Category: Law 5 – Referee

Law 5 – Referee

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

FIRST FOUL

Posted on by

Question:
My question is about the concept of punishing the “first foul.” Situation: a player goes up for a header, using the shoulders of an opponent to launch himself. No horizontal movement, just vertically up. The opponent, sensing this, bends over and causes the opponent to fall over him (“tabletop”). Should the resulting DFK be for the team of the player who went up for the ball (ignoring the shoulder-push and punishing the tabletop) or for the team of the player who had his shoulders pushed on in the first place (with a possible caution or chewing-out for the tabletop)?

Would it change if the original shoulder-pusher had horizontal motion over the player who decided to bend over so he fell?

USSF answer (June 9, 2008):
Why worry about “problems” over what the Laws tell us to do? In situations like this the referee can and must punish both offenses — provided, in his or her opinion, they are indeed both offenses.

The first offense, using the opponent’s shoulders as a support, is an old and time-honored way of cheating. It is called holding and is punished with a direct free kick AND a caution for unsporting behavior. The tactic of using a teammate’s shoulders is not a foul, but is certainly misconduct and would be punished by a caution for unsporting behavior and an indirect free kick for the opposing team at the place where the offense occurred.

The second offense, in which the opponent bends over and thus trips the initial offender, might ordinarily be called a foul, but that cannot happen in this case, because the foul has already occurred and whatever follows it can only be misconduct. If, in the opinion of the referee, this is indeed an offense, rather than the natural aftermath of having extra weight and leverage applied to one’s shoulders by an outside force, then the referee must punish it with a caution for unsporting behavior. However, the restart would still be for the first offense.…

Law 5 - Referee

BEWARE OF DINOSAURS!

Posted on by

Question:
At a recent tournament in San Francisco, I was working with a State referee. He was the referee of the match. The pre-game went like this. “I am going to make your job very easy. You are not to call any fouls. The only job that you have is to monitor the offside. The new mandate on a professional level and MLS is to have the referee call all the fouls so we don’t have three different types of foul calls on the pitch.” I have a hard time believing this guy. I have not seen any memorandum indicating such suggestions. If this is a new thing that I am not aware of please show or direct me to such mandate. If is pure fabrication on this referee/assessor/instructor part then we have a problem. If his pre-game/assessment/instruction to young referees of such then this horse pucky is being passed on to other poor referees that only going to believe such non-sense.  

To what extent does USSF allow referees to massage laws of the game and make up their own ideas and rules as they go along? Please advise.

USSF answer (June 4, 2008):
The Federation does not do any such thing. Current guidance for referee working games under the aegis of the U. S. Soccer Federation is covered comprehensively in the USSF publication “Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials.”

This “State referee” would seem to be doing what was common practice throughout the world 30-40 years ago, Things have changed a lot since then, as those of us who were around at that time are happy to testify.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

PLAYER SENT OFF DURING SUBSTITUTION MAY NOT BE REPLACED

Posted on by

Question:
An attacker has been complaining to the AR about his offside decisions. The attacker is subbed and the sub goes by the rule book waiting until the player leaves the field and the CR beckons the sub onto the field. The AR flags to get the attention of the CR, who finds out that, before the player left the field of play, he was verbally abusive and the AR suggests it is enough for the player to be sent off. The CR does not notice the flag of the AR until AFTER the sub has entered the field after having been beckoned by the referee.

The question posed was, essentially, is the departing player a player being sent off (because the misconduct occurred when he was still a player as the sub had not yet been allowed on the field) or is he a substituted player because the referee didn’t sanction him until after a valid substitution has taken place? If the former, does his team play short? If the former and there are limited substitutions, was the substitute who was beckoned onto the field ever a player and is the team charged for a substitution?

USSF answer (May 23, 2008):
If the referee accepts the AR’s information — and why would he not? — then the player who has now left the field is sent off and his team must play short. The substitute, i. e., the new player who entered the field legally, must be removed from the game at this time, but may be substituted in again for another player at a later opportunity, if one exists.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

CORRECTING A WRONG RESTART

Posted on by

Question:
I got into a debate with a fellow referee in a local adult amateur league the other weekend. It was a friendly disagreement, but I’m appealing to a higher authority to adjudicate which of us was correct, since we couldn’t agree.

Red Team is playing Green Team. A Red player fouls a Green player; the center referee stops play and signals a direct free kick for Green. A Red player (perhaps confused, perhaps intentionally) picks up the ball, places it, and kicks it, putting it back into play. The referee whistles to stop play, returns the ball to the spot of the original foul, and signals again for a Green kick.

We could not agree whether the referee was correct in doing so. One of us maintained that the ball was in play once the kick was taken, regardless of who took it, and the referee could not then stop play.

The other one of us argued that the referee could, indeed, stop play, as the kick taken was not a proper restart and that, in fact, had it been an obvious attempt by Red to delay the Green kick, the Red player could even have been cautioned for delaying a restart.

Who was right? A frosty beverage may be riding on the answer! 🙂

USSF answer (May 20, 2008):
The principle expressed in the following excerpt from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” fits the situation you presented to a tee. It makes absolutely no difference that in your situation it was the player who screwed up, not the referee. Retake the original restart!!!! If you believe there was some confusion on the part of the Red player, let it go with a friendly warning to pay attention. If you believe it to have been a conscious effort to subvert the referee’s decision, caution as suggested in your query.

5.14 CHANGING A DECISION ON AN INCORRECT RESTART
If the referee awards a restart for the wrong team and realizes the mistake before the restart is taken, then the restart may be corrected even though the decision was announced after the restart took place. This is based on the established principle that the referee’s initial decision takes precedence over subsequent action. The visual and verbal announcement of the decision after the restart has already occurred is well within the Spirit of the Law, provided the decision was made before the restart took place.

And where/when do we get OUR frosty beverage??…

Law 5 - Referee

REFEREE CREW COMMUNICATIONS GEAR; VIDEO REPLAY?

Posted on by

Question:
Please go over the following for me kindly..

During the FIFA World Cup matches, it appears the referee and possibly the AR’s the 4th man appears to have had a small head set (like one may use for our cell phones for hand free use) who had access to the this communication link..and was it like a conference line bridge between all the referees and a major FIFA official “upstairs in stands”?

Also Are you aware of any proposals being put forth on the Agenda for the Football Board meeting next year in Early 2009   that would make use of replay for limited situations like in the NFL?

USSF answer (May 19, 2008):
The system is used by the working crew only, with no other people plugged in. We have no idea whether video replay will be on the IFAB agenda for 2009 — but would tend to doubt it. We have heard nothing one way or the other.…

Advantage

ADVANTAGE AND THE “4 Ps”

Posted on by

Question:
I know that it in most cases a referee would not allow advantage when a foul is committed against a team in their defensive end (and often not at midfield either). However, I always thought that it was ultimately left to the referee’s judgement. For example, if a defender, just before being fouled from behind, booms a ball from her 20 yard line up past midfield to send a teammate towards goal on a breakaway, then I thought the referee had the right to play advantage and not stop play.

However, just yesterday I saw the following, reportedly from a USSF instructor, on a referee’s message board. It basically says that advantage can never be called in the defensive third – especially in youth games – and even at the World Cup level, “that a referee should not be applying Advantage even at mid-field.”

Here is this USSF instructor’s position:

—————————————————————

“I am writing you about a discussion I have been told about on another site involving the application of Advantage. From what I am told, it centers around a foul that occurred in the defensive 1/3 with the ball at midfield and a seemingly clear path to goal. The referee stopped play and stated that there is no advantage in the defending 1/3. Several folks seem to feel that the referee was wrong, including you.

Well, actually, he was right! One of the new concepts that is being taught to National Referees is the “4 P’s”. When following this concept, especially in youth games, advantage in the defensive or neutral thirds of the field should not be given by the referee. The reasoning is simply based on the lack of 2 of the 4 P’s:

1) Potential for attack: ability to continue a credible and dangerous attack.

2) Proximity to opponent’s goal: closeness to goal.

Few youth players can keep the ball on their foot, running full speed, for 40-60 yards. Thus, the ‘potential’ for a credible attack is not there in most games. Add that there just might be 1 player on the opposing side that could catch that player within 10-15 yards, thus ending any breakaway. This is why ‘proximity to goal’ is key.

The closer you are to the goal, the more credible your chances to score!

FIFA has stated this idea for some time. If you look at several of their tapes of various World Cup competitions, you will find that they state, even at that level, that a referee should not be applying Advantage even at mid-field. You will even find several position papers discussing the application of advantage within the attacking 1/3 as being the only place the referee needs to be attentive to advantage given the proximity to goal.”

END OF QUOTATION

——————————————————————–

So my question:

Does the above represent the official position of the USSF, including the statements that “advantage in the defensive or neutral thirds of the field should NOT be given by the referee” and also about “the attacking 1/3 as being the ONLY place the referee needs to be attentive to advantage given the proximity to goal” ? OR

Is the referee supposed to use some judgement, rarely giving advantage in the defensive or midfield areas but reserving the right to do so if a long pass results in a breakaway opportunity. With this philosophy, the above statement could properly be rephrased to: “advantage in the defensive or neutral thirds of the field should RARELY be given by the referee”.

(The above assumes, of course, that there is no reason to stop play for game control reasons if the foul was particularly severe and a card needs to be given immediately.)

Thanks for your help.

P.S. I understand the rationale behind the stated “four P’s”, but I find some of the extrapolation in the above statement to be a bit flawed: “few youth players can keep the ball on their foot, running full speed, for 40-60 yards. Thus, the ‘potential’ for a credible attack is not there in most games” . . . Yes, most youth players cannot run full speed with the ball at their feet for 50 yards. But in a lot of youth games if a player receives the ball behind the last defender at midfield, they will boot it well ahead of them and run onto it and not choose to keep the ball at their feet. That will allow the attacker to get all the way to the top of the penalty area against many GK’s, while touching the ball perhaps two times and running at full speed in between. To me, this is a MUCH bigger advantage than a DFK from a team’s own 18 yard line – especially in a girls U13 game, where the DFK’s may not go very far.

USSF answer (May 15, 2008):
We are not aware of any statement from FIFA/IFAB declaring that advantage should not, much less may not, be given in the defensive third or only in the attacking third. “Proximity to the opponent’s goal” (one of the 4 Ps) is a sliding scale — an offense occurring in the defensive third may rarely warrant an advantage call, but “rarely” does not equal “never.”

The third P in the “4 Ps” is “Personnel” — which means that the advantage decision must take into account the players, both attacking and defending, who might become part of the ensuing play. The referee must look at their numbers and their individual skills in determining the likelihood (not the certainty but, rather, the probability) of an advantage for the attacking team in not stopping play.

All advantage decisions are at the discretion of the referee, based solely on his or her judgment as to the specific circumstances of each individual offense. Most of the time, an advantage decision cannot be second-guessed because to do so would require knowing what would have happened in the absence of the decision. Either giving it or not giving it could be effective but it can seldom be described as “wrong.” As a consequence, it is almost impossible to put together a brief scenario and then expect anyone, no matter how experienced or expert, to definitively state that an advantage decision would be right or wrong — the number and complexity of the factors going into making the decision are too great to permit this. It is usually more advisable to actually see a presentation (such as on the “4 Ps”) for oneself than to listen to or read about second, third, or fourth hand recollections of it from other parties. The presentation itself is the only official position of USSF on the matter — everything else is personal opinion, filtered through potentially faulty memories.

Here is a copy of the official presentation: Advantage and the 4Ps

Finally, while we recognize that everyone has a right to speak his or her own thoughts on almost any topic under the sun, responses on any sites other than www.ussoccer.com and www.askasoccerreferee.com are not officially approved by the U. S. Soccer Federation and are best treated as unofficial and not approved.…

Law 5 - Referee

IMPORTANCE OF THE PREGAME CONFERENCE; INSISTING AR

Posted on by

Question:
I was refereeing a U17 girls game. It seemed like every time a ball was played in to the half of one of my assistant referees, she raised her flag signaling offside. The team complained to me with about 5 minutes left in the half about the calls of this AR saying that she was signaling offside for people that were not interfering with play but were in an offside position. I explained to them that the AR was in the best position to make the call but that I would monitor it. I had waived one offside call off as well as an illegal throw-in signal that was given by this AR. With play going the opposite direction in the second half, I noted that only a quarter of the offside calls were being made by the AR compared to what the first AR was making. 

How should a referee handle the situation where there is some doubt in the calls that the AR is making? If the AR is continually waived off, they could shut down and not call anything. There seems to be a fine balance in maintaining the cohesiveness of the referee team.    

USSF answer (May 8, 2008):
You don’t tell us what your instructions to the assistant referees were before the game, so we cannot be certain whether or not this AR knew what was expected of her. As leader of the officiating team, the referee must establish during the pregame conference how the team will work and cooperate. If this is not done, then we can expect nothing but problems as the ARs fill the gap in the instructions by inventing their own. Did you attempt to make any adjustments during the halftime break? One way might have been to suggest to the AR that she should remember the requirements of the various Laws, such as active involvement for offside or position of the feet in Law 15 and not be overly picky.

Finally, you need to remember that part of what you said about offside is not quite correct: Although the AR is in the best position (usually) to judge offside POSITION, it is the referee who must make the final decision regarding offside INVOLVEMENT and this decision falls more heavily on the referee’s shoulders the farther away the play is from the AR.

If all else fails, then the final paragraph of Law 6 gives you all the information you need for such cases:
“In the event of undue interference or improper conduct, the referee will relieve an assistant referee of his duties and make a report to the appropriate authorities.”…

Law 5 - Referee

RULES OF THE COMPETITION

Posted on by

Question:
I am a new 09 ref although at age 59 and a parent of 3, I have many seasons experience as a parent/fan, coach and assistant coach at the rec and classic level. I have been out of it long enough to note the small sided match approach as a great improvement in that it allows more kids to have more touches on the ball! I am however having a slight problem with the variation of the rules that exist between the official brochure I received at my 09 certification training (US Youth Soccer Handbook for Small-sided Games) and the “local” rules that coaches tell me they are following under our local soccer association. 
Perhaps my experience will better illustrate this. Last Saturday I was scheduled to be the sole referee at 2 U-8 matches. I studied up on the rules at this level as described by the manual named above and noted that it involved 4V4, no goalie, throw-ins with repeat for first foul throw, etc. when I got ready to start the first game, I noticed goalies warming up and asked the coach what was up with that. I was told that this was U-9 and that it was 5V5 and that goalies were added at this level. In the interest of letting the kids play the way they were used to, I let the game go on. It was a little awkward having the goal area be the “penalty area” (in terms of the keeper handling the ball) but the game went smoothly.  Also the coaches said that the teams were not used to switching halves at half time (despite what the handbook says) so I let that pass also. The next game I was also told it was U-9 despite what the scheduler (Arbiter). These coaches also said the same thing about the number of players (5 with one of them a goalie) but this time they said there were no throw-ins but rather kick-ins instead. As a new ref without a set of rules to refer to other than the Handbook which does not refer to a U-9 level at all (And trying to apply the U-10 rules on a field designed for U-8 creates a whole other set of problems!!!).  
I don’t want to sound like an obsessive/compulsive but I think that at some point the rules should rule the game although I recognize that at these age levels the primary focus should b having fun. I am going to forward this to my assignor who I hope will be able to give me guidance on this but I wanted to get a “state” answer as well. Thanks,

USSF answer (May 7, 2008):
You can download the current USYSA rules for small-sided soccer from their website. The rules may be found at http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/coaches/RulesSmallGames.asp and more information on small-sided competition may be found at http://www.usyouthsoccer.org/coaches/smallsidedgames.asp .

As to local rules of competition, the intelligent referee will always obtain a copy of these rules before accepting any assignments. That way he or she knows what lies ahead and he or she can determine whether or not to accept assignments/appointments to those games.

In addition, a key element here is the assignor — the assignor should know what age level the assigned match is played at and should be able to provide the referee with, if not the rules themselves, some indication of where they can be found.…

Assignments

NO ARs AT A TOURNAMENT

Posted on by

Question:
I attended a tournament this past weekend for my U11 Boys team. After arriving at the fields I noticed that none of the younger teams, U11 included, were being officiated by the required 3 referees. So before the start of my game, I asked the tournament Administrators if we could have 3 refs for our games. They stated that it was their tournament and there-for their rules, they didn’t have to provide AR for a U11 game. I said that I thought that was illegal and that I thought they had to follow sanctioned rules. They simply restated “It’s our tournament, our rules.” What are my rights as a team manager for our team? What is the rule about the number of referees required for tournaments?And is there a difference with the age of the players? What should I do before going to my next tournament to insure this does not happen again?

USSF answer (May 7, 2008):
Unfortunately, we must give you the same response we give to referees who question the crazy rules used in some tournaments. If as a referee you accept the assignment to the tournament, you must follow the rules of that competition. The same is true for teams: If you enter the tournament and play, you must accept and follow the rules of that competition.

There are other methods that can be used. These are spelled out in the USSF Referee Administrative Handbook, available to all referees. It explains what options are available if there is not a full three-man crew.  The diagonal system of control must still be used, but the Handbook provides various alternatives for absent, missing, or even unassigned crew members.  (We have published this numerous times in the past. The full details may be found in the archives. Good luck!)

An alternative that is perfectly acceptable is for the the referee to ask each team for a club linesman, i. e., a person who will hold a flag, run up and down the line, and inform the referee when the ball is out of play. The club linesman may not show direction or indicate fouls or offside. In this alternative system, that is the job of the referee. Someone might even suggest to the tournament committee that they make this system part of the process for each team in the affected age groups.…

Law 4 - Equipment

THE SOCKS MUST MATCH!

Posted on by

Question:
During a U/15B match being refereed by a Grade 6 referee, the referee admistrator stopped the game during play from the touchline without consulting the center referee. The match was stopped because one team wore two different colored socks. The entire team had matching socks. There was no color conflict with the opposing team. The certer referee was taken aback by this action and stated there was no written law or rule disallowing this, that simply the entire team had to be dressed alike with no color conflict. The admistrator openly chastised the center referee for not knowing the law. The players changed socks and the match resumed.

I went to the the 2008 Laws of the Game and could find no reference not allowing the wearing of different colored socks. Can you clarify this for me?

USSF answer (May 7, 2008):
There is indeed a requirement for uniformity of socks. While nothing is specifically written in Law 4 regarding the color of socks, tradition and common practice dictate that all members of a team (with the possible exception of the goalkeeper) wear socks of the same color, rather than each wearing his or her own choice or wearing socks of one color on one foot and socks of a different color on the other foot.

The ruling will be found in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” which is based on the Laws, memoranda from FIFA and the International F. A. Board, and in memoranda and policy papers published by the United States Soccer Federation.

QUOTE
4.1 WEARING UNIFORMS
It is implicit in the Law that each side wear a distinctively colored jersey, that shorts and socks be uniform for each team, and that the uniforms be distinguishable from the uniforms worn by the other team. However, the details of the uniform are governed by the competition authority and can vary widely from one match to another. The referee must know and enforce the rules of each competition worked. Players’ jerseys must remain tucked inside their shorts, socks must remain pulled up, and each player must wear shinguards under the socks. All undergarments (slide pants, undershirts, etc.) which extend visibly beyond the required uniform must be as close as possible in color to the main color of the uniform part under which they are worn.

All players must wear jerseys or shirts that distinguish them from the referee and assistant referees. If the colors are the same, the players, not the referees, must change.

Remember that jersey/shirt and shorts must be two separate items, not a single unit.
END OF QUOTE

We are concerned that the overzealous referee administrator interfered and actually forced a stoppage of the game to take care of this matter. By waiting for a stoppage called by the referee, the administrator could have “pointed out” the sock color issue and, if he could, cited a local league or competition rule which clearly required the socks to be of the same color from foot to foot. Otherwise, butt out!!…