THE “CORRECT” SOLUTION IS NOT ALWAYS THE “BEST” SOLUTION

Question:
We have recently come across a situation in a game where an opposing coach and I are not in agreement on a call based upon our prior experiences as well as our interpretation of the laws of the game. I am hopeful you can clarify the situation and provide us with the correct decision. Below, please find a brief description of the incident and our two interpretations.

In the game a couple of weeks ago, a keeper was in the process of punting a ball to her team mates at the top of the penalty area. However, in the process of preparing to punt the ball, she took at least two running steps outside the penalty area while holding the ball. The referee immediately blew his whistle and awarded a direct free kick from the spot of the infraction, which was about one and one half yards outside the penalty area. The kick resulted in a goal scored by one of my players. However, the opposing coach did not agree with the call and felt our team should have been awarded an indirect free kick if any award was to be given for the infraction. The opposing coach felt a warning would have been a more appropriate call since he felt the steps taken by his keeper were not done intentionally. The game continued without any incident but we both felt our interpretation of the laws of the game were correct.

Since the incident occurred in the game, we have both reviewed the laws of the game and come up with different conclusions. We are very interested in finding out the correct decision, but please understand we are not involved in any contentious discussion over the situation now or at the time of the game. I will include both of our interpretations so you can share your thoughts regarding the matter and help educate two soccer coaches.

In my interpretation, I feel a direct free kick is the correct call based upon the laws of the game I have posted below as well as my previous experience with this type of call in prior years. Since the keeper handled the ball outside the box, I feel the laws related to a player handling the ball deliberately is the most relevant law associated with the situation especially since the goalkeeper was outside the penalty area.

A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following four offences:
//snipped//
– handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)

A direct free kick is taken from where the offence occurred.

The opposing coach feels first and foremost, the referee should have given the player a warning but if the referee felt compelled to award a free kick, the FIFA rule for an indirect free kick should have applied as follows:
An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player, in the opinion of the referee:
– plays in a dangerous manner
– impedes the progress of an opponent
– prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands
– commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or dismiss a player
The indirect free kick is taken from where the offence occurred.

The opposing coach feels that the word deliberate in the laws related to the four offenses mentioned above means the player handled the ball with “intent” and since the opposing coach felt the player did not intend to gain an advantage, the rules for an indirect kick should apply.

I feel a keeper holding onto a ball is doing so deliberately and consequently should be called for the offense if they step out of the box.

Since we are bound to run into this situation again some time down the road, I would really love to hear the proper ruling regarding the matter. The opposing coach has a wonderful team and our players get along very well together, but we are both interested in seeking the proper ruling. Interestingly, he has asked officials from his town and they support the idea an indirect kick should have been awarded if the referee felt the need to make any call to begin with. I have sought advice from referees and the director of soccer in my town and received confirmation the correct decision was made and a direct kick should have been awarded. I find it amazing we can have so many differences in opinion over the same situation and am very hopeful there is a clear ruling on this matter. I would hate to feel this type of situation is subject to different interpretations to the laws of the game which quite frankly, would make it difficult for any referee to make a call.

Thank you in advance for your help with this matter and I anxiously look forward to hearing back from you.

Answer (October 12, 2007):
Under the Laws of the Game your interpretation is absolutely and indisputably correct: The proper restart would be a direct free kick for the opposing team just outside the penalty area, at the spot where the goalkeeper first deliberately handled the ball outside her own penalty area. So, having stated the facts and feeling very magnanimous, let’s look at the opposing coach’s side as well.

There is some merit in what the other coach says about the “intent” behind the ‘keeper’s infringement and the fact that the referee might have given her a warning to be more careful in the future. And that is something the referee might do, depending on what has been happening in the game up to this point — earlier actions of the goalkeeper, for example. His point about the indirect free kick, however, is a red herring and not apposite here as none of the points under Indirect Free Kick occurred.

While the referee may choose the best solution from among the possibilities available, in this case the only possibility under the Law is direct free kick. (This is clear from the two citations from Law 12, so nothing more need be said on that.) The word “deliberate” would not apply in any case, as the goalkeeper was indeed already DELIBERATELY handling the ball when she left the penalty area; the fact that she (possibly inadvertently) left the penalty area does not change that fact and the referee could punish her for it, as happened in your case. Again, if the referee believed that the goalkeeper’s departure from the penalty area while still deliberately handling the ball was inadvertent or trifling (i. e., it made no difference in the way play ran or continued), then a simple warning after play had next stopped would have been sufficient.

Remember that the “correct” solution is not always the “best” solution. The intelligent referee will know the difference.…

SLEEVELESS JERSEYS

Question:
There is a great deal of discussion where I am located about sleeveless jerseys. The point has been made that a few years back this was addressed by the statement that jerseys must have sleeves, however many feel this was repealed. So the question is what is the ‘current’ regulation on sleeves as well as sleeves which are gathered up by string, tape or velcro, or some other device.

Answer (October 10, 2007):
There has been no change since FIFA revised its stand on jersey sleeves. In a memorandum issued on November 4, 2002, the U. S. Soccer Federation stated:

USSF has been informed by FIFA that it has decided to temporarily set aside the new provision regarding jersey sleeves found in International Board Decision 1 of Law 4. Accordingly, effective immediately and until further notice:
a. Referees will have no responsibility for determining the legality of jersey sleeves or for enforcing the provision in Law 4 related to jersey sleeves.
b. Referees are directed not to include in their game reports any information regarding the presence, absence, or altered status of jersey sleeves unless required to do so by the rules of competition under which a particular game is being played.
c.. The only concern a referee has with respect to the condition of a player’s jersey is safety.
d. Referees are, however, expected to enforce all relevant provisions in the Rules of Competition governing a match, meaning, if a state association, organization, league or tournament has a rule regarding jersey sleeves, that rule should be enforced.

There is no further guidance regarding velcro or string or tape ties to keep the sleeves up beyond the use of common sense and the application of Law 4 to cases where these ties endanger the player him-/herself or any other participant.…

RESTART AFTER A GOAL

Question:
There was a situation in a game that I witnessed today that raised some concern.

Team B had scored a goal. At this point they were losing 5-2. Team A , (ahead), recovered the ball in order to kick off and restart the game. As the player from Team A was carrying the ball back to the center without unnecessary delay, a player from Team B punched at the ball in order to dislodge it from the player on Team A. The player from Team A was able to retain possession of the ball and continued to advance toward the center of the field. The player from Team B at this time punched the player from Team A in the arm, again attempting to dislodge the ball.

No fouls were called.

Two questions come up, does the team against whom the goal was scored have the right to advance the ball back to center, as long as it is done without delay of the game? Who legally has possession of the ball after the goal is scored. Obviously the player who threw the punch is in gross misconduct of the laws of the game and should have been sent off, but was not. Only wondering about who can legally advance the ball back to kick off.

Answer (October 9, 2007):
The reason no “fouls” were called during the movement of the ball back to the center of the field is that no foul may be committed when play has already been stopped. The referee should have punished both players for their misconduct.

After the referee has stopped play for the goal, the ball, although “dead” until play is restarted with a kick-off, does belong to the team against which the goal was scored. Traditionally the ball is carried back to the center spot by the team against which the goal was scored (Team A). A player who provokes confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play may be cautioned for delaying the restart of play. (See the Additional Instructions and Guidelines for Referees in the back of the Laws of the Game 2007/2008.) This would be the case of the player from the scoring team (B) who was interfering with the Team A player carrying the ball to the center of the field.

The team which has possession (A) may “allow” the opposing team to hold/transfer/carry/etc. the ball by acceding to the action (i.e., not disputing it). However, the opposing team does this at its peril. In the incident cited, Team B, perhaps believing that A was moving too slowly to carry the ball back to the center circle for the kick-off, tried to take the ball that “belonged” to Team A. Team B has no right at any time to request that the ball be given over to it (including such childish behavior as attempting to punch the ball out of the Team A player’s control, and even less to punch the opponent’s arm directly).

The Team B player should have been cautioned for delaying the restart of play when he/she initially tried to take the ball away from Team A. If this had occurred, perhaps the subsequent punch by B would have been avoided. If the two actions happened so closely together that the referee had no time to issue the caution, then the Team B player should have been sent off for violent conduct and the attempt to delay the restart included in the match report as additional misconduct.…

LEAVING THE FIELD TO PLAY THE BALL

Question:
I was recently refereeing a recreational U14 Coed game as an AR. A player during the course of play stepped completely over the touch line and kicked a ball that was still in play. The center referee blew his whistle and called for a throw in, not because the ball had passed completely over the touch line but because the player had left the field of play to prevent the ball from crossing the touch line. I had a discussion with the center referee in which I contended that a player was allowed to step completely beyond the touch line in the course of play. The laws of the game seem pretty clear that a throw in is only called when the ball completely passes the plane of the outside of the touch line.

Who is correct? Are there any rules that prohibits a player from temporarily leaving the field during the course of play?

Answer (October 9, 2007):
The referee may not stop the game to award a throw-in until the ball has left the field completely. If the ball had not left the field when the player touched it, then this was a referee error.

As to the act of leaving the field to play the ball, we answered that question as far back as 2001, but it is worth answering it again, just so everyone is aware of it. See the just-published 2007 edition of the USSF publication “Advise to Referees on the Laws of the Game, section 3.9, which says:
QUOTE
3.9 LEAVING THE FIELD IN THE COURSE OF PLAY
If a player accidentally passes over one of the boundary lines of the field of play or if a player in possession of or contesting for the ball passes over the touch line or the goal line without the ball to beat an opponent, he or she is not considered to have left the field of play without the permission of the referee. This player does not need the referee’s permission to return to the field.
END OF QUOTE

Those are the only cases in which a player would normally leave the field without the referee’s permission and live to play again. There might be others, but those would be at the discretion of the referee.

Your referee would seem not to have read any edition of the Advice (1998, 2001, 2003, 2005 and 2006), much less the new one.…

“UNKNOWN” TERMS IN LAW 10

Question:
What does the phrase, “home-and-away tie has been drawn” mean? And what is the “Away goals rule?”

Answer (October 9, 2007):
1. The word “tie” is what is confusing you. In British English, the word “tie,” as used in soccer, means a match between teams, while the word “draw” means that a game has ended up “tied” in the American English sense of both teams having the same score. A “home-and–away tie” is an arrangement whereby one game is played at the home of Team A and the second game in the “tie” is played at the home of Team B. If this tie is “drawn,” then the rules of the competition may call for a tie-breaker procedure. That is where kicks from the penalty mark come in.

2. “Away goals” are those scored when the team is playing at the opponents’ field. Many competitions that require a winner of the game (or two games) count one away goal as worth two if the teams are tied/drawn in the sum of the scores of the “home-and-away tie.…

THERE IS NO CREDIT FOR GOALS IN A FORFEITED MATCH!

Question:
If a match is forfeited, how is the result posted and who if anyone gets credit for the goal or result? thanks

Answer (October 3, 2007):
Not sure what you mean by “posted,” but the competition authority (the people who run the league or cup, etc.) sets the number of goals awarded. No player gets credit for any of the goals awarded by the competition authority.…

MISSED AR SIGNAL — HOW LONG TO HOLD THE FLAG?

Question:
Setup: I was A/R, flagged an “offside” infraction, referee didn’t see my flag, ball went on down the field toward defender’s goal. I kept holding my flag up like a good, little soldier. Another defender came in, got the ball, and was fouled( yellow card issued). I still held my flag. Referee (his back to me, in far quadrant) made note of infraction on his paper, signaled start of play, ball moved down the field, and play was off and running. I finally dropped my flag as the blood was draining and making me light headed.

My opposite A/R never echoed my signal – which might have helped, granted. And I was surprised that not one player or coach hollered, “look at your A/R” (which might have help also). But the fact is that since the offside penalty should have stopped play and there was a subsequent yellow card given, it would seem that the yellow card was negated (or should have been negated) because of the foul. (but, since the referee didn’t call it, then I guess it wasn’t a foul after all – sort of like, “if a tree falls the words and no one hears it” scenario)

Question is this: how long does an A/R actually hold his/her flag? Play did technically go in favor of the defenders (as it should with an offside call. If a referee ignores the A/R’s signal, and subsequent fouls occur (in this case, a yellow card issued), is there anything an A/R should do to bring attention to this? (and yes, I am a firm believer in the adage that an A/R is there to assist, not insist – I’m just looking for advice on how to handle situations like this if it comes up again)

Answer (October 2, 2007):
You would appear to have broken one of the prime commandments of the assistant referee by INsisting on a call rather than ASsisting. No matter that the other AR did not mirror your flag and the referee ignored it totally, the AR does not hold the flag up until his/her arm drains of blood, except in three situations:

  1. OFFSIDE . . ., but ONLY if the attacking team still in possession
  2. Ball out of bounds and comes back on the field
  3. Violent conduct that the referee did not see

You will find the following information in the 2007 edition of the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” now available for purchase on the ussoccer.com website:

6.4 MISSED ASSISTANT REFEREE SIGNALS
If the assistant referee signals a ball out of play, but the referee does not see the signal for an extended period, during which play is stopped and restarted several times, the assistant referee should lower the flag. The FIFA Referee Committee has declared that it is impossible for the referee to act on the assistant referee’s signal after so much play. If the referee misses the assistant referee’s signal for offside, the assistant referee should stand at attention with the flag raised until the defending team gains clear possession or until a goal kick or throw-in is awarded to the defending team. To avoid such situations, the referee should make eye contact with the assistant referees as often as possible. In addition, the assistant referees must be alert for and mirror each other’s signals if needed to assist the referee.The assistant referee should maintain a signal if a serious foul or misconduct is committed out of the referee’s sight or when a goal has been scored illegally. The referee should cover this situation during the pregame conference with the assistant referees.

So, in line with the last paragraph of the quote, what were the referee’s pregame instructions? (A) There weren’t any at all (bad ref, no donut), (B) there were instructions which the AR followed to no avail (also bad ref), or (C) there were instructions and the AR didn’t follow them (no donut for the AR).

Resolve this problem and the bad situation goes away.…

A PLAYER ASKS . . .

Question:
Today I was playing in a game it was roughly the 50th minute. I had been in my opinion fouled outside the box I was minorly injured on the play so I stayed down for a few seconds then the ref came over to me as I was trying to get up and resume play he told me “You should pull your shinguards up” in an agressive tone as I was trying to get up and keep playing I told him to “Shut Up” and I was immediatley shown the red card and I had had no previous infringement the rest of the game prior to that. What would be the referee’s correct action?

Answer (October 2, 2007):
This is a trick question, right? You are pulling our leg on this one, right?

Let’s get two things straight from the start: (1) The only opinion that counts in this game is that of the referee. If he believed that you had been fouled, he would likely have called it. In this case he chose not to believe that. (2) The referee’s primary job in the game is to protect the players, especially from physical injury, but in some cases also from psychological injury. It would seem that the referee discerned that you were suffering from a temporary mental problem and he chose to remind you that your health comes first.

As to the punishment: What you did is called using “offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures,” and it is indeed a send-off offense. By your attitude, from which he was trying to protect you in the first place, you forced him to send you off. Please remember this in the future.…

ASSESSORS! PLEASE MAKE YOUR FEEDBACK C_L_E_A_R

Question:
I recently received an assessment from a national assessor on a U-16 Division 2 game. I had called a foul in the penalty area against the defender, which called for a PK. The assessor said the call was correct; however, he said I was too far from the play to effectively “sell” the call if I had needed to. I was around the 35 yard line and the foul was just inside the penalty area about the 17.

My question is this…what distance should you strive for from the ball (accepting the fact that transitions and other situations sometimes make the ideal distance impossible)?

Answer (September 27, 2007):
We hope that you misunderstood the national assessor’s comment. As you are a first-year referee, he may have been suggesting that being closer to all action would help you sell your calls better.

Positioning is critical when making calls in the attacking third of the field. Position is determined by having the best viewing angle of the challenge. Being between 10 and 15 yards from play without interfering with players space is optimal. In the case of your call, if you were certain that the foul occurred within the penalty area (and your assistant referee did not suggest otherwise), then the decision to award a penalty kick was correct.…

SCREENING VS. IMPEDING; WHICH IS WHICH?

Question:
I am hoping that you can clarify an issue for me: Impeding the progress of an opponent is noted in Law 12 as a foul awarded an IFK. In the ‘Additional Instruction for Referees’ in the back of the Laws of the Game (p61 of the USSF 2006/2007 edition) under the heading of ‘Screening the Ball’ it is noted that a DFK is awarded if a player prevents an opponent from challenging for the ball by illegal use of the hands, arms, legs or body. I am confused what the distinction would be between a ‘impeding’ call (IFK) and the ‘illegal screening’ call (DFK). Can you help?

Answer (September 27, 2007):
There is no difference at all. “Illegal screening” and “impeding” are one and the same thing. are referring to a player who holds an opponent. Holding can be done with the arms, legs, or body.

Under normal circumstances, “impeding” means that there was no physical contact. When physical contact occurs, which is what the “Additional Instructions” meant when it referred to “illegal use of the hands, arms, legs or body,” the foul has been converted into “holding” and is punished with a direct free kick. The Additional Instructions of 2006/2007 are now outdated, by the way, by the 2007/2008 Laws of the Game.…