FLYING BOOT

Question:
Here is the situation: Red team is attacking just outside the penalty box when a red player try to hit the ball to goal,but it missed and in doing so, his shoe went flying straight to the goalkeeper face. At almost the same time, another red player hit the ball and was going straight to the net, but because the goalkeeper was busy protecting himself from the flying shoe,he lost track of the ball and the ball just past next to him and went inside the net. It was an easy stoppable shot. The ref,as soon as he saw the flying shoe,stop the play,barely before the ball hit the net…The reason? according to him, was interfering with play, and also a strange object in the field.. the goal was not allowed,and the game resumed with a ball dropped. Was he correct? Please clarify…Tanks.

USSF answer (September 28, 2011):
The referee was correct in not allowing the goal, as the Red player “threw” an object at the goalkeeper when the shoe went flying from the foot toward the ‘keeper’s face. It might be stretching the Law a bit to call it “interfering,” but the referee certainly exercised good sense in stopping play and restarting play with a dropped ball (for restarts not covered elsewhere in the Law). However, notice that we do not suggest that the Red player might be sent off for violent conduct.…

THE REFEREE DID WHAT?!

Question:
In a high school varsity game played under USSF rules (as opposed to NHSF) the attacking team plays a ball that rolls into the penalty area and is picked up by the goalie. After the goalie has possession, a defender running with the attacker chasing the ball plays the body and bumps the attacker in a significant manner. The referee (I was the AR) gave the defender a caution for UB, and then allowed the goalie to punt to continue play.

We discussed after the game as to whether, after the caution, he should have awarded the attacking team a penalty kick, an indirect free kick from the spot of the contact, or whether letting the goalie punt was appropriate.

We’d appreciate your feedback.

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
If there was no injury or immediate exhibition of ill-feeling and the referee invoked the advantage clause and then cautioned the defending player at the next stoppage, that would be legitimate and proper. However, in this case, the referee did not stop play and appears to have cautioned the attacker “on the fly,” not something that is in accordance with the Laws of the Game. This shows either ignorance of the Law or willful disregard of the Law by the referee.

The correct course of action would have been to play the advantage and then, at the next stoppage, to caution the defending player for unsporting behavior.…

SHIELDING VS IMPEDING

Question:
Corner Kick-shielding. During a recent U12 Girls game I was officiating, the blue team was awarded a corner kick. Blue player took the kick but miss hit the ball. The ball traveled forward about 6 feet towards the goal. The kicker, realizing that she could not kick the ball again since it would constitute a two touch violation, yelled at her teammate to come in and get the ball. The red team defender who was next to the blue teammate also ran towards the ball to try and gain control of it.

Question: Would it have been OK if the blue team player who kicked the ball ran between the red team player and ball to shield her from getting the ball (with the understanding that the ball would have been within playing distance of the blue team player who kicked it) and give the blue teammate of the kicker a better opportunity of getting the ball by swinging behind the two players?

If the kicker was not allowed to legally play the ball again immediately due to the two touch rule, can she still be involved in the play and shield the opposing player from getting the ball?

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
Shielding the ball does not establish or continue “possession” of the ball. The Blue player is technically unable to actually play the ball, because to do so would constitute the “second touch.” Being within “playing distance” should not be considered sufficient to allow the kicker to shield the ball – the ball must in fact also be playable by that player. In other words, the concept of “playing distance” must include being able to play the ball legally.

If the player can legally play the ball and the ball is within playing distance, the player may shield as a tactic to prevent an opponent from getting to the ball (provided, of course, that the shielding does not involve holding).  If the player cannot legally play the ball or if the ball is not within playing distance, such shielding becomes “impeding the progress of an opponent” and should be penalized by an indirect free kick.…

OFFSIDE?

Question:
The situation is it is raining: All three forwards are in an offside position as it is played forward by a teammate of the forwards, but right at a defender. The defender kicks the ball one-touch but it squibs off their foot and goes 20 yards down the field out of bounds for the team that was offside to take a throw in.

I signaled for offside. Is that gaining an advantage or a misplay by the defense and rain is rain?

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
The correct decision would be for the referee to call the offside. See the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:

11.14 BECOMING “ONSIDE”
The possibility of penalizing a player for being in an offside position must be reevaluated whenever:
1. The ball is again touched or played by a teammate,
2. The ball is played (possessed and controlled, not simply deflected, miskicked or misdirected) by an opponent, including the opposing goalkeeper, or
3. The ball goes out of play.

The result of such a reevaluation, of course, may be that the player remains in an offside position based on still being beyond the second-to-last defender, the ball, and the midfield line. Referees must remember that a player cannot simply run to an onside position and become involved in play. The player’s position with relation to the ball and the opponents must change in accordance with the Law.

In the case of the ball leaving the field in favor of the team whose player was in an offside position and actively involved in play (e.g., a corner kick or throw-in for the attackers), it is traditional to call the original offside offense. If the restart would be in favor of the opposing team (e.g., a goal kick or throw-in for the defenders), it is usually preferable to ignore the offside infringement, as the defending team’s restart gives them the possession under circumstances not much different than the indirect free kick for offside-and often with less controversy.

THE REFEREE DID WHAT?! (CORRECTED)

Question:
In a high school varsity game played under USSF rules (as opposed to NHSF) the attacking team plays a ball that rolls into the penalty area and is picked up by the goalie. After the goalie has possession, a defender running with the attacker chasing the ball plays the body and bumps the attacker in a significant manner. The referee (I was the AR) gave the defender a caution for UB, and then allowed the goalie to punt to continue play.

We discussed after the game as to whether, after the caution, he should have awarded the attacking team a penalty kick, an indirect free kick from the spot of the contact, or whether letting the goalie punt was appropriate.

We’d appreciate your feedback.

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
The correct course of action would have been to stop play for the foul by the defender, to caution the defender for unsporting behavior and restart with a penalty kick. However, in this case, the referee did not stop play and appears to have cautioned the defender “on the fly,” not something that is in accordance with the Laws of the Game. This shows either ignorance of the Law or willful disregard of the Law by the referee.…

DEFINITION OF “RELEASING THE BALL INTO PLAY”

Question:
The following event occurred in an under 17 boys classic game:
The keeper of Team A caught shot from team B and proceeded to jog to the top of the penalty area where he bounced the ball once before the impending punt. The bounce hit a sand spot and died in place, wherupon in a continuous motion the keeper scooped it up and punted it. The referee whistled and awarded and indirect free kick to Team B for “touching the ball a second time violation” which resulted in a goal being scored by Team B.

After the game, I questioned the referee about that call, and he stated that once the keeper lost possession of the ball, he could not pick it up again. I stated that the rule requires the keeper to release the ball from his possession which implies intent (except for dropping an air dribble), and that a bad bounce from a field defect does not end possession as long as the keeper’s play is continuous. I have seen the same with a mud spot or water puddle in the goal area and also a divot in the pitch that causes the ball to bounce badly.

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):

While the goalkeeper’s choice of a spot to bounce the ball was unfortunate, he did NOT relinquish possession of the ball by doing it and was perfectly within his rights to reclaim the ball in his hands. The goalkeeper is allowed to throw the ball in the air or bounce it on the ground and still retain possession of the ball. The referee was wrong to call the “second touch.” Naughty, naughty referee!…

PLAYER UNIFORMS

Question:
It appears that during the ‘regular’ season there are only a handful of referees that still require a player’s shirt to be tucked in at the beginning of the match. Virtually all matches at higher levels do not seem to worry at all about this. I feel almost alone in this area – why do we still require this if so many (the majority) don’t give it a second thought?

USSF answer (April 5, 2011):

In the past custom, tradition, and safety required that players keep their shirts tucked in and their socks pulled up and generally maintain a professional appearance. However, nowadays the uniforms are cut differently by the manufacturers and the jerseys are clearly meant to be worn outside the shorts. It is time for us referees catch up with modern fashion and learn to live with it.…

AR PROCEDURE AT A GOAL UNSEEN BY REFEREE

Question:
As an assistant referee, what is the proper way to indicate that a goal has been scored when not immediately apparent to the center referee that the ball has crossed the goal line between the posts?

USSF answer (September 15, 2011):
We are not authorized to answer questions regarding high school soccer, but this question covers material that is universal. This guidance from the USSF publication “Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials” should answer your question:

• If the ball briefly but fully enters the goal and is continuing to be played, raises the flag vertically to get the referee’s attention and then, after the referee stops play, puts flag straight down and follows the remaining procedures for a goal
• If the ball clearly enters the goal without returning to the field, establishes eye contact with the referee and follows the remaining procedures for a goal
• Runs a short distance up the touch line toward the halfway line to affirm that a goal has been scored
• Keeps moving to avoid confrontation if approached
• Observes the resulting player behavior and the actions in and around the penalty area
• Takes up the position for a kick-off
• Keeps players under observation at all times
• Records the goal after the trail assistant referee has recorded it

“IN THEIR OWN HALF OF THE FIELD”

Question:
At a kick-off, a player is straddling the halfway line (or, more dramatically, has one foot on the line and the other in the opponent’s half). Referee did not call an infringement or foul of any kind, trifling or otherwise.

My Background: Law 8 doesn’t say that a player can’t be in the opponent’s half, only that he must be in his own half. It seems to me that when the Laws say “outside”, they mean “completely outside, and not on, over, or above the line”. My interpretation of “inside” would be “any part of the head, torso, legs, or feet on, over, or above the line”.

I believe the referee’s decision was correct, but a colleague (a referee instructor) said that, for the purposes of Law 8, a player is not in his half if any part of him can be considered to be in the opponent’s half, thus any player having his head, torso, leg, or foot on, over, or above the line violates the Law, and the referee must either order the kick-off retaken or adjudicate the infraction as trifling and let play continue.

Question: At kick-off, is a player considered to have “gained the line” (to borrow an ice-hockey term) in the scenario above? More specifically, we both agreed that play should continue in the scenario, but disagreed as to whether it is a trifling infringement (ATR 5.5) or no offense.

USSF answer (September 15, 2011):
Yes, ALL players are expected to remain in their own half of the field until the ball is in play. Being in play means that the ball has been kicked and moved forward, even if that forward motion may be only slight. Custom seems to be a bit more laissez faire, with the player who is to receive the kick-off normally a short step or two into the other team’s half. Despite being counter to the Law, this is accepted practice throughout the world.

In most cases, the offense, if any, is TRIFLING, particularly when the teammate of the kicker is slightly or even mostly over the line by a step or so and this is the player who is going to “receive” the ball from the kick-off. However, a player who is more than a brief step or so over the halfway line should be instructed to return to his own side of the halfway line.…

OFFSIDE: INVOLVEMENT IN PLAY

Question:
I served as an AR today. Striker repeatedly positioned himself offsides and then made a run directly at goalie when his right forward shot on goal. After 3 such occurrences by the same player, I signaled offsides, as I felt striker was interfering with goalie by attempting to distract him with his runs even though his runs did not directly block the line of sight between goalie and right forward. Was I wrong? I am aware of the Passive Offsides implementation, but this just felt wrong. The opposing coach looked at me like I had sprouted a second head! Thanks.

USSF answer (September 14, 2011):
There is no such thing as “passive offside” or “offsides,” no matter what some people may say. A player in an offside position either remains in an offside position or becomes offside when his teammate plays the ball, depending on what occurs next.

It is tempting to raise the flag when a player attempts to interfere with his opponent, but to do so could affect the play. The AR must remember where the player was when his teammate played the ball and wait until the player actually becomes actively involved in play. If the ‘keeper is easily able to gain the ball, then to flag would simply slow the game down and aid the opposing team’s efforts. That is not the referee’s job.…