Author: Jim Allen

"Inventive" Refs

BALL IN PLAY FROM KICKS COMING OUT OF PENALTY AREA

Posted on by

Question:
On a kick by the defense from within its own penalty area (could also be a goal kick), what is the restart if the ball is kicked backwards and goes over the goal line between the boundaries marked by the sides of the penalty area?

I’m asking because this scenario was posed to me by a USSF State Referee. His amazing explanation, which he said was confirmed by [a high-ranking referee and USSF manager], was as follows. The penalty area only has three sides: the line in the field that is 44 yards long (the “18 yard line”) and the two lines on the sides. The line that is at the back of the penalty area is the goal line; the goal line is not part of the penalty area.

Therefore, a ball that is kicked out over the goal line, as described, has left the penalty area and is in play briefly as it crosses the goal line. Therefore the restart is a corner kick because the last player that touched the ball was a defender.

I disagree. Law 16 says “The ball is in play when it is kicked directly out of the penalty area.” In my scenario, the ball has not gone into play; therefore the kick must be retaken.

A corner kick would be the correct restart only if the ball exited the penalty area and crossed the goal line between the corner flag and the side of the penalty area….but that is not the scenario we’re discussing (I was shocked by the State Referee’s answer, therefore I confirmed exactly where he said the ball went out).

Please help. Thank you.

USSF answer (July 29, 2009):
We are extremely disappointed with the “USSF State Referee” who has falsely quoted the high-ranking referee and USSF manager.  His explanation is indeed “amazing”; however, the correct information for this situation is entry-level material.  In this situation the ball must leave the penalty area and enter the field to be considered in play.  If the ball leaves the field without exiting the penalty area and entering the field proper, the kick is retaken.…

"Inventive Coaches"

SUBSTITUTION

Posted on by

Question:

U-16 girls game.  Score is tied 1 – 1.  Substitute player was at the half line ready to sub.  Play rules allow substitution on any dead ball.  Play was stopped for a corner kick.  Referee beckoned the substitute onto the field.  Coach pulled the substitute back and did not send her in for the corner kick.  Second dead ball situation.  The same substitute is at the half line ready to enter the game.  Referee beckoned the same substitute onto the field.  Substitute identified the girl she was replacing and AR1 took her card.  The coach informed AR1 that it was his decision when to sub the player, not the referee’s and that the substitute should wait until he told her to enter the game.  AR1 informed the coach that since she was beckoned onto the field and did not enter the field, she had used her substitution and was no longer allowed to sub in.  Coach became irate.

Correct procedure ??  If not, what should have happened

USSF answer (July 28, 2009):
Once the substitute has reported to the fourth official (or assistant referee if there is no fourth official), only the referee makes the decision as to when the substitute may enter the game.  In no event does the coach have any right to dictate what actions the game officials take.

On the other hand, neither the referee nor the assistant referee has any right to deny the player the right to enter the field because “she had used her substitution.”  (Do we detect someone applying college rules here?)  That is arrogant behavior that is not acceptable under the Laws of the Game.  Game officials should be a proactive as possible, particularly at the youth level.

The referee has every right to expect the substitution to occur once he (or she) has beckoned, but there is no authority in the Law that REQUIRES the substitution — i. e., the substitute could withdraw (after all, he/she cannot enter the field unless and until the player being swapped leaves the field and we all know that the player can lawfully refuse).  However, in such cases, the referee COULD consider this as a time-wasting ploy and treat it accordingly.…

"Only in America!"

BALL AND PENALTY AREA (WHICH INCLUDES THE LINE)

Posted on by

Question:
In one of last year’s ‘week in review’ articles (and in one of the DVDs provided this year to the SDIs), there is a statement that says, “the goalkeeper may legally handle the ball as long as any part of the ball is crossing the penalty area line whether on the ground or in the air. The position of the goalkeeper’s body plays no role in determining the handling offense.”

Now I ask you to consider a situation in which part of the ball is within the penalty area, but the rest of the ball is geometrically outside of the penalty area. The week-in-review statement suggests that it would be legal for a goalkeeper to deliberately touch (with his hands) that portion of the ball, even if the goalkeeper’s body were geometrically located entirely outside of the penalty area.

I have four questions.

First, is what I just said true? That is, is it legal for a goalkeeper (irrespective of his location) to use his hands and deliberately touch the red portion of the ball in Fig 1a?

Second, if the above is true, how is the ruling reconciled with the Law, which tells us to award a direct free kick to the opposing team where the offense occurred unless the goalkeeper is within his own penalty area? Do we simply say that, if a player touches a ball and if the ball is in the penalty area, the touch (by definition?) occurs within the penalty area?

Third, if a field player uses his hands deliberately to touch the red portion of the ball, do we award a PK?

My fourth question is this: If a player is off the field of play and deliberately touches the red portion of the ball with his hands, is the offence considered handling? That is, would we stop play and restart with a DFK?

USSF answer (July 27, 2009):
Let’s look at it in increments.  If any part of the ball is on the line, the ball is within the penalty area.  At no time in this situation did the ball leave the penalty area.  The fact that part of the ball was outside the penalty area is irrelevant.  The BALL was still in the penalty area and, accordingly, it can still be handled by the goalkeeper, and that includes ANY PART of the ball.  The BALL is a whole thing and either is or is not in the penalty area.  If it is, it can be handled by the goalkeeper.  If it is not, it cannot be handled by the ‘keeper.  Thus the WIR article is in complete agreement with the Law.…

"Inventive Instructors"

THROW-IN SIGNAL

Posted on by

Question:

I am wondering about center referee mechanics for throw-in. I am getting feedback from referees that they have heard instructors tell them center referees should signal a throw-in with a 90 degree arm signal, rather than the 45 degree arm signal. They are being told to watch the MLS referees. Is this a change to referee mechanics?

USSF answer (July 22, 2009):
When in doubt, follow the instructions in the Guide to Procedures.  The referee “Points 45 degrees upward to indicate direction of throw-in.”…

Law 18 - Common Sense

KEEPING TIME

Posted on by

Question:

We had a situation this morning in a championship game of a tournament. The game was tied after regulation of this U-13 girls game and went to two-10 minute “sudden death” overtime periods.

At the end of the 2nd overtime period, one of our players broke away and was 5 yards ahead of the defender and entered the penalty box when the ref blew the whistle to end the overtime–and onto penalty kicks.

Who knows if she scores , or not.

I have observed three or four matches during the games of three of my kids over the years where the ref blows the whistle to end a half or a game immediately following a goal and I was always told that refs will allow an “advantage” situation to play out.

Which philosophy is right if there is no rule about this.

USSF answer (July 22, 2009):
Many referees realize that the Laws of the Game (the rules we all play by, except in college or high school) allow the referee to be the judge of when time must be added and when the proper amount of time has elapsed.  Most referees will wait until the ball is in a “neutral” area before saying “time is up” and ending a period.  Some, restricted rules of particular competition or by their lack of knowledge of the Laws, will not.  However, when we say that time is up, that means that the referee has made all necessary allowances for time lost.  The only exception one might make would be when the ball is in the air heading toward goal and only the laws of physics and the skill of the goalkeeper will determine if a goal is scored or not.

We must add that “sudden death” (also known as “golden goal”) is not a permitted method of deciding a game.…

"Inventive" Refs

COMPETENCE OF THE REFEREE

Posted on by

Question:

During a recent away game for a U-14 boys team, both teams arrived at the field in time, but the referees did not show up. Us being the visiting team, waited about half an hour for them to contact other referees. They showed up close to an hour later, after the coaches from both teams agreed to forfeit the game.
The referee that showed up told the teams that there was no special provision in the rules as to how long should a team wait before conceding the points, and therefore, the game had to take place of be rescheduled for a later day.
My question is: is there an specific amount of waiting time for this, and how the league should handle such a matter according to the rules?
Thank you.

USSF answer (July 21, 2009):
We wonder at the referee’s audaciousness in saying that the teams had only a choice between playing the game that day or rescheduling for another day.  This is far outside the referee’s level of competence.  Only the league (or other competition authority) can make specific decisions rules on situations like this.

What bothers us is the failure of the referees to turn up on time.  No team can be forced to forfeit a game when the referee and assistant referees are late.  This would appear to be a problem of communication between the league and the assignor or between the assignor and the referees.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

DURATION OF EACH HALF

Posted on by

Question:

I was the official of a game that started 10 minutes behind schedule.
Before the game, I advised the teams that the 1st half was going to be reduced 10 minutes but, the 2nd half was going to be the 45-minute half.
I was a little skeptical in my decision because I have seen other referees adjusting each half equally for the time that was behind schedule (ie, if 10 minutes behind, then 40 minutes halves). None of the teams made any comments nor did my assistant referees.
What is the procedure to do this?
Did I make the correct decision?

USSF answer (July 21, 2009):
Unless there is something in the rules of the competition in which you were refereeing that permits the referee to arbitrarily shorten periods of play, then you have to follow the Laws of the Game.

LAW 7 – THE DURATION OF THE MATCH
Periods of Play
The match lasts two equal periods of 45 minutes, unless otherwise mutually agreed between the referee and the two teams. Any agreement to alter the duration of the periods of play (for example, to reduce each half to 40 minutes because of insufficient light) must be made before the start of play and must comply with competition rules.

As you can see, the Law calls for “two equal periods,” not one of 35 and one of 45.  If you are going to shorten the periods, you must get the agreement of BOTH teams and make the decision that is fairest to all concerned.  This must be done before the game begins.  (And, if you were being assessed, the game would not count because the full amount of time was not played.)…

Guide to Procedures

STARTING THE WATCH

Posted on by

Question:

As an AYSO Intermediate Ref, currently working on my Advanced Badge, I was reviewing your Guide to Proceedures.  Under the kick off section, on page 9, you indicate “…starts watch and signals for the kickoff to be taken”.  Is this really correct?  Law 8 states, and a prior instructor had taught me, that the game starts only once the kick off has been taken.  I was originally instructed that you don’t start your watch until the ball moves, as this indicates the start of the game.  Should the USSF Guide To Proceedures actually state “Signal for the kickoff to be taken; once taken, start watch”, or is your current Guide correct to indicate start the watch first?

Please advise,

USSF answer (July 17, 2009):
While we formerly taught that the referee should wait to start the watch until the ball had actually been put in play, we have found that this distracts the referee from watching all that goes on at the actual first kick in the kick-off process.  Therefore, we recommend that referees start their watch and then blow the whistle.  The referee is thus more assured of seeing everything that occurs as the ball is put into play.

If you are worried about the proper amount of time, you can always add that particular second to the time to be added at the end of the period.  Although many referees are encouraged NOT to add time by the rules of competition or by their own mistaken ideas, no game in the world has ever finished without the need for some amount of added time.  Time is lost for numerous reasons throughout each period of play.…

Law 1 - The Field

DIGGING HOLES AND MAKING KICKING TEES

Posted on by

Question:
game u13g a player is desinated to kick all free and goal kicks. in doing so she constanly would use her heel of her boot to dig a hole so she would place the ball next to the hole so she would get a good lift on the ball
I could not find any thing on the FIFA rule book that is ok, or not.

USSF answer (July 15, 2009):
Creating a hole either behind the ball or to mound up dirt to create a “tee” is illegal.  While you will find nothing specific to this particular situation in the Laws of the Game, it must not be permitted, and there a number of reasons for that.

The first is the established principle that players may not make unauthorized marks on the field.  Although this is aimed mostly at goalkeepers who scuff lines around their area to assist them in “locating” themselves, there is no functional difference between scuffing lines and digging holes.  Second, digging a hole is potentially dangerous, unless one assumes that the player becomes responsible for immediately “replacing the divot” after the kick is taken.  So for safety reasons this is not allowed.  Third, creating such a hole and tee is a form of “artificial aid” to assist play — and that is considered misconduct (using a teammate’s shoulders, hanging on the crossbar to make the save, trapping the ball with the shirt, etc.).  Fourth, though a bit more of a stretch of logic, if a player cannot move or remove a corner flag for the taking of a corner kick, why would we allow the digging of a hole (or stubbing the toe into the dirt to create a “tee”) for the taking of a free kick?  Fifth, would we allow this for the taking of a penalty kick?  If not, then why would it be allowed for other kicking restarts?…

"Inventive" Refs

THROW-IN AND HANDLING

Posted on by

Question:

During an over 40’s mens’ recreational league match this weekend, there were 2 issues that another referee who is an assessor, told me I did incorrectly that surprised me.

1. During a throw-in, the player raised the ball just above his head and threw it in. Since law 15 states that the thrower delivers the ball from behind the head, I awarded a throw-in to the other team. After some discussion, it does raise the question, how far behind the head does the ball need to go before being a legal throw in?

2. During play near mid-field, a blue team player kicks a hard ball at close range (about 2 yards) from the white player who is running toward the ball. The white team’s player, in a flinch reaction, puts his hand up to protect his face and the ball hits his hand. He does not direct the ball after the contact. At the time, I did not consider it deliberate, and let play continue. This “no call” decision was based on the Advice to Referees as well as the 2009 Referee Program Directive on Handling the Ball, Part 4, where it talks about a purely instinctive reaction to protect sensitive areas of the body. This is consistent with the Advice to Referees. The other referee told me that not only should I have called handling, I should have given a yellow card because he considered it a tactical foul. I believe that it was neither a foul nor a misconduct.

USSF answer (July 14, 2009):
1. Referees need to remember that, in addition to the Letter of the Law, they need to be in tune with the Spirit of the Laws.  A throw-in is simply a way of restarting the game.  The decision on how far behind the head the thrower must bring the ball is a matter for the referee to decide.  While the requirements of Law 15 are pretty specific, not bringing the ball fully “behind” the head is a relatively trivial infringement of those requirements.

2. Many referees have yet to learn that refereeing is not a case of “us” against “them,” but a matter of finding the best solution to a problem by balancing the Letter and the Spirit of the Law.  As you describe the situation, and remembering the sources you have cited, we believe that you reached the correct decision in this case.…