Author: Jim Allen

"Inventive" Refs

LOST BOOT; BALL KICKED “TO GOALKEEPER”

Posted on by

Question:
The first I cannot figure out after reviewing the LOTG etc. and asking fellow referees their opinions. It has to do with equipment. Team A was at the 18 yrd line with the ball. Defender from team B won the ball and passed it 10 yrds forward to another teammate. A player from team A ran toward him and in the process his boot came off. The team A player caught the team B player gaining control of the ball. I whistled for a foul and awarded the B team an indirect kick as Player A was not in uniform. I read something about a dropped ball being called but I would guess that would be rewarding the A team. Anyway, I am not sure what to do and seek your guidance.

The second has to do with kicking the ball back to the GK. I was told by one of our senior referees that we cannot read the field players mind when the ball is kicked to the GK, intentional or not and should award an IFK when if occurs unless it is so obvious that there was no intent. For example, the player kicks the ball into the wind and it blows back to the GK who grabs it. I was the center at a u14 game.

The ball was in the middle of the penalty area.

the defender ran and took a mighty kick at the ball which glanced off the foot and rolled towad the GK who picked it up. I did not award an IFK causing dismay in one of the opposing players who questioned me about it. What is the proper interpretation of the pass back rule regarding intent?

USSF answer (November 24, 2011):
1. A player is expected to replace his footwear as quickly as possible if it comes off during play, but that does not mean that he has to do it immediately. You would have been wrong to caution this player for misconduct; there was no foul committed in the scenario you present, so no kick was necessary. You should have started with a dropped ball (for stopping play incorrectly) and apologized to all concerned

2. The referee should not be looking for fouls to call when none occurs. You would have been mistaken in punishing the goalkeeper for his teammate’s misplayed ball. The ball was truly deliberately kicked, part of the foul, but it was not sent to any place where the goalkeeper could play it; that was pure happenstance, not a foul. Furthermore, the teammate kicking the ball in this sort of scenario is NEVER the one who commits the foul. The foul — if it exists at all — is committed by the goalkeeper if he chooses to use his hands instead of some other part of his body.…

"Inventive" Refs

FEET ON THE LINE AT A THROW-IN

Posted on by

Question:
As a referee, I have always been told that the lines on a field are part of the area of which they “contain”. However, this seems to be in conflict with the law regarding throw-ins and the placement of the feet of the individual taking the throw-in along the touchline.

I recently had a game in which I had to explain the lines are part of the area of which they contain and he brought up the fact that on a throw-in as long as both feet are touching the touchline in some form that the throw-in is considered legal. However he then pointed out that by my description, would not that be illegal since in a throw-in the player must take the throw-in from outside of the field of play, however the line is considered in play?

The only reasoning I can come up with for this is that at its most basic form the throw-in is a method of restarting the match and thus follows a slightly different set of circumstances or rules than normal course of play.

But is there any further reasoning as to why a player is allowed to be completely in the field of play when taking a throw-in (in the case where they keep both heels on the inside edge of the touchline) and yet the throw-in is technically taken to put the ball back in to play?

USSF answer (November 24, 2011):
The answer to your question lies in applying Laws 1 and 15 as they are written, not in finding reasons to doubt them. “He,” whoever “he” may be, was totally wrong in suggesting that having one’s feet on the line had anything to do with a dichotomy in the Laws. Your original understanding is correct. Your interlocutor is talking apples and applesauce, two different things, and creating his own muddled version of the Laws.

Law 1:
Field Markings
The field of play must be rectangular and marked with lines. These lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries.

Law 15:
Procedure
At the moment of delivering the ball, the thrower:
* faces the field of play
* has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside the touch line

This is the Law and it is also tradition. Where the Law is clear, follow the Law; where it is not, do the best you can (including applying logic).…

"Inventive" Refs

DELAYS THE RESTART OF PLAY

Posted on by

Question:
Having a debate here about definition of ‘delay of game’.

On a kick-off from the half line, after a goal, or starting a game, if a team does an improper kick-off (i.e. ball does not move forward, and cross over the half line) several times, is this delay of game? I have seen teams do this in the past. I would allow this twice, then give an IDFK to the opposite team. I was recently told by a senior official that this is not a delay of game and not IDFK. Well, if so, what do you do about it?

USSF answer (November 17, 2011):
The tactic you describe could be considered to be delaying the restart of play. A number of examples are given in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:

12.28.4 DELAYS THE RESTART OF PLAY
The following are specific examples of this form of misconduct (some of which may also be committed by substitutes):

• Kicks or throws the ball away or holds the ball to prevent or delay a free kick, throw-in, or corner kick restart by an opponent

• Fails to restart play after being so instructed by the referee

• Excessively celebrates a goal

• Fails to return to the field from a midgame break, fails to perform a kick-off when signaled by the referee, or fails to be in a correct position for a kick-off

• Performing a throw-in improperly with the apparent intention of being required to perform the throw-in again, thus wasting time

• Unnecessarily moving a ball which has already been properly placed on the ground for a goal kick

• Provokes a confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play

Because the ball was out of play at the delay, the restart after any caution in this case would still be the kick-off.…

"Inventive Coaches"

UNSPORTING BEHAVIOR RESTART AND “END OF HALF”

Posted on by

Question 1:
In the first 10 minutes of a U-12 Girls D-1 game, Orange Attacker collides with Blue Keeper. The Orange attacker gets up, but Blue Keeper stays face-down and motionless. The ball spins out of the penalty area toward the touchline when Orange Attacker 2 gathers the ball — completely unopposed. Both teams call for Orange Attacker 2 to kick it out because Blue Keeper is down. Orange Attacker 2 does kick it out.

When the ball is officially out of play, the “injured” blue keeper pops up – smiling. She was “hobbling” a little, but she was perfectly fine after she rubbed her leg a little.

In reflection of this incident, I SHOULD have cautioned Blue Keeper (unsporting behavior) for faking an injury to gain an advantage. I did not give her a YELLOW since I wanted to give her the “benefit of the doubt.”

If the card is issued, What is the re-start? Throw-in for the Blue Keeper’s team or Indirect Free kick (inside the penalty area) for Orange Attacker 1’s team?

Question #2:
At the end of the half in a different U-12 Girls D-1 game, there was a large melee in from of the goal. Time expired in the half PRIOR to the ball entering the goal, but before I could blow the whistle due to it slipping out of my hand at the crucial moment it should have been blown. I disallowed the goal as it was after I was aware the half had ended.

Obviously, the attacking coach told me that play continued until I actually blew the whistle and the goal should count. I told him, the half is over when the center referee is AWARE that time has expired, even if the whistle is NOT blown at all! I also told him the whistle has no official meaning under the laws of the game, but is simply a device officials use to get the attention of the players.

Should the goal have been awarded?

USSF answer (November 17, 2011):
Answer 1: The restart is governed by the reason the ball was out of play (if not stopped by the referee for some other reason). In this case, the correct reason is (apparently) a throw-in, after the referee has issued the caution for unsporting behavior to the goalkeeper (if it is deserved). If the referee did not feel that the goalkeeper’s injury was serious, then there was no reason for the teams to take action on their own to stop play. The referee should instruct the players to leave decision of this nature up to the referee and not take the law into their own feet.

Answer 2: Your decision was correct: no goal. As we constantly remind people, coaches will always attempt to influence your calls. Pay them no mind and call the game as you have been taught to call it.

In addition, your statement about the whistle is not strictly true and could even be confusing. A whistle is required for every ceremonial restart; without it, the restart is not authorized and must be retaken. In such cases, it is NOT merely to gain the attention of players.…

Law 11 - Offside

FOUL OR OFFSIDE?

Posted on by

Question:
I had a situation last weekend in a local Div. 1 men’s league game. An attacker, in the offside position was fouled by a defender before he was ruled as “offside” by my AR. At the moment of the foul I blew the whistle and indicated an offside offense had occurred. Naturally, the attacking team was unhappy that their player had been fouled and the defensive team received the free kick. Does being fouled while in an offside position indicate “involvement” in the play?

USSF answer (November 15, 2011):
We are confused. The problem in answering is that so much depends on whether you or any referee realize(s) that the description of the sequence of events controls the answer..

In the scenario as described, the attacker in the offside position was fouled “before he was ruled offside by my AR,” but does that mean the AR didn’t see any touch of the ball until after the foul occurred? If so, then the foul clearly occurred first, It takes precedence, it determines the restart, and there was no offside offense because the attacker’s touch of the ball (“interfere with play” happened after play was stopped. If the description means that the AR was about to raise the flag for an offside offense that hadn’t happened yet (because the attacker hadn’t yet interfered with play) — an all too likely possibility — then again the result should be that there was no offside offense and only the foul is relevant here.

The only way we can see the offside being called and taking precedence over whatever the defender did is if the ball was passed to the attacker, the attacker made contact with the ball (interfered with play and hence committed an offside violation), and THEN was “fouled” by the defender; but of course it wasn’t really a foul because play stopped with the offside offense (if the referee accepts the AR’s flag) and so the defender can, at most, only be punished for misconduct.…

"Inventive" Refs

NO OFFSIDE?!

Posted on by

Question:
Blue player takes a shot with everyone onside. Ball hits crossbar and lands at the feet of another blue player who went to play rebound. there was no defensive player between him and goalie and the ref blew whistle and called offside. Is this a true offside??

USSF answer (November 15, 2011):
In order to be declared offside, a player must be in an offside position and actively involved in play when a teammate plays the ball. That did not happen in this case. If any member of the blue team had played the ball legally into the goal then a goal should have been scored. It appears that your referee has an overactive imagination and a less than desirable knowledge of the Laws.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

OUTSIDE AGENT PREVENTS GOAL

Posted on by

Question:
Hello, my question is while the ball is kicked and pass the goalkeeper and headed to goal, at this moment if a fan inters the pitch and blocks the ball from passing the line, what will be the referees decisions?

USSF answer (November 14, 2011):
The fan is considered to be an outside agent. If an outside agent enters the field of play the referee must stop play (although not immediately if the outside agent does not interfere with play), have the outside agent removed from the field of play and its immediate surroundings, and then restart play with a dropped ball in the position where the ball was at the time when the match was stopped, unless the ball was stopped inside the goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was when play was stopped.…

"Inventive" Refs

ONLY TEAM OFFICIALS CAN COMMIT “IRRESPONSIBLE BEHAVIOR”

Posted on by

Question:
It’s very near the end of the game and Team A is losing to Team B.

Team A has a throw-in near the benches and is pressing very hard to equalize the score. As Team A’s player begins to take the throw-in Team B’s substitute goalkeeper, sitting on the bench, throws another ball into the field to prevent the restart.

The referee correctly identifies the goalkeeper, shows the red card, and sends him off for the misconduct. Now here’s the issue.

Some referees are opining that a substitute is considered “bench personnel” while at the bench. Therefore, the match report should say the GK is sent off for “irresponsible behavior.”

I argue that a substitute is a substitute, not bench personnel. As such the substitute GK can only be sent off for one of the seven reasons stated in Law 12 — and “irresponsible behavior” is not one of them.

Your response?

USSF answer (November 6, 2011):
Neither the substitute goalkeeper nor any other player may be sent off for the offense of “irresponsible behavior.” He may only be cautioned for unsporting behavior, unless something else occurs during the period following the initial cautionable misconduct of throwing the extra ball onto the field.

This was made clear in a position paper of March 22, 2006, on “Management of Behavior in the Technical Area.” The pertinent quote from that paper Is:
“,. . . in match conditions where spectators are not allowed near the immediate area of the field (for example, restricting spectators to stadium seats or behind barriers), the persons allowed in or near the field are strictly limited to players, substitutes, and team officials. For purposes of this memorandum, anyone officially allowed in the technical area who is not a rostered player or substitute (or substituted player) is a team official.”

Thus, no player (including substitutes and substituted players) may be sent off for “irresponsible behavior.” Such persons are not “bench personnel” and are thus not subject to the same treatment as team officials (coaches, trainers, medical personnel, etc.). Players (including substitutes and substituted players) may be sent off only for one of the seven reasons listed in Law 12, which covers players, etc:…

Disciplinary Matters

UNDUE INTERFERENCE/IMPROPER CONDUCT BY AR (AND SPECTATOR)

Posted on by

Question:
Two quick questions, at the half of a u18 game. AR approaches the center,and states the center is “calling for the other side” Center tells AR the game is being called for both sides. AR argues the point,and is asked by the center to return to their sideline,AR at such time throws down their flag,and quits the game. Is this not a very poor behavior,and an example by the AR,who is also a referee? forget if LAW 5 or 6 covers AR. is this not reportable to the local association. second during a very physical game, team A and Team B are struggling for the ball,play continues. center verbally warns both players about use of elbows. A spectator jumps up out of their seat on the sideline in a aggressive manner,moves to the touch line,ands starts yelling at center about elbows. center approaches partway to sideline, tells spectator both players have been warned,and it’s under control,to sit back down. after game same spectator enters the field,and approaches the center, verbally assaults,and threatens the center. spectator is instructed to leave the field. does the referee retreat,or does he still have the field?

USSF answer (November 2, 2011):
Regarding the assistant referee, Law 6 tells us: “In the event of undue interference or improper conduct, the referee will relieve an assistant referee of his duties and make a report to the appropriate authorities,” using the the match report form each referee should fill out after every match. This AR has also failed to live up to the Referee Code of Ethics and could be brought up on charges under U. S. Soccer Federation Policy 531-10 – Misconduct of Game Officials .

Regarding the aggressive spectator, Law 5 tells us that the referee stops, suspends or abandons the match because of outside interference of any kind. Before abandoning the game, however, the referee should ask the home team (tournament/league officials, if present) to have the person removed. If there is no help from these officials, then the match is abandoned and the referee includes full details in the match report.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

A REFEREE MUST ALWAYS FOLLOW THE CODE OF ETHICS

Posted on by

Question:
Parents sitting within a few feet of the corner flags (basically, their positioning impedes the soccer players from having the appropriate space to kick the ball). I have traditionally had problems with rec parents (in particular) who get mad when asked to move at least 2 yards from the lines or from outside the corner goal area. As a matter of fact, this weekend a newly bridged ref (from grade 9 to grade 8 and whose dad was the coach of the team playing) got mad when asked to move (mind you he was sitting, as a spectator, within 2-3 ft of the flag – if he had laid down he would have touched the flag). During stoppage of the game, he came to the pitch to question why I would make a “ref” (while pointing to his new 2012 badge) move – wanted me to tell him “which rule”. I told him I’d be happy to talk to him after the game but not why I was currently reffing. Then he said, “The game has stopped. Tell me why you want me to move”. I told him I was in the middle of the game and he needed to leave the field so I could get the game going again. His dad then told him to get off the field so the team could play. Naturally, he did not come to find me at the end of the game.

I plan to talk to the Association today about this behavior; however it seems that there is some “ethical” issue that he may have violated
– particularly since he entered the field and had no reason to be on the field.

USSF answer (October 31, 2011):
This sort of situation is usually dealt with in the rules of the particular competition under which the game is being played. In other words, the rules of the league or the rec council or tournament, etc. In most cases these rules forbid spectators (particularly partisan spectators) from being behind the goal lines or less than three yards from either of the touchlines,although it will vary depending on where you are.

While the errant official may not have been on the game itself, he clearly violated a number of items under the Referee Code of Ethics:

(1) I will always maintain the utmost respect for the game of soccer.
(2) I will conduct myself honorably at all times and maintain the dignity of my position.
//3 items clipped//
(6) I will be loyal to my fellow officials and never knowingly promote criticism of them.
//2 items clipped//
(9) I will do my utmost to assist my fellow officials to better themselves and their work.
(10) I will not make statements about any games except to clarify an interpretation of the Laws of the Game.
/1 item clipped//
(12) I consider it a privilege to be a part of the U.S. Soccer Federation and my actions will reflect credit upon that organization and its affiliates.…