Author: Jim Allen

Law 5 - Referee

WEARING THE U. S. FLAG PATCH

Posted on by

Question:
Are USSF referees still being asked to wear the USA Flag Patch as referenced in this article from back in September 2001?
http://www.ussoccer.com/articles/viewArticle.jsp_2411.html

The September 11th Fund as mentioned in the ussoccer.com article is closed and is no longer accepting donations:
http://www.september11fund.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11th_Fund

It appears that the MLS/FIFA referees dont seem to be wearing it:
new OSI Uniform
http://www.ibiblio.org/footy/2008a/0…web_03_wej.jpg
MLS adidas Uniform
http://www.ibiblio.org/footy/2008a/0…0329wej_67.jpg

USSF answer (February 18, 2009):
The wearing of the U. S. flag on the uniform is (and always has been) a matter of personal choice. The 2001 article you cite is still valid as far as the wearing of the flag patch goes, but the fund no longer exists.…

Interpretations/IFAB

RESTART AFTER GOAL WITH OUTSIDE AGENT(S) ON FIELD

Posted on by

Question:
Roughly rephrasing a recert question: Following a goal but before the restart it is observed that A) a team official of the goal scoring team was on the field but did not interfere with play or B) a team official of the defending team was on the field but not involved in play.

Does the goal stand and/or what is the restart?

USSF answer (February 17, 2009):
Your complete answer will be found in the back of the Law book, under “INTERPRETATION OF THE LAWS OF THE GAME AND GUIDELINES FOR REFEREES,”, Law 3 – The Number of Players. (If you do not have a copy of the Laws with the Interpretations, etc., in it, you can download it from this site.)

Extra persons on the field of play
Outside Agents
Anyone not indicated on the team list as a player, substitute or team official is deemed to be an outside agent as is a player who has been sent off.

//snipped//

Goals scored with an extra person on the field of play
If, after a goal is scored, the referee realizes, before play restarts, that there was an extra person on the field of play when the goal was scored:
– the referee must disallow the goal if:
— the extra person was an outside agent and he interfered with play
— the extra person was a player, substitute, substituted player or team official associated with the team that scored the goal
– the referee must allow the goal if:
— the extra person was an outside agent who did not interfere with play
— the extra person was a player, substitute, substituted player or team official associated with the team the conceded the goal

…
Interpretations/IFAB

GOALKEEPER LEAVING FIELD FOR TREATMENT

Posted on by

Question:
have [an] interesting question for you, one that had senior instructors in animated disagreement. We know that:

(a) A team has 11 players, one of whom must be the goalkeeper.

(b) With permission of the referee, a player may leave the field temporarily for treatment of an injury and not be replaced. Play continues.

(c) In the case of (b) above, with the referee’s permission the player may return to the field during play over any touch line, or if play is stopped, over any boundary line.

The question is, if the injured player is the goalkeeper and that team wishes to continue play while the GK is being treated, if this allowed or must one of the other players (or a sub) be designated as GK?

This situation could conceivably arise, for example, in the last few minutes of a 2-1 game when Red is down but has been pounding away at Blue’s goal trying to tie it up. The Red GK gets injured and must be assessed for a possible concussion, the team has no more subs and is reasonably sure the GK can return, so they want to continue playing while momentum is on their side (perhaps also due to concern about game time remaining).

We recognize that in normal circumstances the right thing to do is to wait for the GK to return and add the time lost. But the question is: If the team wants to continue, must we force them to wait?

The referees on one side of this argument point out that no Law is being violated just because the GK happens to be off the field. The referees on the other side think the spirit of the Law (and maybe somewhere, the letter) requires that the GK be on the field. It’s been an interesting discussion.

Would you like to weigh in with your thoughts and/or an official answer?

USSF answer (February 13, 2009):
There is no written requirement that the goalkeeper MUST remain on the field of play. However, The goalkeeper cannot leave the field with the referee’s permission specifically for treatment unless he or she is either substituted or exchanges places temporarily with a field player (following the guidance in Law 3). The clear intent of the Laws is that the goalkeeper remain on the field of play. That is demonstrated through the provisions in the Law that the goalkeeper may be treated on the field, even though (with some specific exceptions) others must leave. (For the exceptions, see Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees, Injured Players.)

However, the goalkeeper is permitted to leave the field during the course of play, just as are all players. A statement in the 2008-2009 Laws of the Game (Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees) demonstrates that: “If a player accidentally crosses one of the boundary lines of the field of play, he is not deemed to have committed an infringement. Going off the field of play may be considered to be part of playing movement.”
An earlier question and answer (2006 IFAB Q&A, Law 3) also illustrates the point:

20. During a match, the goalkeeper sprints from the goal to stop an opponent. He kicks the ball out of the field of play and a throw-in is awarded to the opposing team. The momentum of the goalkeeper takes him off the field of play and before he can return, the throw-in is taken and a goal is scored. What action, if any, should the referee take?
A goal is awarded since no offence has been committed.

A goalkeeper may be treated just off the field while play continues — we often see this in higher-level games — but must return as quickly as possible.

When the ball is out of play, the goalkeeper may gain the permission of the referee to leave the field specifically for treatment, but play cannot be restarted until that goalkeeper has returned to the field, been substituted, or exchanged positions with one of the field players.…

Advice to Referees

“DELIBERATELY KICKED”

Posted on by

Question:
In clause 12.20 of the ATR, is the operative interpretation “deliberately kicked” or kicked “deliberately to the goalkeeper” by a teammate?

In one of my recent games, white attacker in possession of the ball is moving toward blue’s goal, with blue defender challenging shoulder to shoulder. Blue defender wins possession and kicks the ball away from the white attacker. Blue goalkeeper, while still in her own penalty area, moves toward the ball and picks it up. Clearly the blue defender “deliberately kicked” the ball. But she didn’t necessarily kick the ball “deliberately to the goal keeper”.

Has the goalkeeper committed an infraction?

USSF answer (February 12, 2009):
We think the Advice is quite clear as it stands but will address the matter here.

Two answers to the first question: (a) Both. “Deliberately kicked” or “kicked deliberately” mean that there was some forethought to the player’s action; the player knew where he or she wanted the ball to go and kicked it there. On the other hand, an obvious attempt to clear the ball that happens to run to the ‘keeper is not punishable, nor is a ball that is obviously miskicked. (b) “To the goalkeeper” means directly to the goalkeeper or to a place where the goalkeeper can conveniently play the ball.

Second question: If, in the opinion of the referee, … .

We add a final note, meant solely to clarify for referees (and, unfortunately, many instructors, too) that the phrasing MUST NOT be interpreted as “kicked with the intent that the ball go to the goalkeeper.” “Deliberately” modifies “kick” and not the direction (meaning the totality of the direction “to the goalkeeper”) which is why the kick must be deliberate and the direction must be deliberate (i. e., not a miskick) but the direction itself doesn’t have to be the specific direction of “to the goalkeeper.”…

"Only in America!"

AR FLAGS

Posted on by

Question:
Is there a standard design for the Assistant referee flags?
I see many different designs and would be interested in having a unique one.

USSF answer (February 11, 2009):
No, there is no standard design for these flags, other than that they are square or rectangular.…

"Inventive Commentators"

FOULS AND MISCONDUCT CAN OCCUR SIMULTANEOUSLY

Posted on by

Question:
Could you explain the decision in the following scenario. It caused a lot of controversy in a recent match and teams still expect an explanation from me:

A player shoots towards goal, first time, as soon as he receives the ball from a team-mate. Just as he shoots, an opposition player tackles him very hard. The tackle deserves either a red, or a yellow card, but the player’s shot goes in (ie. he scores but is left injured). In either situation, whether the tackling player deserves a red, or a yellow card, does the goal stand? Would an advantage be allowed in any case (red or yellow)? Does this apply to all outfield players and the goalkeeper or are there slightly different rules regarding the keeper (committing the foul)?

My thoughts would be since its a “dangerous” tackle, advantage should not be allowed, and the very second the tackle was made, the game stops immediately, therefore, the player who fouls receives a red/yellow card, and the fouled team get a free kick/penalty.

Alternatively, the goal stands and the player is not cautioned or sent off at all. One thing I thought definately shouldn’t happen is for the goal to stand AND the player cautioned/sent off using the “advantage” rule. I thought this is not permitted since the game should immediately stop from the second a dangerous foul is committed, regardless of whether the subsequent shot ends up in goal or not.

USSF answer (February 11, 2009):
Yes, the goal stands, because the referee will sensibly have waited a moment or two to see what happens, applying the advantage but waiting that moment or so to see what happens before announcing it.

The same rules apply to goalkeeper and outfield players for such an infringement. Why would they differ?? In this case, if the referee decides that the tackle was excessive and that it was delivered with no intent to play the ball (e. g., late or from an angle opposite to the ball), then it is and should be reported as violent conduct.  If the referee decides that the player was attempting to play the ball with excessive force, then it is and should be reported as serious foul play.

If there is a chance of a goal, the referee will wait that extra second or so to declare the decision already made: That the tackle was done with excessive force and is therefore serious foul play or violent conduct. The referee must NEVER take away a deserved goal, no matter that the player has been injured. If the ball does not enter the goal, the referee will stop play, send off the opposition player for serious foul play, and restart with a penalty kick or a direct free kick, whichever is correct for the place where the foul and serious misconduct took place.

The referee must make the decision as to what he or she will do at the moment the particular infringement occurs. That will not change for whatever else may happen after the infringement. In this case, the goal was scored and the rest follows automatically.…

Advice to Referees

CONTACT WITH THE CORNER FLAGPOST

Posted on by

Question:
There was a karate kick to the lower back of player in a Premiership game recently (Liverpool vs Chelsea). Transfer that scenario to USSF territory in our minds so you can comment on the happenings. The refs missed the kick, oops. The Liverpool player was holding the corner flag before the kick. Isn’t that not allowed to hold the flag? Could this assault possibly be avoided by penalizing the Liverpool player for holding onto the corner flag? What level of play would that call be considered trifling?

USSF answer (February 7, 2009):
The referee in this game was most likely unable to see the play, but it occurred directly in front of the assistant referee. We need to remember that, just like the goalposts, the corner flagposts are considered to be part of the field. Players routinely make contact with both the goalposts and the flagposts. Doing so is not an infringement of the Laws. If you need a reference, see the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” which says:

1.8 DEALING WITH APPURTENANCES TO THE FIELD AND OUTSIDE AGENTS
(a) Required appurtenances
These are the goals, corner flags, and flagposts required by Law 1. Contact between these appurtenances and the ball or players is a normal part of play and requires no special consideration in determining the restart.//rest snipped//

We cannot comment on the apparent foul and misconduct by the Chelsea player; however, we would agree with you that making contact with the corner flag for nefarious purposes would be just as illegal, say, as throwing a rock, and for the same reasons and judged on the same standards. But the thought of punishing the sort of actual contact with the post in this case, a means of forestalling being charged by one opponent and kicked by another opponent, is just plain weird.…

"Only in America!"

UNSPORTING BEHAVIOR? WHY A RED CARD?

Posted on by

Question:
There was an incident where 2 high school players were red carded for taking their jersey’s off after the game had ended walking off the field for I’d say in disgust since they lost the game. I find that too harsh to be red cards. Now… they were not taunting anyone and they were not doing anything other than walking off the field. So do you give red cards for that or anything for something like that AFTER the game is over? I find it pretty lame that they have to sit out 1 game for something that did not involve another team or any taunting or fighting or throwing of shirts… now if they were taunting or wanting to fight… fine card them… and throwing of shirts… let the coach deal with that. Is it just a judgement call or was that too outrageous??? Many times have i seen other sports where jersey’s were taken off right after the game was over but no actions were taken. Also could you elaborate on the rules where it says “unsporting behavior”? I think its too vague of a phrase.

USSF answer (February 6, 2009):
Coach, we don’t do high school rules here, so we can speak only to the Laws of the Game (the rules the rest of the world plays by).

First to “unsporting behavior”: The lawmakers (the International Football Association Board) left the words vague for a purpose. That purpose is to enable the referee to apply common sense and intelligence in enforcing the Laws of the Game. Unsporting behavior is any act that could bring the game into disrepute, i. e., any act that runs counter to the spirit of fair play. Some examples: mocking the opponents, as in the removal of shirts during the game; some forms of gamesmanship, such as calling “mine” to fool an opponent; using a cellphone on the field; performing fouls recklessly (without thought for what might happen to the opponent); handling the ball to score a goal; and faking an injury or pretending to have been fouled. There are hundreds of possibilities for unsporting behavior and the referee needs to have this weapon in his or her arsenal.

Second, beyond unsporting behavior, the lawmakers left other portions of the Laws vague as well, for the very reasons explained above.

Third, regarding the removal of shirts AFTER the game, there is absolutely no rule against it. In fact, we see it every day on television at the highest levels of the game.

Finally, as to your question about giving a red card after a game has ended, the Laws of the Game allow a card (regardless of color) to be shown if a player commits misconduct while the referee is still in the area of the field even though the match may have ended. …

Ball in Play

WHEN IS THE BALL IN PLAY FROM A FREE KICK?

Posted on by

Question:
On an indirect kick is the ball in play when first touched by the player or is it when it moves
and by moves does it have to move at least one rotation?

Ref calls a indirect kick. Places the wall, the kicking team places two player in either side of the ball.
The ref whistles to start , and one of the players touches the top of the ball but does not move it.
The second player then kicks the ball into the net with out any other player touching the ball
is this a goal?

USSF answer (February 2, 2009):
No, the ball does not have to move a rotation. It must simply move from “here” to “there,” as long as it is clear that the ball has been kicked — i. e., forced into the movement from “here” to “there” by a kicking motion — and has moved that undefined distance.

As to your question about the goal, no, it is not a goal.…

Disciplinary Matters

MISCONDUCT BY MATCH OFFICIAL — WHAT TO DO?

Posted on by

Question:
Is there a penalty, sanction or otherwise for a referee who files an inaccurate game report for the benefit of lowering the league penalties on the teams and players?

I witnessed an adult amateur game prior to my assignment as an incident between 2 players escalated into violent conduct. Both players were sent off by the referee. After the match, the players were seen “negotiating” a lessor card so the penalty from the league would not be so harsh. The referee reported Serious Foul Play instead on the game report.

USSF answer (February 2, 2009):
Although you have reported what you saw and heard, we feel we should at least lay out why the scenario you describe might perhaps not be as compelling as you have stated.

For example, even if events are exactly as you described, is this really misconduct?  There is no indication that the referee was bribed or coerced.  Were the referee to have decided not to report the card at all, to report it as a caution instead of a sending off, or to have identified a different player than the one actually shown the red card, this would clearly constitute reportable behavior.  But the referee seems only to have changed the reason for the send-off.  

Suppose though that the final report did not involve a change at all.  You have characterized the original behavior as “violent conduct,” but how do you know that the referee at the time so characterized it?  

Even if he did consider it violent conduct at the time, is the referee not allowed to reflect upon the specific circumstances, filtered by time and possible additional information, before writing his report? Suppose additional information came from an AR.  Would you then argue that this makes it okay, but that being persuaded by information coming from anyone else is misconduct? Your use of the term “negotiating” is loaded — from a distance, “remonstrating” might be just as accurate.  And how do you know why (or even IF) the referee made the change?  Players informing the referee of the dire consequences of a card for VC could have simply been justification for the referee deciding to think more carefully about what was seen and done before preparing a final report.

However, if you are utterly convinced that the referee has indeed committed misconduct in the matter of the report, you have the right and the duty to lodge a complaint. Under the USSF Policy Manual 2008-2009, a person who accuses a referee or other game official of misconduct for actions during or away from a match should file a complaint in accordance with the Policy Manual. In a case such as this, Policy 531-10–Misconduct of Game Officials applies:

Section 2. Procedures

(A) Misconduct at a Match

When any game official is accused of having committed misconduct toward another game official, participant, or spectator at a match, or of having a conflict of interest, the original jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter shall vest immediately in the State Association or Organization Member through which the accused game official is registered. In the situation where Amateur and Youth State Associations exist in a state, and the incident of alleged misconduct occurred at a match sanctioned by one State Association, jurisdiction shall vest with the State Association sanctioning the match in question.

(B) Misconduct Away From a Match

When any game official, referee, referee assistant or referee development program person is accused of unethical conduct, misuse or abuse of authority or conflict of interest in any matter in the pursuit of or may affect the individual’s official dealings within and as authorized by the Federation, its Divisions, Affiliates or Associates, a State Associations or Organization Member, or a competition, tournament or other appropriate authority, the matter shall vest immediately in the State Association through which the accused game official is registered or through which the referee development program person is appointed.

(C) Any allegation of misconduct or of conflict of interest by a game official as described by subsection (A) of this section, or of unethical conduct, misuse or abuse of authority or conflict of interest as described by subsection (B) of this section, shall be made in writing to the State Referee Administrator or to the State Association(s) or Organization Member that shall report all such allegations including any allegations against the State Referee Administrator, to the State Association(s) or Organization Members through which the accused game official is registered or through which the accused referee development program person is appointed.

(D) Upon receipt by the appropriate Organization Member of a verified written complaint, a hearing shall be conducted within 30 days from verification pursuant to guidelines established by the Organization Member having jurisdiction as provided by subsection (A) or (B) of this section. The guidelines may include referring the complaint to the State Referee Committee for the hearing. The hearings and appeal process shall provide for adequate due process for the accused person including proper notice of charges, the right to bring witnesses in defense, and the right to confront and to cross-examine the accusers.

(E) The Chairman of the hearing committee shall transmit the findings of the committee in writing to all parties concerned including the accused and the accusers and to the State Association(s) or Organization Member within seven days of the hearing.

(F) Any party subject to penalties shall receive, at the time of notification of the decision, a notice of the rights of appeal and a copy of the procedures and deadline dates required for such an appeal to be properly considered. Time for filing an appeal shall start with the date official receipt of the decision by the party making the appeal.

…