Question:
Situation: USSF sanctioned match. In the second half, the referee allows the match to continue past the standard (sanctioned) length of the half as adjusted for time lost based on his error as to the proper duration of the half for a particular age group (eg., in a U12 match, the referee runs a 35 minute half instead of the standard 30 minute half). During this unauthorized extension, one team scores a goals which proves to be the winning goal. Aditionally, the referee adminsters a card (caution or send off). This fact situation presents the following two questions/problems:

Question # 1: Does the goal stand?

This question presents two subquestions depending on the timing of the referee’s recognition of his error:

Subquestion # 1a: After the goal is scored, but before the restart, the referee realizes that he has improperly extended the match. Can the referee disallow the goal and end the match as a tie immdiately (and describe these circumstances in his match report)?

Scenarioi # 1b: The referee allows the goal and restarts the match but, at a later point (but prior to blowing the whistle to end the match), the referee realizes his error. Must the referee allow the goal to stand, end the match immediately, and describe his error and the consequences in his match report to the competition authority?

Question # 2: Does the card stand?

This question also raises two subquestions depending on the timing of the referee’s recognition of his error:

Subquestion # 2a: The referee administers a card, but, prior to the restart, he discovers his timing error. May he rescind the card and end the match immediately as a tie (and describe these circumstances in his game report)?

Subquestion # 2b: The referee administers a card, restarts play, but at a later point (but prior to blowing the whistle to end the match) realizes his error. Must the referee let the card stand, end the match immediately, and report the circumstances in his match report to the competition authority?

Applicable Laws:

Law 5 Denotes that the referee is the official timekeeper for the match

Law 7: The referee may add time for time lost

The referee may not arbitrarily shorten or lengthen the duration of the halves where the competition authority has specified the duration of the halves

Asked for further information, the questioner stated that he “should have said something to the effect of ‘mistakenly extended’ time. In the case which prompted my questions, the referee simply made a mental error and ran a 35 minute second half having run a 30 minute first half. However, . . . in this case, both AR’s were inattentive and of no help to the referee and both coaches (including the coach whose team was ahead) did not question the referee about the time during the running of ‘extended time’.”

USSF answer (February 24, 2009):
1. Does the goal stand?
1a. The goal may be disallowed once the referee realizes his error.
1b. The goal must stand.
In both of these situations the referee must provide full details in the match report.

2. May the referee rescind a card? The card stands and the referee must provide full details in the match report.
2a. The referee COULD rescind the card, but SHOULD the referee do it? Probably not in this case, since the player’s misconduct is cautionable whether committed during play or (if time has run out) during the period immediately following the end of play.
2b. No, in this case the he card stands and the referee must provide full details in the match report.

To sum it up: The referee ran an overly long second half. If he had been smart and quick on his mental feet, he would have simply described the extra time as “taking into account time lost” — not true, of course, but an overly long half is easier to “explain” than a half which is short by any amount.

In a different situation, it might have been that the referee hit the 35th minute in the second half and said “Oh my God! I forgot that the half for this age group is 30 minutes long. I got it right on the first half but was so absorbed in the game and the players were playing so much above their age level that I let the half go too long.”

The match is not over until the referee says it is over. If the error is realized during a stoppage (e. g., for a goal), the goal can be cancelled and the match ended. If it is not realized until after play restarts after the goal, it stands and the match ends when the referee stops play. The same principle applies for the card shown at a stoppage — it can be cancelled if play has not resumed, it stands if play has resumed.…

Question:
I noticed that non-FIFA referees who are refereeing professional matches are wearing a red badge. Is this the new “professional” referee badge that the federation came out with? Can you provide detail.

Is the color of the badge only being changed for the professional referees, or will the color for national and state referee be changed.

Please shed some light on this topic.

USSF answer (February 21, 2009):
Effective this year, those National Referees working professional games as referee or assistant referee have been given new red and yellow badges. These badges are to be worn only when they are working MLS, WPS, and USL 1 and 2 games. The different colors have no significance other than to complement whichever uniform the referee team wears.…

Question:
I am a coach of 12 years and encountered a situation during a game last season and would like your input as to the correct call for the situation.

Here is the setup; the attacker is heading towards goal followed closely by a defender, the only player between the attacker and goal is the keeper, the attacker has entered the area and is about the 15 when the defender reaches forward and gives a slight tug (hold or grab) on the left shoulder of the attacker trying to slow down the attacker’s progress, the attacker feels the hold and lunges forward through the air as if he were pushed.

Would you send off the defender for a deliberate hold in the area that denies an obvious scoring opportunity and award a pk, or would you caution the attacker for unsportsmanlike behavior, or both, or neither?

If both, what would the restart be?

USSF answer (February 20, 2009):
There are various possibilities for punishment, depending on the referee’s perception of the situation.

Was the attacking player simulating?  If so, the referee needs to decide exactly WHAT was being simulated.  Was it the foul itself, or was the attacker fouled but the simulation was an attempt to get the referee to add misconduct to the punishment (i. e., a card)?

If it was the foul itself that was being simulated, then the attacker needs to be cautioned for this and the opposing team given an indirect free kick where the simulation occurred.

If the defender committed a foul (holding or pushing) and the simulation was an attempt to get the referee to show a yellow or red card, then the attacker must certainly be cautioned for this but we are still left with the fact that the attacker was fouled inside the opposing team’s penalty area by a defender — which means a penalty kick restart.

In this case, the only question remaining is whether the defender’s foul also involved misconduct and thus the defender must be shown a card as well.  What are the only possibilities for carding the defender based on the foul?  The referee might decide that the foul itself was reckless (yellow card) or involved excessive force (red card), but the referee must be careful not to be influenced by the attacker’s simulation.  The other possibility is that the referee might decide that the foul interfered with an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (OGSO).  Assuming all the “4 D” elements were met, the referee must take into account whether the interference was actually caused by the defender’s foul or whether the attacker contributed to the interference by the simulation.  In other words, if the “falling down” hadn’t occurred when the attacker simulated, would the attacker’s OGSO have been interfered with by the original foul?

Only the referee “on the spot” can make these determinations.…

Question:
If a person is dribbling, is the defense player allowed to lean almost like being ridden of the puck in hockey. Is this obstruction? No tackle for the ball is attempted it.

USSF answer (February 20, 2009):
All is in the eye of the beholder, and in this case the only beholder who counts is the referee. Yes, players are allowed to charge an opponent, using their shoulder against the area of the shoulder of the opponent. We hesitate to make any analogies to the sport of ice hockey lest we be attacked by someone’s father or mother.…