Author: Jim Allen

Law 18 - Common Sense

NO GOAL FOR THE UNITED STATES

Posted on by

Question:
In the on-line comments that I read concerning the controversial call that denied the United States a third goal in the US — Slovenia World Cup game, I found the following statement:

“You have another ref in the press box watching the replay and he relays the correct call to the main ref via microphone. Side line refs are told not to call anything on close plays like this and if it is offsides the goal is taken away quickly after the upstairs ref reviews the replay. This could have taken seconds.”

Is this statement, or any part of it, accurate? It seems contrary to everything I have understood concerning who has the power to make decisions about play and under what circumstances.

USSF answer (June 18, 2010):
The ways of referees are mysterious. There was no flag from the lead AR to indicate a foul or any other infringement. Yes, there was a fifth official assigned to the game, but he was sitting on the bench behind the fourth official and could not have seen the action in the Slovenian penalty area any better than the fourth official and did not communicate anything to the referee.

While some national associations have conducted tests with the sort of system you describe, this system is not being used in this World Cup. The person who posted the comment you cited is ill-informed.…

Disciplinary Matters

PLAYER SENT OFF IN ABANDONED MATCH MAY NOT PLAY IN REPLAY

Posted on by

Question:
What is the right way to continue a game after it was suspended by the referee at minute 22 of the first half? one team was playing with 9 players due to none sufficient players and to one player with red card at minute 15 of play. can the the team complete up to ten players and can the team have subtitute players on the benches if they didn’t have enough players in the first game?

USSF answer (June 17, 2010):
“Suspended” simply means stopped temporarily. If the referee then “terminated” or “abandoned” the game, the following might apply, but it would be up to the rules of the particular competition.

An official USSF question and answer of August 16, 1999, forbids a player sent off in a game that MUST BE REPLAYED to participate in the replay. That ruling is still valid.

“PLAYER SENT OFF IN ABANDONED GAME THAT MUST BE REPLAYED IN FULL

“Q. A game has been abandoned because of severe weather conditions. During the game, a player was sent off and received a red card for serious foul play. The rules of the competition specify that the game must be replayed in full on the following day. In other words, it is not to be a continuation of the abandoned game. May the player who was sent off participate in this game? How many players may his team use?

“A. Because the game will be replayed in full at a later date, both teams may start with the maximum allowable number of players, plus the number of substitutes prescribed by the rules of the competition. The player who was sent off in the abandoned game may not participate in the game, nor may he be included in the roster of players and nominated substitutes for the game.”…

"Inventive Assessors"

INDOOR RULE ON COACHES STANDING IN BENCH AREA

Posted on by

Question:
In an NPSL match, as the match went on and became more contentious, the assistant coach as well as several substitutes began standing in the technical area, occasionally making dissenting remarks.

One comment by an assessor was to allow only one team official to stand at a time.

Is there any USSF requirement that players or coaches remain seated?

As a fourth official, can I demand that the players or coaches remain seated?

USSF answer (June 17, 2010)
The competition rules of NPSL do nor require team officials to stand one at a time, nor that they remain seated. The same applies to the published USSF indoor rules, probably because most facilities don’t always even have seats in the benches.

However, if the teams were playing outdoor soccer, the Law does require that only one team official at a time be standing in the technical area.…

Interpretations/IFAB

FEINTING AT PENALTY KICKS

Posted on by

Question:
I am reading many of your archives with much delight; I came across one in particular (Infringement by Kicker at Penalty Kick – Feb. 2010). You indicated that feinting of penalty kicks was going to be a topic of discussion at the IFAB meeting in March, 2010. I am curious, was there any further clarification or changes that came out of this meeting?

USSF answer (June 10, 2010):
Yes, there was further clarification, with good news for referees and bad news for crafty players. Here’s a quote from the Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees (in the back of the Law book):

LAW 14- THE PENALTY KICK
Procedure
Feinting at the run-up to take a penalty kick to confuse opponents is permitted as part of football. However, feinting to kick the ball once the player has completed his run-up is considered an infringement of Law 14 and an act of unsporting behavior for which the player must be cautioned.

And see this text in the Memorandum on Law Changes 2010 published by USSF:

USSF Advice to Referees: Players may feint during the run to the ball (so long as this does not involve, in the opinion of the referee, excessive changes in direction or similar delays in the taking of the kick) but feinting actions once the run to the ball is complete are now to be considered a violation of Law 14 by the kicker. This would include clearly stopping and waiting for a reaction by the goalkeeper before taking the kick or any similar clear hesitation after the run to the ball is complete and before kicking the ball into play. In other words, once the kicker has reached the ball, the kick must be taken without hesitation or delay. In most cases, the referee should allow the kick to proceed and then decide on the appropriate action to take based on the outcome of the kick: if the ball went into the net, the goal is canceled and the kick retaken; if the ball did not go into the net, an indirect free kick is given to the opposing team where the violation occurred. In either case, before play is restarted, the kicker must be cautioned for unsporting behavior.

…
Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

CARELESS, RECKLESS, EXCESSIVE FORCE VS. ACCIDENTAL

Posted on by

Question:
The Laws define the terms “careless, reckless and with
excessive force” for penal offenses:

1. Kicks or attempts to kick an opponent.
2. Trips or attempts to trip an opponent.
3. Jumps at an opponent.
4. Charges an opponent.
5. Strikes or attempts to strike an opponent:
6. Pushes an opponent
7. Tackles an opponent.

This makes it much easier for Referees to gauge the respective punishment when the force reaches a certain level. However, is it possible to do any of the above without a foul actually being called since it was neither careless, reckless, nor with excessive force?

A defender and attacker are running full speed, side-by-side shoulder-to-shoulder and stride-for-stride. The defender makes a cut and to make the cut he extends his leg outside his normal gait. The attacker’s leg clips the defender’s leg and the attacker goes down like a sack of potatoes. There is nothing to be considered careless, reckless or with excessive force. The referee considers the tripping to be unintentional and accidental and allows play to continue. But who on the field is going to accept that when the defender wins the ball? The attacking team is going to be irate and the defending team is going to think that they got away with one. The offense is “Trips or attempts to trip an opponent”. A trip is a trip, intentional or not. Should the referee call a tripping foul? Or does the brave referee make the non-call with the comfort in knowing that he’s the only one on the field that knows he’s right?

USSF answer (June 10, 2010):
You might wish to search through the archives to find this answer (only an excerpt given here) of April 15, 2010. It should answer all your questions on this matter.

12.3 CARELESS, RECKLESS, INVOLVING EXCESSIVE FORCE
“Careless” indicates that the player has not exercised due caution in making a play.

“Reckless” means that the player has made unnatural movements designed to intimidate an opponent or to gain an unfair advantage.

“Involving excessive force” means that the player has far exceeded the use of force necessary to make a fair play for the ball and has placed the opponent in considerable danger of bodily harm.

If the foul was careless, simply a miscalculation of strength or a stretch of judgment by the player who committed it, then it is a normal foul, requiring only a direct free kick (and possibly a stern talking-to). If the foul was reckless, clearly outside the norm for fair play, then the referee must award the direct free kick and also caution the player for unsporting behavior, showing the yellow card. If the foul involved the use of excessive force, totally beyond the bounds of normal play, then the referee must send off the player for serious foul play or violent conduct, show the red card, and award the direct free kick to the opposing team.

And it is worth repeating — yet again — that the occurrence of contact between players does not necessarily mean that a foul was committed. Contact occurs and it is accepted and welcomed, as long as it is accomplished legally — and that includes most accidental contact.

And the referee can very effectively reinforce his or her conviction that no foul has occurred by shouting out “No foul!” Never leave doubt in the minds of the players as to your comfort with your decision.…

Guide to Procedures

AR SIGNAL FOR GOOD GOAL AT PENALTY KICK

Posted on by

Question:
The Guide to Procedures tells us if a goal is scored during the taking of a penalty kick that the lead assistant referee “follows the normal goal procedure”. Since the assistant referee would not be in a position to “run a short distance along the touch line”, what, if any indication does the assistant referee give to the referee to confirm that a goal has been scored?

USSF answer (June 8, 2010):
In the case of a penalty kick, the lead assistant referee indicates that the goal is good by moving back to the touchline (to take up a position for the next phase of play — i. e., the kick-off) and, if it was not good, by staying where he was with the flag held at waist level parallel to the ground.…

"Inventive" Refs

POSITION OF HANDS FOR THE THROW-IN

Posted on by

Question:
Law 15: What constitutes “from behind” the head? All of the ball behind all of head? center of the ball behind all of the head? center of the ball behind center of the head?

Thanks

USSF answer (June 7, 2010):
While some particularly limber people may be able to position the entire ball behind their head, the rest of us are not that well enabled. The “from behind and over the head” refers to the hands, the means of delivering the ball. The hands must be positioned behind some portion of the back and top of the head before the ball is delivered.

A gentle reminder to all referees (and coaches and players and spectators) who read this: The referee should not go looking for offenses to call. Let the game flow if there is no clear — let us emphasize that, CLEAR — infringement that somehow affects the game.…

Law 1 - The Field

PARTICIPANT SAFETY OUR PRIMARY CONCERN

Posted on by

Question:
The technical area was marked and extended up to 1m from the field of player. This is permissible in LOTG. However they then erected a temporary shade structure on this boundary. It comprised supports made of 1″ box channel made of aluminum steel, pegged to the ground. It was quite solid, and I had concerns a player could easily trip or run off the FOP and collide with it. If so could injure themselves.

While I could write a report to local association of my concerns, at the time what right do I have to have it moved back (say 2-2m) from FOP.

USSF answer (June 7, 2010):
Law 1 tells us:

Decisions of the International F.A. Board
Decision 1
Where a technical area exists, it must meet the requirements approved by the International F.A. Board, which are contained in the section of this publication entitled The Technical Area.

The Laws of the Game expect that competitions will follow the basic premise of all the Laws of the Game, protecting the safety of all participants. A structure within one meter of the touchline would likely not be considered to be safe for players, team officials, and the officiating crew.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

GOAL SCORED WITH AN EXTRA PERSON ON THE FIELD OF PLAY

Posted on by

Question:
Play is stopped during the routine course of play and in this example the restart is a throw in for Team A. It is discovered prior to the throw in that a team has too many players on the field. The Referee deals with the extra player appropriately and play is restarted with Team A throwing the ball in, regardless if Team A or B had the extra player.

Now change the example and Team A scores a goal. It is discovered prior to the restart that Team A had an extra player on the field (rostered player, not an outside agent). The Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines explains how to handle this situation except for the restart. Play was stopped because the ball left the field of play (below the crossbar and between the posts), not because of the extra player. 

I feel the restart should be goal kick because play was stopped due to the ball leaving the field of play over the end line, last being played by the attacking team. The fact that the ball entered the net is nullified by the presence of the extra attacking team member. Is this the correct restart?

USSF answer (June 2, 2010):
Your reasoning is almost impeccable. The ball was out of play, ostensibly awaiting a kick-off for the goal, when it was discovered that the extra player existed. After the referee has cautioned and removed the extra player the correct restart is a goal kick.…