DROPPED BALL

Question:
Last few minutes of the Brazil/Norway women’s game on 15 Aug… A Brazil player is asked to leave the field for a likely injury/blood situation. The referee then indicates that a drop-ball will be the restart (I believe we’re all good to this point.) A Norway player steps-up and plays the ball long to 2 attacking teammates. The referee then calls BACK the ball and does a drop-ball AGAIN…

How could this have been a valid 2nd restart with a drop-ball?

Obviously, the referee indicated drop-ball the first time, the ball touched the groud and the ball was played. There may have been some confusion on what the referee had really wanted to happen, but the ball did seem to be legally and correctly put back into play…

How could the referee justify the 2nd drop-ball restart?

USSF answer (August 18, 2008):
On the surface your response to the situation would appear to be correct. Once the referee has dropped the ball and it is in play — as soon as it hits the ground — that would seem to end the matter. However, we cannot second-guess a referee at an international tournament. There may have been other circumstances that neither you nor we are aware of.…

OFFSIDE: INTERFERING WITH PLAY

Question:
My question relates to the AR’s mechanics of signaling for an offside offense.

Attacker #1 is in an offside position when the ball is played (for this instance he is very close to the 2nd to last defender so the AR is also at the same relative location on the touch line).
Attacker #2 is in an onside position when the ball is played.

Both attackers are making an effort to play the ball along with a defender, but it is not yet clear which attacker (if any) will play the ball first. Also, attacker #1 is not interfering with (impeding) the defender’s ability to play the ball. Obviously, if either the defender, or attacker #2 play the ball first, there is no offside to call. However, if attacker #1 plays the ball first, then it is an offside offense.

The question is on mechanics. Which of the following would be correct?

#1 – The AR stays in position when the ball was played and then raises the flag when attacker #1 touches the ball. When the referee sees the raised flag and blows the whistle, the AR makes eye contact w/ the referee and points to the correct far side, middle, or near side. The position of the restart is where the AR is standing.

#2 – The AR runs down the touch line maintaining proper position with either the ball or 2nd to last defender, and then raises the flag when attacker #1 touches the ball. When the referee sees the raised flag and blows the whistle, the AR makes eye contact w/ the referee and points the flag to the correct far side, middle, or near side. The position of the restart is where the AR is standing.

#3 – The AR runs down the touch line maintaining proper position with either the ball or 2nd to last defender, and then raises the flag when attacker #1 touches the ball. When the referee sees the raised flag and blows the whistle, the AR makes eye contact with the referee, lowers the flag and runs up the touch line (maintaining eye contact with the referee) to the initial position attacker #1 was at when the ball was played (the time he was determined to be offside) and points the flag to the correct far side, middle, or near side. The position of the restart is where the AR is standing.

#4 – Do you have another option ?

The problem with #1 is that the AR will be out of position should either attacker #2 or the defender have the first touch. The AR would be out of position to possibly actually see who had the first touch. The AR would be out of position to possibly see a subsequent offside offense or any other fouls or misconduct in his/her end of the field.

The problem with #2, which I believe is the most common performed (and I am also guilty of performing), is that the restart is not in the correct location. Depending on the initial location of attacker #1, the size of the field, and the ages of players, this could actually result in an advantage for the attacking team. For example, the initial position of attacker #1 was only 3 yards into the attacking half, and the next touch of the ball is just at the top of the penalty area, and the players are 12 years old (or even adults for that matter).

The problem with #3, which I believe is the right thing to do, is that it would most likely create much discussion (and yelling from sidelines).

There is no advice on this topic that I can locate.
Thank you for your opinions / advice.

USSF answer (August 18, 2008):
The correct option is none of the above, although #2 is the closest of the bunch.

The AR runs down the touch line, maintaining proper position with either the ball or second-last defender, and then raises the flag when attacker #1 touches the ball or it is clear that attacker #2 cannot get to the ball ahead of attacker #1. When the referee sees the raised flag and blows the whistle, the AR makes eye contact with the referee and points the flag to the far, middle or near side, whichever is correct. The AR then moves back down the touch line to a point in line with the correct spot for the restart.

A quote from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” may be helpful:

“Interfering with play” means playing or touching the ball passed or touched by a teammate. A player can be considered playing the ball even without touching it if, in the opinion of the referee or assistant referee, that player is making an active play for the ball and is likely to touch it. If contact is likely, the offense (offside) can be called when the official makes that determination, even if there is no contact with the ball.

An attacker in an offside position is not considered to be interfering with play (and, therefore, is not judged offside) if, in the opinion of the referee, another attacker starting from an onside position will clearly make first contact with the ball. In this situation, officials must refrain from calling an offside offense until they make this determination.

Note: There is no specific advice on the matter because it is left to the discretion of the referee to cover the issue in the pregame.  The issue, simply put, is that the AR must continue to maintain proper position during the period of time between when an offside position is noted and when the offside violation is clear enough to be flagged.  The AR’s position must be maintained in this scenario because of the possibility that an offside violation may not occur.  The issue outcome hinges on identifying the correct location of the restart.…

YES, ANY PLAYER MAY TAKE A PENALTY KICK!

Question:
Understand that substitution can take place during any stoppage.

I would like to check can the substitute which just come in, can he takes the penalty kick, corner kick, or throw in?

i saw my fellow referee did not allow the substitute player who just come into the field of play to take the penalty kick and sometimes do not allow the substitute player who just come into the field of play to take the throw in and corner kick.

please advise and clear my doubts.

USSF answer (August 14, 2008):
There is no reason that the new player cannot take the penalty kick or other restart as soon as he or she has entered the field in compliance with the requirements of Law 3.

Note:
The questioner and his colleague are not from the United States and thus are not confused by the high school rule that does not allow a newly-subbed in player to take a penalty kick. The high school rules do not place any other restrictions on newly-subbed in players taking other restarts.…

WHEN MAY A CARD BE SHOWN TO A SUBSTITUTE?

Question:
In a game I played yesterday, one of the substitutes was verbally advised by the referee that as soon as he came onto the pitch to play that he would give him a yellow card.

The incident came about as the subsitute said something to the linesman during the 20th minute of the game. The referee did not show a yellow card at the time, but advised the player that as soon as he did come into the game that he would give him a yellow card. The substitute came into the game in the 75th minute and as soon as he entered was shown a yellow card.

Can the referee do this, or does he have a time limit on when to show a yellow card?

USSF answer (August 11, 2008):
Another inventive referee! If it was going to be done at all, the referee should have cautioned the substitute at the moment of the misconduct — or at least prior to the next restart. Under these conditions, i. e., the referee was aware of the misconduct (dissent, we presume) and had not received any later signal from the assistant referee, the referee must caution at the next stoppage following the misconduct or he or she no longer has that privilege. The referee can, of course, still include details of the misconduct in the match report, but it cannot be considered to be a caution.…

DO I NEED A WHISTLE FOR A CORNER KICK?

Question:
before a player kicks for a corner kick, is he or she signaled to kick by a referee with a whistle?

USSF answer (August 11, 2008):
Under normal circumstances, there is no need to wait for the referee’s signal. If the referee wants the kick to be delayed, he or she will let the kicking team know in plenty of time.…

COIN TOSS PROCEDURE

Question:
Is there a procedure that is to be followed?
I have heard in the past Spring season:
* Do not bend over to pick up the coin. You shouldn’t bow down to “the captains”
* Do not let the coin hit the ground. You will bear your hind quarters to half the stadium.
* Do not catch the coin and flip to the back of your hand. You “reverse the outcome”.

Yet, in the recently concluded Euro 2008 Tournament, I witnessed all three of the above examples in various matches.
This is only trivial. You just hear so many different “you should do this and not that” from various referees.
Thank you for your time and attention regarding this question.

USSF answer (August 6, 2008):
No, there is no set procedure for the coin toss.…

OFFSIDE

Question:
I was recently talking to somebody about offsides and they brought up that it is no longer true that the head or body is a deciding factor in determining offsides. He said the feet are the only deciding factors, and that if any part of the head is closer to the goal line than both the ball and the second to last defender that the player is not offsides. I asked when he heard about this change, and he said in the spring, but I never heard about it. Is this true?

 USSF answer (August 5, 2008):
Ah, those people who do not bother to read the Laws of the Game once they have completed the entry-level course.  No, this rumor is not true.  The Laws clearly state — in the Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees (beginning on p. 55 of the 2008/2009 Law book):

LAW 11 – OFFSIDE

Definitions

In the context of Law 11 — Offside, the following definitions apply:

* “nearer to his opponents’ goal line” means that any part of a player’s head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent.  The arms are not included in this definition

FIELD MARKINGS

Question:
If the markings of a field are incorrect, in this case, specifically the penalty mark, should the existing mark be used, or should the referee mark off the correct distance? This is on an artificial field, so it cannot be covered or moved easily.

USSF answer (August 5, 2008):
If the penalty mark is in the wrong place and cannot, for whatever reason, be changed, the referee must ensure that any penalty kicks are taken from the correct distance from the goal line and in the correct location in relation to both goal posts. Possible mismarked lines can be worked with, but the penalty kick occurs so rarely and can be so decisive, that the distance MUST be correct.…

PLAYERS OF ANY AGE MUST BE SENT OFF FOR SERIOUS MISCONDUCT (2)

Question:
A recent discussion created much debate about the duty and responsibilities a referee under law 5 had to exercise an opinion on law 12 send off offenses when playing 11 aside soccer. The question posed was the failure to show a red card for a send off offense that the referee actually admitted was in fact a send off offense but the referee refused to send off a player because the player was between 9 to 14 years of age a miss-application of law? If a referee was to stop play and award a dfk or pk for a spitting at another or a DOGSO incident where the player CLEARLY denies a goal via the illegal use of the hands but chose not to show a red card due to age is that an opinion on a fact of play or is it a miss application of law? I understand that as an opinion the referee can say there was no criteria for send off and as a fact of play not much can be done but can he say I saw the goal denied point 4 states the player is to be sent off but I do not care? Are not the send off offenses more along the lines of if that occurs then this happens not if it does happen I can pretend it didn’t because the player might get upset?

USSF answer (August 5, 2008):
Yes, the Federation suggests that the referee weigh the facts in every case of misconduct, so as to ensure that both the Letter and the Spirit of the Laws are satisfied. But if the referee chooses to excuse a player aged 9-14 for committing an infringement that should be punished by an immediate sending-off simply because he or she is so young, how will such players ever learn right from wrong and how to play soccer properly, not to mention to exist in society?Furthermore, who would want to be such a referee on the witness stand testifying as to why he let “Davie” stay in the game because he was a cute 11-year-old who had performed a studs-up tackle on “Mark,” was let go this time, and then broke “Freddy’s” leg two minutes later with the exact same maneuver.  Whether the referee shows a red card or not, a violent player must be gotten off the field.…

PLAYERS OF ANY AGE MUST BE SENT OFF FOR SERIOUS MISCONDUCT (1)

Question:
Is it appropriate to take game and situational factors, especially the age of players, when considering sending-off offenses? The ATR “philosophy of cautions” is clear that the referee must consider qualitative factors when determining whether or not to give a caution. Does the same concept apply to send-offs? To be more specific, having determined that a sending-off foul occurred, must the referee send off the player regardless of the player’s age?

As an example, I would be hard-pressed to send off a U12 player for DGH. The law seems intended to prevent older and more skilled players from trading a sure goal for a PK, by adding the consequence of playing a man down. A U12 player is unlikely to understand this, and more importantly is far more likely to handle the ball in an “oh crap” moment than with malicious premeditation. If possible, I’d appreciate a general response as well as an answer to the specific example.

USSF answer (August 5, 2008):
Yes, the Federation suggests that the referee weigh the facts in every case of misconduct, so as to ensure that both the Letter and the Spirit of the Laws are satisfied. But if the referee chooses to excuse a player aged 9-14 for committing an infringement that should be punished by an immediate sending-off simply because he or she is so young, how will such players learn right from wrong and how to play soccer properly, not to mention to exist in society? There is, of course, the question as to whether an accidental (“Oh crap”) handling should be considered at all — and the answer must be a resounding “NO!”…