Thanks for your previous clarifications, but (perhaps) I didn’t understand.
I quote FIFA “Additional Instructions and Guidelines for Referees” 2007/08
Law 3 – The Number of players
If a team official enters the field of play:
• the referee shall stop play (although not immediately if the team official does not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
Player outside the field of play
If, after leaving the field of play to correct unauthorised equipment or kit, to be treated for an injury or bleeding, because he has blood on his kit or for any other reason with the referee‚s permission, a player re-enters the field of play without the referee‚s permission, the referee shall:
• stop play (although not immediately if the player does not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
Substitute or a substituted player
If a substitute or a substituted player enters the field of play without permission:
• the referee shall stop play (although not immediately if the player in question does not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
Should a Referee only apply the advantage clause for Law 12 infringements? No, any Laws?
USSF answer (April 2, 2008):
There is little that can be done about the IFAB’s interesting use of the language. There is advantage within the technical meaning of Law 5 (which can only be used with respect to violations of Law 12) and the general concept of advantage in the sense of “a benefit” could apply to any situation much the same way that the concept of ‘trifling’ does. So, in this framework, let us suppose that a team official enters the field. The referee is not obliged to stop play immediately not because of the application of advantage-in-Law-5 but if the entry of the person has no impact on the play — i.e., it doesn’t matter, and won’t really matter until and unless the team official does something to affect play by interfering with the ball or a player.