COACHING ILLEGAL GAMESMANSHIP

Question:
I have a question about a restart off a free kick.

Recently, I was coaching a game and a young referee called a hand ball right outside the penalty area. My players lined up a wall right behind the ball so the other team could not take a quick free kick. The referee was moving back the wall when the other team set the ball and scored while the referee was moving back the wall. I quickly yelled and protested to the referee that a whistle was needed because he was moving the wall. He agreed and a re-kick was ordered and the other team did not score. The opposing coach protested saying a whistle was not needed.

USSF answer (September 4, 2008):
Let’s do a little analysis here on the true state of the situation that concerns you.

First, if your team actually “lined up a wall right behind the ball so the other team could not take a quick free kick,” this is a blatant violation of both the spirit and the letter of the Laws of the Game. The referee should immediately have indicated that the restart could not occur, cautioned one of your players, advised the other players to quickly retreat to the required minimum distance, and then signaled for the restart. There would then have been no question that the kick could not be taken until the referee signaled — your team would have (as it did) successfully prevented a quick restart, but it would have paid at least some price for this obvious misconduct.

Second, assuming the referee failed to understand the need to deal with the misconduct and proceeded to move the wall back, the attacking team was still free to take an quick kick because they had not been ordered by the referee to wait. Clearly, the referee was distracting the opponents but, frankly, this was their own fault. None of this would have happened had they not violated the Law by being closer than the minimum distance. In short, what the referee did was bad mechanics but not a violation of the Laws of the Game.

Lessons to be learned from this:
The defending team has only one right at a restart, not to be distracted by the referee. They have no right to form a wall nor to prevent the opponents from taking a position anywhere on the field. In this case, you are correct about the referee: Because he was pushing your team back, this required a clear indication to the kicking team to wait for his whistle to restart. The referee should have called the kick back and had it retaken, but the referee should have been astute enough to notice that the kicking team wanted to take a quick free kick. That would have solved every problem.

If your team insists on engaging in illegal gamesmanship, they must be prepared to assume the consequences, regardless of whether the referee uses recommended mechanics or not.
Who is correct? What is the correct ruling?…

BALL IN PLAY FROM AN INDIRECT FREE KICK

Question:
I noticed in one of the current issue responses “Putting the ball into play from a kick restart” that the situation is very similar to an indirect free kick restart. While the response was clear that it must be the decision of the referee as to what is a “kick” and what is not, ATR 13.5 makes it clear that “Simply tapping the top of the ball with the foot or stepping on the ball are not sufficient”. It has become commonly accepted for teams to restart from indirect kicks without the appropriate kicking motion. My question is this…should the correct call be to (a) stop play for an improper restart, warn the players about the proper restart procedure (and subsequent caution for delay or persistent infringement if continued) or (b) allow play to continue, ignoring the tap, treating the subsequent kick as the “first touch” and maintain the indirect signal until a true second touch happens, thereby calling back any goal that might be scored directly from the improperly taken restart and continuing play with a goal kick restart?

USSF answer (September 2, 2008):
The Law is clear: “The ball is in play when it is kicked and moves.” We have stated clearly in Advice 13.5 that there must be some “kicking motion” to put a kicked restart into play. The referee is the sole judge of what constitutes a kick.

Another point in your question needs to be cleared up: We would dispute that “It has become commonly accepted for teams to restart from indirect kicks without the appropriate kicking motion.” Some players may do it and some teams may use that as a tactic, but this does not mean that the definition in the Laws of how an indirect free kick (or any other kick restart) should be taken has changed. It is only referees who are reluctant to enforce the Law who have allowed this tactic to become “commonly accepted.” If the kicker fails to follow the Law and it makes a difference, then the referee must uphold the Law. If it didn’t really matter, then let it go (or perhaps give a warning). This is only common sense.…

CONFUSED REFEREE

Question:
1) if there is a hand ball is it a direct or indirect free kick? how do you know when to call a indirect or direct kick?  2) if the goalie comes out of his area, and advances the ball to the opposite goal, and loses the ball, the defending team has the ball, how would you call that play as a linesman, would the last defender be consider a goalie? would the the forward be offside if he is in front of the last defender but the goalie is way on the other side of the field. this happened to me 2 weeks ago, i counted the goal but should i have?

USSF answer (August 26, 2008):
1) Let’s get some terminology straight here. A “hand ball” means nothing in soccer. If you mean that a player deliberately handled the ball, that is a direct free kick foul. If the handling was not deliberate, then there was no foul, no matter that the player whose hand the ball hit may have “gained an advantage.”

2) Only the goalkeeper can be considered the goalkeeper. Neither of the last two opponents between an attacking player and the opponents’ goal must be the goalkeeper. No, you should not have counted the goal if there was only one opponent between the player and the goal line and the ball was played to that player. That player would have been in an offside position and thus offside (interfering with play) when his teammate played the ball to him.…

“RIGHTS” AT A FREE KICK

Question:
What rights do the kicking team have in the wall during free kicks?
If the defending team sets the wall and a member of the attacking team wants in the wall too, where can he go?
This is usually done to duck under or jump over the free kick.
Must they set up on the ends? Are they allowed to get between the defenders?
I see them pushing for position and am not sure what their rights are since it is their team that is being penalized.
thanks

USSF answer (July 25, 2008):
The defending team has only two rights at a free kick:
(1) The right to retire immediately a minimum of ten yards away until the ball is in play, i. e., is kicked and moves. Any player who fails to do so runs the risk of being cautioned and shown the yellow card for failure to respect the required distance at a free kick, no matter what they may see in professional games.
(2) The right not to be diverted by the referee interfering with the action in other than a ceremonial free kick situation. This is what the referee is doing when he or she starts talking with the opponents — even if saying nothing more than to back away — or, worse, when the referee is actively engaged in being “the first brick in the wall” while still allowing the kicking team to kick whenever it wishes. The USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” lays out a fairly simple set of rules for the referee — keep your mouth shut unless you have to or are asked to step in — in which case the free kick automatically becomes a ceremonial restart and the first thing out of the referee’s mouth had better be an admonition to everyone that the free kick cannot now be taken without a signal by the referee.

The kicking team has rights too: the right to a “free” kick, free of interference from the opponents and, if they wish to take the kick quickly, free from the interference of the referee. The referee cannot abdicate the responsibility to ensure that the free kick is indeed “free.”

No member of the kicking team may force his or her way into the wall set by the defending team. If there is a hole in the wall, the player may go there, but may not then interfere with the ability of the defending team to play the ball. Such players may go to the ends of the wall or set up in front of the wall, paying heed to the caveat in the first sentence — no interference with the wall once the ball is kicked.…

MANAGING A FREE KICK

Question:
This subject probably has been beaten into the ground before but in my referee association interpretations are all over the map. In Advice to Referees, Law 13 – Free Kicks, 13.3 says “The referee should move quickly out of the way after indicating the approximate area of the restart and should do nothing to interfere with the kicking team’s right to an immediate free kick .  At competitive levels of play, referee should not automatically “manage the wall”, but should allow the ball to be put back into play as quickly as possile, unless the kicking team requests help in dealing with opponents infringing on the minimum distance .”  13.5  (first paragraph) says “If the referee decides to delay the restart and to enforce the required minimum distance…”  Second paragraph  says “If one or more opponents fail to respect the required distance before the ball is properly put into play, the referee should stop the restart to deal with this infringement.”  The italics are mine.

So here is how I would manage a free kick:  A) Indicate spot where kick is to be taken.  B) Move away to observe kick.  C)  If attacking team asks for ten yards, move defense (wall) ten yards from ball and tell attackers not to play ball until signal is given (I also read Law 13 to say that a whistle is not required, only a “clear signal”).  D)  Give signal for restart. E)  If a defender intrudes upon the required distance on the restart, I could whistle a retake, and give a caution, if the defender’s action interferes with the restart (I would play advantage if not).  F)  If ten yards is not asked for, and a defender purposely interferes with the restart I may whistle a retake and issue a caution depending upon the outcome of the restart.  On any restart I would not call for a retake if the defenders interfered with the play but the attackers maintained advantage.  I know things vary slightly with different levels of soccer, but I am talking about competitive level.

Some referees will always tell defenders to back off and or/manage the entire restart without a “ten yards” request from the attackers.  Am I erring in some way?  Should I back off defenders? Or is the way I now manage a free kick OK?  I would appreciate an answer from an authority, USSF, so I can argue the correct points.

USSF answer (July 10, 2008):
Whatever works for you, //name deleted//, but there are some other things to consider.

The sequence you describe works fairly well with a couple of minor exceptions. First, regarding “step” (C), be aware that not every time the ten yards is asked for does it actually need to be enforced. Make a quick judgment as to whether in fact the opponents are far enough away and, if they are, order the attackers to proceed with the restart. Second, also regarding step (C), you may not have intended it but the actions in this step are reversed — if requested to enforce the minimum distance, the first action you need to take is to state clearly (by word and/or commonly understood gesture) that the restart cannot occur except by your signal and then back the opponents up the necessary distance. Third, in situations where an opponent attempts to interfere from within ten yards but is unsuccessful (and therefore you choose not to caution), don’t ever forget the value of talking to or warning the player about his or her behavior. Finally, vary the procedure as needed so long as you honor the basic underlying principle — namely, the opponents have no rights in a free kick situation, their actions are already suspect and they must generally be on the best behavior, so your job is to intrude as little as possible and let the attackers control the situation. That is, after all, why we call it a FREE kick.…

“LIFTING” THE BALL TO KICK IT

Question:
On a restart; Can a player scoop/lift the ball in the air for another player to volley it?

USSF answer (June 24, 2008):
Yes, that is legal. A player may take a kick restart by lifting the ball with one or both feet simultaneously. Law 13, under the new 2008/2009 Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees, tells us: “The ball is in play when it is kicked and moves. A free kick can be taken by lifting the ball with a foot or both feet simultaneously.”

However, the player who is allowed to do that by flicking the ball to another player may NOT play it a second time him- or herself. If the ball is truly flicked up and then propelled (contact with the ball is lost and then regained), then a second-touch violation has occurred.…

BALL IN PLAY FROM KICK RESTART; ADVICE 13.5 FOR 2008

Question:
The 2007 ATR is quite specific that a tap on top of the the ball, stepping on the ball, or dragging of the ball does not count as the first touch for an indirect free kick – the ball must be touched in a kicking motion. So far this season I have refereed mover 50 games and have talked to thirty or more referees. Not one coach, or even one referee has been aware of this ATR. I have taken the tack this season to inform both teams during equipment check that I would be following the ATR and then giving the coach a copy, so that they would know where I was getting my information from. I have had now problems. However, this does require a little “speech” to the players, a luxury one does not always get.

At the recent [local] tournament I had the opportunity to talk to several level 5 referees about this ruling – they were unanimous in telling me that you don’t tell teams about this ruling and you certainly don’t follow it – if you disallowed a goal because the only touches were a tap on top of the ball and a kick that put the ball in the goal you wouldn’t make it off the field in one piece.

I’m now in a quandry – do I follow the ruling – if so, do I tell the teams before the game. Imagine this situation – League tournament finals, score tied, one minute to go, defender makes a high kick – IDFK just outside, or inside, the penalty area. Kicking team lines up four players who run at the ball in turn. The first player jumps over the ball, the second player taps the top of the ball, the third player kicks it, loops it over the wall tough play for the keeper. The keeper, following the ATR, knows that a goal cannot be scored, and not risking touching the ball, backs away from the ball and lets it go untouched into the goal. What’s my call? Do I follow the ATR and signal for a goal kick, following a ruling that NOBODY else in the stadium knows, risking major mayhem, or do I make the easy call – GOAL penalizing the goalie for knowing the rules?

That raises a second question – why isn’t a ruling that makes such a fundamental change in how what can be a critical play is judged, better advertised?

USSF answer (June 3, 2008):
It is not surprising that many State-level referees, no matter which state they come from, do not follow the instructions in the Advice to Referees. We find this to be the case throughout the United States, because so many “senior” referees and assessors seem to know more than the Federation about how games should be refereed.

No matter what your colleagues may tell you about what is in the Advice to Referees, it is the interpretation of the U. S. Soccer Federation and should be followed by all referees, assessors, and instructors. Anyone who troubles to read the introduction will find that the Advice is intended to be read by referees, instructors, assessors, players, coaches, parents, and anyone else wants to know what to expect from the officials in a game.

Section 13.5 of the Advice has been changed for 2008, but only “gently.” It now reads:

13.5 BALL IN PLAY
The ball is in play (able to be played by an attacker other than the kicker or by an opponent) when it has been kicked and moved. The distance to be moved is minimal and the “kick” need only be a touch of the ball with the foot in a kicking motion. Simply tapping the top of the ball with the foot or stepping on the ball are not sufficient.

When the restart of play is based on the ball being kicked and moved, the referee must ensure that the ball is indeed kicked (touched with the foot in a kicking motion) and moved (caused to go from one place to another). Being “kicked” can include an action in which the ball is dragged by continuous contact with the foot.  The referee must make the final decision on what is and is not “kicked and moved” based on the spirit and flow of the match.

The referee must judge carefully whether any particular kick of the ball and subsequent movement was indeed reasonably taken with the intention of putting the ball into play rather than with the intention merely to position the ball for the restart. If the ball is just being repositioned (even if the foot is used to do this), play has not been restarted. Likewise, referees should not unfairly punish for “failing to respect the required distance” when an opponent was clearly confused by a touch and movement of the ball which was not a restart.

The referee must make the final decision on what is a “kick” and what is “not a kick” based on his or her feeling for the game-what FIFA calls “Fingerspitzengefühl” (literally: “sensing with one’s fingertips”).

The intelligent referee will do at least two things here:
1. Recognize the situation for what it is and deal with it correctly.
2. Not to explain all this to players or coaches or spectators either before the match or at the time of the first indirect free kick (which is the only situation where the distinction is important).

We continue to emphasize to new referees that, for example, the “captains talk” (the coin toss) is not the time to lecture on the Law.…

FAILURE TO RESPECT THE REQUIRED DISTANCE

Question:
After a direct free kick was awarded, the three members of the defending team lined up about 6 yards from where the ball was placed for the restart (obviously not yielding the required distance). The attacking team elected to take a quick kick rather than ask for the required ten yards. One of the defenders jumped up and to the side and was able to deflect the ball with his chest. In this situation, should the defender be cautioned for failure to yield ten yards and the free kick retaken, or does the attacking team’s decision to take the kick negate any requirement to yield the required distance? If this situation is a violation of the law, as a follow-up question, if the defenders did not move and were struck by the ball, would this also be a violation?

USSF answer (May 6, 2008):
1. Yes and yes. The defender within ten yards clearly interfered with the taking of the free kick. The attackers have the option to restart even though there are defenders within ten yards but that does not absolve these defenders from the duty to not interfere from within ten yards.  And clearly the ball was not misplayed directly to the opponent — he “jumped up and to the side” in order to deflect the ball.

2. No. If the ball had been kicked directly to a defender who happened to be within ten yards at the time there is no infringement, no card, and no stoppage.…

HANDLING AN INDIRECT FREE KICK AT THE GOAL LINE

Question:
Team A is awarded an IFK at the 12 yard line, and Team B sets up a wall just in front of their goalkeeper. Team A’s kicker hits a hard shot towards the upper corner of the net and a defender (not the goalkeeper) reflexively reaches up well above her head to deliberately deflect the shot over the top of the goal.

1. Can DOGSO be called in this situation, given that the goal would have been disallowed if the ball went directly into the goal?

2. Does the situation change if the defender who handled the ball was standing directly in front of the goalkeeper, who was reaching up for the ball and theoretically might have mishandled it – leading to a legal goal – had the defender not illegally handled the ball first?

My view is no DOGSO in either case, but I’m not certain. Thanks for your help.

USSF answer (April 3, 2008):
1. While the goal would have counted if the ball had entered the goal, the player did not prevent an obvious goalscoring opportunity, because, as you suggest, the goal would not have counted if the Team B player had not touched the ball. Caution for unsporting behavior and restart with a penalty kick for the Team A.

2. No the situation does not change.…

INDIRECT FREE-KICK RESTARTS

Question:
On an indirect restart, with the directive that a touch on top of the ball with no movement (in the opinion of the referee) does not count a the first touch, when can the defenders move within 10yds? Can they move on the feint or should the restart be stopped and caution issued?Also if the next player who touches the ball does so twice (without the ball touching another player) is the player guilty of a double touch?

USSF answer (December 19, 2007):
The opponents must remain at least ten yards from the ball until it has been kicked and moves. The ball is not in play until it is kicked and moves. Simply tapping the ball does not move it; there must be a perceptible move from “here” to “there.”

In answer to your questions:
1. The defenders must wait until the ball has actually moved before they approach.
2. If, after the ball is in play — i. e., has been kicked and moved — the kicker touches the ball a second time (except with his hands) before it has touched another player, an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team, the kick to be taken from the place where the infringement occurred* (see page 3). So, yes, if the next player to kick the ball after a “tap” on the ball (which does not put it into play) touches the ball twice in succession, that player is guilty of a double touch.…