Search Results for: dropped ball

Law 11 - Offside

WHEN IS OFFSIDE?

Posted on by

Question:
Red team is defending an attack by blue team. A red player is clearly in an offside position in the center of the field about 10 yds inside the Blue team’s half, but not interfering in play. Suddenly the ball is cleared to the wing and the red team is now attacking. The ball is played to the offending red player who is now in an onside position on the edge of the PA. It is determined that the red player managed to get the ball as efficient as he did because of his original position and the speed at which the ball found him. Assuming the correct call is offside, where is the ball placed, at the edge of the PA or back up near the halfway line where he was offside? If at the edge of the PA, it seems although the red team is penalized, they have still gained an advantage because the ball is starting so much closer to the goal.

USSF answer (December 1, 2008):
The matter at the crux of the decision for or against offside is this: Where was the player at the moment the ball was last played by one of his teammates? It makes absolutely no difference where the player was before that moment.

Because the red player was in an onside position when the ball was played by one of his teammates and he than became actively involved in the play, a decision for offside would be incorrect and thus there is no reason for a restart. However, if the referee had stopped play and it is then found that the player was not offside, the restart would be a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when play was stopped.

This reasoning is reinforced by the fact that the player was in an offside position in the center of the field and not involved in play when the ball was played to the wing. It is perfectly legal to be in an offside position at any moment while the ball is in play and even at most restarts. What matters is the player’s subsequent involvement (or lack thereof) in play.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG?

Posted on by

Question:
U 17 higher level girl’s game. Ball is played toward the goalkeeper and it is obvious that the goalkeeper will get the ball although there is an attacking player in an offside position a substantial distance away from the goal area. As ball is going toward the goalkeeper referee is distracted by other events taking place on the field and looks away and does not notice that the assistant referee has signaled offside although the attacker clearly was not going to get the ball and was not attempting to play the ball. Whistle is not blown and offside is not signaled by center referee. When center referee looks back, goalkeeper in reliance on the assistant referee’s signal has carried the ball outside the penalty area in line with the assistant referee, placed it on the ground and is preparing to take kick. Attacking team wants hand ball called for carrying the ball outside the penalty area. Your opinion on the proper way to have handled the situation?

USSF answer (November 12, 2008):
The principal error here was the mistake was made by the player — taking the assistant referee’s signal as an indication that play has stopped (particularly given the “U 17 higher level” of the competition). We can apply these ancient words of wisdom to the situation: “The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players.”  The referee should either drive this point home to the goalkeeper by calling deliberate handling or, if feeling kindly at that time and perhaps a bit embarrassed, the referee could whistle to stop play, declare that the whistle was inadvertent, and restart with a dropped ball (because of the stoppage with no accompanying infringement or, as in this case, a trifling violation).…

Ball in Play

THROW-IN OFF OPPONENT’S BACK

Posted on by

Question:
On a throw in, the player taking the throw in near the halfway line dose a correct throw but throws at an opponent that is the required distance away or more( 8′). This throw is not a slip or a tactical off the opponent redirect, as the opponent is facing the thrower. This throw was at the player body and not the head. The ball rebounded off the opponent and went out of play back to the thrower.

The thrower was being unsporting at the opinion of the referee and close AR, play stopped Thrower cautioned and play restarted with throw in by the player cautioned (thrower). Question is with the restart.

First we have a player “off the field”, with a stoppage in play,dose this player that commits a misconduct at this time = a restart based on the original stoppage or is the the restart base on the ball being in play, and the ball being an object of striking which = DFK to the opponent at the spot of the contact, or is it a dropped ball as the thrower was off field? My main problem here, is the thrower committing a misconduct or a foul and a misconduct.

USSF answer (November 5, 2008):
If the thrower had released the ball, as it would seem from your question, then the ball was in play and the restart, after the caution for unsporting behavior (or more, if the referee thinks it was done using excessive force), is a direct free kick for the opposing team from the place where the ball struck the opponent. Why? you ask. Because the ball is an extension of the thrower’s arm and the contact with the opponent took place on the field of play.…

Advice to Referees

OUTSIDE AGENT INTERFERES WITH POSSIBLE GOAL

Posted on by

Question:
What do you do when team A is ahead 1-0 and team B is about to score when all of a sudden a team A official comes out and interferes with play to stop the goal? Does team B get the ball for a DFK or PK or do you have to do a DB. From what I have read team officials can be sent off but they are considered outside interference and play restarted with a DB. Also, what about parents or spectators in this same situation? Common sense says do what is right, what do the rules say?

USSF answer (November 5, 2008):
The rules, as explained in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” tell us:
“3.18 ACTION IF PLAY STOPPED FOR PERSON ILLEGALLY ON THE FIELD
“(a) If the extra person is neither a player nor a substitute (as determined usually by the team’s roster), that person is considered an “outside agent” and must be removed. That person, as an outside agent, has not committed misconduct and so no card may be displayed. In the special case of a player who has already been sent off and shown the red card but who returns to the field, no further action can be taken following removal other than to include full details in the match report. Play is restarted with a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped*.”

Note: The asterisk means to see Law 8 for dropped ball restarts within the goal area.

If it is a team official, that person is expelled for behaving irresponsibly and must leave the vicinity of the field. If it is a spectator, that person must also leave the vicinity of the field. As noted in Advice 3.18(a), all details must be included in the match report.…

"Inventive" Refs

NO MAKEUP CALLS!!

Posted on by

Question:
I recently attended a soccer match where the following occurred:

A player on the attacking team was injured in the penalty area of the defending team during a corner kick. The center referee only noticed the injury after it occurred due to the number of players in front of the goal. Both the center referee and the AR did not call a foul. It was realized after that the girl had been kicked in the throat during a scramble for the ball. The injury was tended to, but no foul was indicated and the restart was a free kick to the defending team, which she was instructed to kick directly to the opponent’s goalie as a sign of sportsmanship.

Later in the match a corner kick was taken by the other team. A defender stopped this ball by actually catching it with her hands (in the penalty area). No foul was called and the coach went ballistic (understandably). The Center referee indicated that he did not call a foul (which would result in a penalty kick, i.e. a sure goal) because he did not call a foul in the previous incident… in essence he was calling it a “wash”.

Is this something that referees do? Can they have discretion when calling fouls if they feel a mistake has been made in a previous call?

USSF answer (September 19, 2008):
We are stumped on this one, because you have not told us how play was stopped. If the game was not stopped by the referee to deal with the injury — and referees should stop the game ONLY for SERIOUS injuries — and no foul was called, then the correct restart is for the reason that the ball went out of play. If the game was stopped by the referee to deal with the injury — see above — then the restart would be a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when play was stopped. The indirect free kick might have been correct under high school rules, but certainly not under the Laws of the Game. Another inventive referee at work.

Yes, a very inventive referee — and a referee who cheats on the Letter of the Laws and the Spirit of the Game. Soccer referees do not do “make-up” calls. This referee should be reported to the competition authority and to the referee authorities in your state, so that he can undergo some additional instruction.

If a referee makes a mistake, he or she should NEVER do a “balancing of calls” by making another bad call for the opposing team. Two wrongs do not make a right and the referee must always make the best possible decisions within the framework of the Laws.

Nor do mistakes by referees give the coaches permission to rage at them. We are concerned about you (and others, you are not alone) saying that the coach “went ballistic” and then in this case adding “(understandably).” No coach has a right to “go ballistic” — if they have a concern about a referee’s decision, they should suck it up and follow through with the sort of report we described above. We don’t want anyone believing that we would condone such behavior (any more than we condone the referee’s egregious errors in this situation).…

Interpretations/IFAB

WRESTLING WITH CHANGES IN THE LAWS

Posted on by

Question:
Obviously some things have changed in the last year concerning misconduct (violent conduct) by players on and off the field. Would you please correct or clarify two examples that may have changed and what the correct restart (and by whom) should be:

1. The classic example of the goalkeeper that steps into the goal and over the goal line while the ball is in play to strike an opponent who is caught in the goal net due to momentum. The previous restart would have been a dropped ball. It seems the new restart is now an indirect free kick at the point of the ball. Correct?

2. A player on the field of play is guilty of violent conduct while the ball is in play against a substitute or substituted player. I find an answer (AIG 08; FIFA LOTG 2009) as an indirect free kick… but for whom? Chronologically the substitute or substituted player has entered the field of play illegally (caution; unsporting conduct) before the player misconduct which would be an indirect free kick for (and sent off) for violent conduct with and indirect free kick awarded to the opposing team. Pulled in both directions.

USSF answer (September 15, 2008):
Considering the amendments to and revision of the Laws of the Game for 2008/2009, you may have a point here.

In the first scenario, the IFAB has now made it clear that referees have to decide if the player left the field for the purpose of committing the misconduct or whether the player left the field (or was ordered off — blood, equipment — or was given permission to be off) for some other reason and happened to commit misconduct while off the field. Indirect free kick for the former, dropped ball for the latter.

In the second scenario, the change in emphasis occurred at the same time as the change in restart. After declaring that the restart for an illegal entry by a substitute or substituted player was indirect free kick rather than dropped ball, the Board made it clear that restarting for the illegal entry was the referee’s only choice — i. e., it didn’t matter what the substitute/substituted player did while on the field illegally or what a player did to the substitute or substituted player who was on the field illegally, the restart would still be the indirect free kick for the illegal entry.…

"Inventive" Refs

UNAUTHORIZED MODIFICATIONS TO THE LAWS

Posted on by

Question:
A neighboring state has instituted a modification for youth games and I am uncomfortable having to enforce should I elect to officiate there. (I live nearby and could work games there.)

Here is their modification:
If play is stopped for a reason without a prescribed restart (e.g., injury stoppage) they award an indirect free-kick to the team that was in possession of the ball at the time instead of a drop ball. (NFHS influence at work here, I suspect.)

It caused some issues here at a tournament where I was assigning referees when those neighboring referees attempted to use that restart in our games.

I don’t see this as fitting into any of the five listed items on page 3 of the Laws of the game, “Notes on The Laws of the Game.”

USSF answer (July 24, 2008):
The restart described is not authorized under the Modifications described in the Introduction to the Laws of the Game 2008/2009. The correct restart for a non-foul/misconduct stoppage not described elsewhere in the Laws is a dropped ball — see Law 8. As we do not know — i. e., have not been able to determine — whether or not the state association involved has applied this ruling across the board, we cannot give a more complete answer.

The indirect free kick restart described is taken from high school rules, which are not applicable to games played under the aegis of U. S. Soccer or U. S. Youth Soccer. It is true that an indirect free kick restart is authorized if a player commits any other offense, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or send off a player, but that would not be the case in the situation you put forth.

The only further advice we can give is that the Federation has no direct control over such modifications, but a referee who accepts a game operating under rules of competition that mandate unauthorized modifications must officiate the game under those rules. In other words, know the rules before accepting the assignment.

On the other hand, referees who come from a state where such modifications are used must not seek to apply them in another jurisdiction playing under different rules of competition.…

"Inventive" Refs

DON’T “THINK” TOO MUCH ABOUT POSSIBLE SITUATIONS

Posted on by

Question:
I know these hypothetical situations from a bunch of refs sitting around with nothing better to do aren’t your favorite things, but hopefully you’ll be willing to address this one. We do generally stick to issues that have actually happened to someone, but this one came up and none of us feels certain to have the correct answer.

A foul is committed by the defense in the PA in the closing seconds of a tie game. The referee points to the spot and announces that the PK is being taken in extended time. He also reminds both teams that after the kick is taken, the only player that may touch the ball is the keeper, and that after the kick is finished, the game is over.

The kicker takes the kick, which is deflected by the keeper up into the air. At the taking of the kick, the keeper was on his line, and all other players remained outside the PA/behind the ball until the ball was kicked – that is, all the requirements for a legal kick appear to have been satisfied, and the only question is whether or not the ball will enter the goal. However, the keeper loses the ball in the sun, and it bounces off his back towards the goal. By all appearances it will enter the goal, however, a defender who rushed in after the kick performs a goal-line clearance.

I have gone back and forth on this. Does the game end as a tie (or go to extra time) because the PK was properly taken and did not enter the goal? Or is there a retake? I suppose a third option might be a caution for the defender and IFK in from the 6, but that seems out due to the extended time issue. In going back to ATR 14.7, it seems appropriate to categorize the defender comparable to an outside agent as he could not legally play the ball, and order a retake as “Although the ball was put into play, the team given the PK is deemed not to have had a fair opportunity to score under these circumstances.” A caution for the defender for UB would likely be appropriate as well – I don’t think you can send him off for DOGSO because the offense is not punishable by a FK (no FK in extended time) or PK (the PK is for the previous foul).

OTOH, 14.7 also says that if the interference occurs after the keeper plays the ball, it’s a dropped ball (from the 6 presumably), which would lead one to believe that the kick is in fact over despite the defender’s illegal interference, and all that can be done is to caution the defender and end the game.

Would you be willing to address this scenario?

USSF answer (June 24, 2008):
First things first! Your scenario, while admittedly hypothetical, contains one element that should never come up in any soccer game in which time is extended for the taking of a penalty kick: No players other than the kicker and the goalkeeper should be anywhere near the penalty area in which the kick is taking place. Allowing that to happen is a major referee error and hard to forgive. In this case, the (hypothetical) referee has sown the seeds of his own destruction.

As to the answer to your scenario, you have not yet seen Advice 14.13, which will appear in the upcoming 2008 edition of the Advice to Referees. It should answer your question:

14.13 WHEN IS THE PENALTY KICK COMPLETED?
The penalty kick or kick from the penalty mark is completed only when the referee declares it so, and the referee should not declare the kick to be completed if there is any possibility that the ball is still in play. In other words: So long as the ball is in motion and contacting any combination of the ground, crossbar, goalposts, and goalkeeper, a goal can still be scored.

A penalty kick or kick from the penalty mark is not completed, and must therefore be retaken, if anything unfairly or illegally interferes with the movement of the ball from the moment of the kick to the arrival of the ball at the goal. Examples of such interference would include the ball bursting on its way to the net or the intervention of an outside agent (e. g., spectator) while the ball is still moving to the net. Any interference that occurs after the ball has reached the net (resulting in the ball entering the net, missing the net entirely, or being saved by the goalkeeper) is handled as if the same event had occurred during play. The basic principle underlying this guidance is that the team taking a penalty kick or a kick from the mark must be given a fair chance to score and any illegal obstacle hindering the movement of the ball to the net must result in a retake of the kick.

In this scenario, the Law regards the defender as an outside agent and thus the kick must be retaken. The defender — who should not have been anywhere near the field — must be cautioned for unsporting behavior.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

INFRINGEMENTS COMMITTED OFF THE FIELD OF PLAY

Posted on by

Question:
The attacking team makes a long pass downfield. The ball is heading toward the goaline, just inside the penalty box. An attacker is sprinting downfield trying to get to the ball before it rolls out of bounds. A defender is giving chase as well.

The attacker is able to stop the ball right before it crosses the goalline, and the ball rolls backwards about a yard, sitting inside the penalty box, about halfway between the side of the goal box and penalty box.

However, the momentum of the sprint to the ball causes both players to leave the field of play by a few yards. The attacker is a bit more agile than the defender, and is able to change direction first.

However, prior to the re-entering the field, the defender turns, and grabs the attacker’s jersey, preventing him from getting to the ball and making a cross to an open player.

My very small, meager, and limited understanding of the Laws (I have no business earning a badge and suiting up in the yellow shirt on Saturdays) are that the action by the defender is classified as misconduct, as it occurred off the field of play. In all likelihood, the defender shall be cautioned for unsporting behavior for the blatent shirt pull. However, the only possible restart in this case is a dropped ball at the point where the ball (if outside the goalbox, moving it parallel if not) was when the misconduct occurred.

If my interpretation is correct, to put it mildly, this really sucks for the attacking team. Sure, the defender gets a caution, but for robbing the attacking team from having the ball in a prime location, the result is a dropped ball. That just seems to go against the spirit of fair play.

I would also hope the referee in this situation would double check with his AR who studiously sprinted down the sideline as well to make sure that tug on the shirt didn’t happen to conclude with any part of it occurring over a blade of grass on the outside edge of the goalline, inside the penalty box, where a penalty kick could be awarded.

USSF answer (June 23, 2008):
Any infringement of the Laws committed while off the field by players who have left the field during the course of play must be punished by a caution for unsporting behavior or a send-off for violent conduct, as applicable to the action. The only restart permitted by the Laws of the Game is a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when the infringement occurred (keeping in mind the special circumstances regarding restarts in the goal area).…

Advice to Referees

OFFSIDE: DEFENDER OFF THE FIELD

Posted on by

Offside: Defender Off the Field
By now, many of you have seen and/or heard about the controversial goal in the Holland vs. Italy match in Euro 2008 this past week. Despite its controversy, the referee team was correct in allowing the goal and in their interpretation of Law 11, Offside. Below, we will review the decision and explain why many announcers were doing the game a disservice by providing incorrect information to the fans.
• The Situation
During a free kick by the Dutch team, the Italian goalkeeper pushes his own defender out of the way and off the field, where the defender and a Dutch attacker are both down. The Dutch attacker rises quickly and returns to the field. The Italian defender remains off the field. The ball is played away from the goal and is kicked back to a Dutch player who has the Italian goalkeeper between himself and the goal line and the Italian defender lying on the ground outside the field.  The ball is crossed and redirected into the goal by the attacker.
Video Clip 5:  Holland vs. Italy (25:17)
Review the video clip and ensure you clearly see the situation as it develops. At the end of the clip, there is a better graphical display of the position of the players. Then, ask yourself the question that follows below.
• The Question
Should the Dutch attacker who scored the goal have been called offside? He had only one opponent between himself and the goal line. There was an opponent lying on the ground just across the goal line.
• Clarification
If a defending player deliberately steps behind his own goal line in order to place an opponent in an offside position, the referee shall allow play to continue and caution the defender for deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission when the ball is next out of play. That did not happen in this situation.
However, in this case the defender left the field of play as a result of being pushed aside by his goalkeeper. Players in either of these situations – whether they left the field during the course of play or stepped off to place an opponent in an offside position – are considered to be part of the game and thus accountable when determining offside position by their opponents. The only difference is how these players would be treated from a disciplinary point of view (no yellow card was warranted in this case).
• Summary
There were two Italian defenders to be calculated into the equation, the goalkeeper and the player on the ground just outside the goal line. The referee’s interpretation that the player off the field of play was still involved in the game was correct.
If this interpretation did not exist, then defending players would use the tactic of deliberately stepping off the field of play to put their opponents in an offside position and that is both unacceptable and counter to the Spirit of the Laws of the Game. Unless a player has the permission of the referee to be off the field (in the case of an injury), they are considered to be on it, involved in active play, and deemed to be part of the game.
The Law was applied correctly and the Dutch attacker was not in an offside position when his teammate passed the ball. Hence, the referee was correct in allowing the goal to be scored.
The situation above raises many related questions regarding offside and defending players leaving the field. The following examines a few of these common questions and scenarios.
• Different Scenarios
1. The Italian defender left the field deliberately to place the Dutch attacker in an offside position
Play would continue and the defender would be cautioned at the next stoppage of play for leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission.
Video Clip 6:  Colorado at Kansas City – 2001
This video clip provides a visual example of scenario 1 above in which a defender deliberately attempts to leave the field of play to place an opponent in an offside position. In this case, the defender would not be cautioned because he is not all the way off the field at the time the ball is played by the attacker. If he were fully off the field at the time of the initial shot/pass to goal, the referee would be required to caution the defender for leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission. For further explanation of the events in this clip, referee to U.S. Soccer’s August 23, 2001 position paper entitled, “Offside and Misconduct by a Defender.” <(Click on the link to access the paper) 2. The Dutch attacker pushed the Italian defender thereby forcing him off the field of play
Play would be stopped for the foul committed by the Dutch attacker against the Italian defender.  The restart would be a direct free kick for the defending team from the place of the infringement, keeping in mind the special circumstances involving offenses within the goal area.
3. While off the field of play, the Dutch attacker, as he was getting up after having fallen, held down the Italian defender
Play would be stopped; the Dutch attacker would be cautioned for unsporting behavior and the game would be restarted with a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when play was stopped.
4. While off the field of play, the Italian defender held down the Dutch attacker
The referee would invoke the advantage and play would continue. At the next stoppage the referee would caution the Italian attacker for unsporting behavior.
5. The Italian defender is clearly injured and off the field of play
The referee makes a decision that the defender is seriously injured and cannot return to play by himself. Once the referee has acknowledged the seriousness of the injury, the player may not participate in the play and must not be considered to be in active play (at this point, he would not be considered in determining offside position and should not be considered in the equation as either the first or second last opponent). For purposes of Law 11, the defender is considered to be on the goal line for calculating offside position. This player, however, may not return to play without the referee’s permission. Remember, the referee is instructed in Law 5 to stop the game only for serious injury.
• Other References
U.S. Soccer has published “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game.” Within this publication, refer to sections: 11.8, 11.9, 11.10, and 11.11.

The entire item, including URLs for the two video clips, can be found at http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/LessonsLearnedWeek_11_2008.htm…