Question:
I have seen this similar situation at least 4 times in the last year – with the same results. An attacking player is dribbling from a wing area (left or right of the goal) in the defenders penalty area. A defender takes a hard and late hip charge into the offensive player. Enough to move them 2 – 4 feet off the ball. The offensive player maintains balance and control. But either immediately or within 1 or 2 seconds loses the ball to the second or third defender (in each situation the defense outnumbers the offense in the immediate vicinity of the play). No whistle and actually no play on is verbalized or signalled. In all cases after the game the referee informs the offensive team/player that if the player had been knocked to the ground a penalty would have ensued. I love a good physical game and in some cases I could easily argue that advantage was the call. But the seemingly late nature of the hit bothers me. Myself, as a ref I’m loath to call a PK but worry about benefiting the defensive team with questionable play and penalizing the offensive team for not flopping. These hip charges are hard, from the side or slightly behind the offensive player. If the offensive player went down I don’t think anyone would have been suprised. But with them not falling I can’t see a foul being called. So, there are a couple parts to my question. 1.) using the four P’s the call seems rather legitimate but it seems to me that the defense gained advantage using a questionable tackle. Could this be whistled as a foul? 2.) even if it is not a foul could this warrant a caution?

USSF answer (September 24, 2008):
We cannot make any definitive comment on a game played under high school rules, as it would not have been played under the Laws of the Game. However, if the game had been played under the Laws of the Game, we can make some definite statements:

1. What you describe has nothing to do with advantage, but is strictly a matter of a referee afraid to make a call. There is no room for cowards in the refereeing corps.

2. In general we can say, without fear of being incorrect, that hip charges at any level of play (male/female, young/old, skilled/unskilled, etc.) are unfair and thus not allowed. Charges must be shoulder to shoulder, with both players having at least one foot on the ground. However, we must consider some allowance for differences in height and weight and bodily proportions. In other words, we must not forget that both the laws of physics and Mother Nature can overrule the Laws of the Game, in that women are usually wider at the hips than men and men are usually wider at the shoulders than women. What we judge is how those bodily characteristics are used. If they are used unfairly — and only the referee on the spot can do that — then a foul should be called.

3. Referees who do not call unfair charges should consider two courses of action: Either call fouls correctly or stop refereeing, as they are doing the rest of us no favors. Simply because a player was fouled but not knocked to the ground is not a valid reason not to call a foul. A foul is a foul is a foul.

4. Referees MUST make the same call in the penalty area that they would make on the rest of the field. If they cannot do that, they must consider those same two courses of action, because their failure to call the game correctly makes problems for all referees.

5. If the referee chooses to make a decision — which each of us must do thousands of times in a game — then it had better be for the good of the game. The decision to award the advantage must be based on the four Ps, but in that case the referee must follow through and speak to the miscreant afterwards. There may be no need for a caution on the first offense, that is up to the referee, but if the player or the team contnues to do that, the referee must punish the misconduct.…

Question:
I recently attended a soccer match where the following occurred:

A player on the attacking team was injured in the penalty area of the defending team during a corner kick. The center referee only noticed the injury after it occurred due to the number of players in front of the goal. Both the center referee and the AR did not call a foul. It was realized after that the girl had been kicked in the throat during a scramble for the ball. The injury was tended to, but no foul was indicated and the restart was a free kick to the defending team, which she was instructed to kick directly to the opponent’s goalie as a sign of sportsmanship.

Later in the match a corner kick was taken by the other team. A defender stopped this ball by actually catching it with her hands (in the penalty area). No foul was called and the coach went ballistic (understandably). The Center referee indicated that he did not call a foul (which would result in a penalty kick, i.e. a sure goal) because he did not call a foul in the previous incident… in essence he was calling it a “wash”.

Is this something that referees do? Can they have discretion when calling fouls if they feel a mistake has been made in a previous call?

USSF answer (September 19, 2008):
We are stumped on this one, because you have not told us how play was stopped. If the game was not stopped by the referee to deal with the injury — and referees should stop the game ONLY for SERIOUS injuries — and no foul was called, then the correct restart is for the reason that the ball went out of play. If the game was stopped by the referee to deal with the injury — see above — then the restart would be a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when play was stopped. The indirect free kick might have been correct under high school rules, but certainly not under the Laws of the Game. Another inventive referee at work.

Yes, a very inventive referee — and a referee who cheats on the Letter of the Laws and the Spirit of the Game. Soccer referees do not do “make-up” calls. This referee should be reported to the competition authority and to the referee authorities in your state, so that he can undergo some additional instruction.

If a referee makes a mistake, he or she should NEVER do a “balancing of calls” by making another bad call for the opposing team. Two wrongs do not make a right and the referee must always make the best possible decisions within the framework of the Laws.

Nor do mistakes by referees give the coaches permission to rage at them. We are concerned about you (and others, you are not alone) saying that the coach “went ballistic” and then in this case adding “(understandably).” No coach has a right to “go ballistic” — if they have a concern about a referee’s decision, they should suck it up and follow through with the sort of report we described above. We don’t want anyone believing that we would condone such behavior (any more than we condone the referee’s egregious errors in this situation).…