sense.

2. If the referee decides to be proactive, he or she may stop play before the kick takes place and step in immediately and prevent a foul or even misconduct from occurring by having a word with the prospective perpetrator, whether it is the marking player or the goalkeeper. This keeps the ball with the team that won the corner kick (or other restart) and should defuse a potential escalation of the action into misconduct.

To that we might add that there is nothing we can do to MAKE the referee recognize what is going on and act against it. A polite — let us stress — P O L I T E — request to the referee at a stoppage in play might — let us stress M I G H T — work, but experience has shown us that the referees who do not recognize this tactic are often those who miss many other things in a game and are also those who will be the first to take disciplinary action against the person who asks or comments, whether it is truly deserved or not.

Question:
Can a match be restarted and completed even after the Center Ref has signaled it abandoned?

I was the center for a U16 Boys Classic 1 contest in which I expelled the loan team official during the 2nd half of a tied match (this decision was not done lightly and probably would have been done earlier if not for the circumstances)

When I expelled the coach, he confirmed there were no other team official present. I felt I had no option but to abandon the match and indicated that I was doing so by whistle and word. Within a very short time (not much more than a minute or so), while the teams were still on the field pleading with me to let the game continue somehow, the players indicated that a parent was coming to take responsibility of their team.

Because I wanted the boys to be able to complete their game I conferred with my ARs, and after speaking with the captains of both teams we restarted the match from the point the game had been abandoned (ball was in touch).

Since our state requires only that a team official be present to begin a match and allows for a responsible parent to take the place of the official during a match, my question is whether I had the authority to restart the match after I had signalled the match abandoned?

Thanks and I so much appreciate the service that your sight provides.

I only wish there were more questions/answers to read.

USSF answer (September 29, 2009):
1. Our job as referees is to allow the game to reach its natural completion whenever possible. The referee is permitted to change his (or her) mind on a decision of this nature only if the teams remain on or in the near vicinity of the field and the rules of the competition permit it. We might suggest that if such a situation should occur again — heaven forfend! — that you or whatever other person is refereeing first consult with the team(s) to determine if someone is available to take the place of the coach before abandoning the game.

2. You can find more questions and answers in the various archives on this site. They go back to at least 2000 — although some have clearly been rendered slightly less useful by changes in the Laws or in interpretations from the IFAB, FIFA, or the U. S. Soccer Federation.

Question:
Situation: AR is at the mid-line, action is down at the goal to his left. Defenders and two attackers are milling around the mid-field awaiting some action. The AR witnesses a defender come up behind an attacker and rake his Achilles tendon with his cleats.

Clearly this is Violent Conduct and requires sanctioning with a send-off. But my question is how should the AR signal this to the Ref, and when? Should he stand there waving his flag (foul), whistle, or wait until the next break in play and dash out on the field? Can an AR stop play with a whistle blow?? Should he?

This seems to me to require immediate attention, although one might also say that stopping play immediately could impact potential goal scoring opportunities, and the offense could be resolved at next stoppage of play.

Your thoughts??

USSF answer (September 29, 2009):
According to the USSF publication “Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials,” this is the procedure the trail AR must follow for fouls not seen by the referee but indicated by the trail assistant referee:

Trail Assistant Referee
• Determines that the infringement was not or could not be seen by the referee and that, per the pregame conference, the referee would likely have stopped play for the infringement if it had been seen
• Signals with the flag raised vertically in the hand appropriate for the restart direction and, after making eye contact with the referee, gives the flag a slight wave
• If the referee stops play, signals with the flag held 45 degrees upward in the direction of the restart if the foul was committed by any player outside of the penalty area or by an attacker inside the penalty area
• If the referee does not see the signal, continues to hold the flag straight upward in accordance with the pre- game conference
• Takes position to assist with offside on the free kick and monitors other player actions in accordance with the pre-game conference
Lead Assistant Referee
• Mirrors the trail assistant referee’s flag signal if this is not seen by the referee and, upon making eye contact with the referee, directs the referee’s attention to the lead assistant referee

Question:
I was doing an over30 competitive match when the following occurred: White player is dribbling in the penalty area when he begins to lose his balance. Orange fullback sees the white player is beginning to fall and pretends to be tripped by the player and falls pinning the attacker under him. I blew the whistle and awarded a penalty because in my opinion the fullback simulated a fall in order to knock the attacker to the ground and fell on top so the attacker was completely taken out of the play. Of course the orange team was upset and felt I penalized their defender for falling. Could I call this a trip because the action of the fullback caused the attacker to go to ground? Unfair challenge? Or simulation (misconduct IFK)? I don’t know what to call it but it certainly looked like a foul to me.

Your thoughts please

USSF answer (September 24, 2009):
We seem to have at least two infringements here and they must be dealt with in the order in which they occurred. We also need to remember that the referee must base the restart on the infringement that occurred first, rather than the more serious, unless the infringements occur simultaneously, which was not the case described here.

If we accept your description, this is the order in which the infringements occurred:
Infringement the first: The defender simulates a fall.
Infringement the second: The defender then trips the attacker.
Infringement the third: The defender then holds the attacker down.

The correct action here would be to call the simulation and caution the defender for unsporting behavior, for which the restart is an indirect free kick from the spot of the infringement. While the defender did indeed trip the attacker and then hold him down, these acts occurred after the simulation and cannot be punished — unless, of course, you applied the advantage for the simulation and then called the second infringement, the tripping. This would allow you to caution the defender for the simulation and also award a penalty kick for the tripping in the penalty area.

Based on the description, the referee could take either path, depending on what he felt the game “needed” under the circumstances (temperature of the match, behavior of the players, etc.). In addition, there is a third option — caution for the simulation, indirect free kick or penalty kick restart based on which offense is the basis for the stoppage, but then a second caution for the subsequent misconduct of holding the opponent down — which results in a dismissal (red card) for the second yellow.

Question:
I recently AR’ed a U10 game where a few parents on my side of the touchline constantly called into my attention about the assistant coach of the opponent standing on the other side constantly walking down the line close to the corner kick area of his team (where i can see him straight from where i’m standing) yelling out instructions to this players. Since the ball is in play, I didn’t signal the center ref about the issue and allow the game to continue.

The parents got really mad and starting shouting out that i should tell the center ref. Should i stop play in this case or just ignore the issue till the ball is not in play before informing the center ref? Also, if the coach still continue to do it after being warned, what is the best course of action?

USSF answer (September 22, 2009):
Under the Laws of the Game, generally aimed at top-level soccer, team officials are supposed to stay in their own “technical area.” Each team has its “technical area” on the same side of the field, separated by the halfway line. The competition in which you were the AR may have different rules about this. It is very common for local rules (where it is equally common for there not to be any technical areas) to require that no one (team officials or spectators) can be behind the goal lines or farther down the touchlines than the top of each penalty area. Furthermore, where it is needed for match control but the league or tournament has not marked them, USSF allows the referee to approximate a technical area within which substitutes and team officials must stay (and behave themselves).

You should not — and legally cannot — stop the game at any time for a matter this minor. However, you may signal the referee at the next stoppage and inform him or her of the situation, if it is indeed not permitted under the rules of the competition.

You should also pay little or no attention to the parents of either team. They, like coaches, will try to influence your decisions, so turn your ears to a position where you hear only what you need to hear during the game.

Question:
In a recent game player A grabs player B and pulls him down on the ground.  Prior to the whistle being blown, player B stands up and holds the ball in his hands stopping play…..whistle is blown.

Player A should be cautioned  but in discussing this with both National and State Emeritus refs, they both state that only Player A should be cautioned.

Normally I would agree, however in reading  the following, I believe I would be required to caution Player B as well.

12.32 SEQUENTIAL INFRINGEMENTS OF THE LAW
If the referee has decided to stop play for an infringement of the Law (foul, misconduct, offside, or other reason) and another infringement of the Law occurs between the making of this decision and the actual whistle to stop play, this subsequent violation must be treated as misconduct and handled appropriately

.USSF answer (September 21, 2009):
The first foul was called (in the referee’s mind at least) and the delay in whistling covered in the Advice to Referees is irrelevant. You seem to have misunderstood the language of 12.32. It doesn’t mean that ANYTHING that happens after play is stopped is misconduct — it is merely a statement that anything that happens after play is stopped can ONLY be misconduct (i. e., not a foul). Player B committed no offense, whether he thought the whistle was going to blow or not, because the referee’s mental decision had effectively stopped play. Now, if B had reacted to something else (e. g., an AR flag) and the referee had decided NOT to stop play, then we have an entirely different matter.

Question:
I am a grade 8 referee working to improve my skill level and increase in understanding of the game. I have found the us soccer website to be extremely helpful. Find the week in review to be very educational. Currently have a question on making the correct call when there is goalie/attacker collision. When both players are clearly playing the ball and there is not an apparent aggressor, should there be a “no call” or should there be a foul? When one player or the other is clearly an aggressor and “takes the other out”, is it correct to call a foul on the goalie when the ball has been played and a goal prevented? Would say if the attacker takes out the goalie, it is clearly a foul. Is there guidance to making a call when there is a goalie/attacker collision? Thank you.

USSF answer (September 16, 2009):
One question at a time.

First, if both players are clearly (and fairly) playing the ball and not one another and, as a result, they collide, there is NO FOUL. PERIOD. This despite the penchant some referees have for calling this a foul.

2. If one of the players (whether goalkeeper or a field player) is clearly playing his/her opponent, rather than playing the ball, that is a foul. If the act is aggressive, it is serious misconduct, worth of a sending-off (red card). If it is instead reckless, it is unsporting behavior and must be cautioned (yellow card).

3. If the act by the “aggressor” is a foul, interferes with a goal-scoring opportunity (including the actual preventing of a goal), and all “4 Ds” are present, then the “aggressor” should be sent off for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offense punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick. However, if the act in and of itself is worthy of a sending-off, then that is the reason to be included in the match report.

Question:
How should the following matter be addressed?

Our game involved experienced upper teen-aged players. During the game, a defender attempted to kick the ball into touch/out of play to stop the attack. The ball struck a waiting substitute (in this instance, a substitute for the defending team) at the midfield line who was standing too close to the touch line; thus, the ball never completely crossed the touch line but rebounded and remained on the pitch.

In our game, the referee stopped play, verbally admonished the substitute, and restarted using a drop ball near the intersection of the touch and midfield lines. This remedy just doesn’t feel right to me. The substitute had control of where they were and, by being too close to the touch line, committed an act that interfered with play.

In conversation with other referees, several other alternatives to the above procedure have been discussed:

· Caution (yellow card) to the substitute for unsporting behavior (UB), restart with an indirect kick by the non-offending team at the point where the ball struck the substitute. This is my preference as it recognizes the substitute has been improperly involved in the play.

· Play on, as the substitute has the same status as any part of the field – overhanging tree limb, corner flag, referees, etc. I am uncomfortable with this as I do not see the substitute as being something either incidental or necessary to the field or maintenance of the game.

· Treat the ball as if it had completely crossed the touch line (ignoring the contact) and allow the attacking team a throw-in. While this fulfills the nature of how the play should have developed, it certainly lacks honesty and impinges on the integrity of the game and its referees.

Depending upon the proper remedy, what would be the restart if the struck substitute were on the attacking, rather than defending, team?

USSF answer (September 16, 2009):
If a substitute has entered the field without the permission of the referee — which this substitute has done by being too close to the line, no matter how inadvertently, and playing the ball — the Law prescribes the correct punishment and restart. (See the Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees at the “back” of the book, Law 3.)

Question:
As always, many thanks for the excellent resource you provide.

A question has arisen in another forum regarding how long the referee team has to make a call. Specifically, the scenario was given as:

a. During a play for the ball in the penalty area, there is a collision, with no foul committed at that time; three players simply tangle and go down, and the ball caroms away.

b. While the players are untangling and getting up, and the referee’s attention is on the next play some distance away, a still-sitting defender deliberately cleats an opponent in the thigh.

The referee does not observe this, but the AR does. However, the AR does not immediately recognize this for the foul and misconduct that it is.

c. While play continues, the AR is replaying the scene is his mind, and gradually comes to the realization that the incident deserves a send off, presumably for violent conduct.

d. No more than 15 seconds later, play is stopped for an injury.

The AR now has a moment to completely consider what he saw, gets the referee’s attention, and relates what happened. The referee sends off the defender.

Here is the point of dispute. I believe that, since this referee stopped play for the injury, and the AR made no decision at the time, but only after the fact, that the restart is determined by the reason the referee stopped play: a dropped ball. The other point of view is that, since play has not restarted since the incident occurred, the referee team is still empowered to punish the foul as well as the misconduct, and the restart should be a penalty kick.

I appreciate that making the correct call is always the primary concern, but I believe the referee needs to maintain some personal integrity here. This was not the case of an AR signalling for a foul & misconduct at the time it occurred, and not getting the referee’s attention until after play was stopped. The AR did not make up his mind until (in my opinion) it was too late to call the foul. For the misconduct, of course, it is never too late, at least until the match report is filed.

What do you say: dropped ball or PK?

USSF answer (September 15, 2009):
In this case, the original reason for the stoppage is irrelevant. The assistant referee is reporting serious misconduct in the play prior to the stoppage.

Send off the defender for violent conduct. Restart with a penalty kick for the foul against the attacking player.

Give the AR a magic pill to make him/her observe more closely and think more quickly.