Question:
I have a question about judging denying a goal or obvious goal scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball: ATR 12.37 (a) states in part “but simply the occurrence of the offense under circumstances in which, in the opinion of the referee, the ball would likely have gone directly into the goal but for the handling”.

What if the deliberate handling by a defender prevents the ball from reaching an attacker who would be able to simply put the ball into an unprotected goal (no other defenders or the goal keeper to prevent the goal)?  In this situation, the handling prevents an obvious goal scoring opportunity, but this does not seem to meet the criteria as stated in ATR 12.37 (a) “the ball would have likely gone directly into the goal”.

Thank you for your help.

USSF answer (April 2, 2008):
The information in Advice 12.37 applies only to situations in which, but for the handling, the ball would have gone into the net (in the opinion of the referee, of course).  What you are asking about is at least one step removed from that and would require the referee to decide that, but for the handling, the ball would have gone to another attacking player who, maybe/possibly/perhaps, would have made a shot on goal which, maybe/possibly/perhaps, would have gone into the net.

Your scenario, rather than applying under Advice 12.37, is a perfect example of handling as a tactical foul — breaking up attacking play — and thus merits no more than a caution, followed by a direct free kick or penalty kick (if applicable). The referee cannot spend valuable time dithering over whether or not a player might/could/should/would have done something, but must decide what has happened now. We judge an offense on its own, not on action extended into the future.

For information on dealing with the tactical foul caution, see Advice 12.28.1.…

Question:
With the new requirement for undergarments being the same color as the uniform, is it required that all players wear undergarments or can some players wear undergarments and others not wear undergarments.

USSF answer (April 1, 2008):
The requirement for matching colors between undergarments applies only to those players who actually wear the undergarments in question. One would assume that all players wear some sort of undergarments, but we are concerned only with those that show.…

Question:
Red attacker with ball avoids a slide tackle by jumping over tackler (no contact), but lands akwardly on his ankle twisting it (later determined to be broken). This occurred close to the bench-side touch line. Red attacker, in obvious pain, is yelling profanities.  In this moment, the newer referee was not sure what to do–whether to card for the offensive language or not.  Fellow referees in our area disagree–some say card, others no card. What’s your view and recommendation?

USSF answer (March 31, 2008):
If, in the opinion of the referee, . . . with that opinion formed by some standards.  We already allow for momentary outbursts of frustration and should probably allow the same for momentary outbursts of pain, but not if they continue beyond the moment, not if (other things equal) they are shouted at the top of the lungs, and not if (other things being equal) the language itself is patently offensive (based on the audience and/or by being directed at someone — e. g., the opponent over whose leg the player jumped or the referee whose fault all this clearly was).…

Question:
I was coaching my daughter’s u10 game and a younger ref did the equipment check… I have a girl on the team who has softball/baseball cleats on – they have a plastic stub on the front it is a smaller stud not one that want of great length – he informed her that he had to cut the stub off or change shoes… I told him that I am an R8 Ref and I had looked at the cleats and wanted to know what was unsafe on them… he said that he dose not allow baseball style cleats regardless if they metal or not… I told him I did not agree with the interpretation but it was his game so she played in a spectator’s shoes (they swapped) …

So I have 2 questions: 

Cutting off a stud on the fields — I have to say that getting a knife and cutting off the stud could leave “shaper” or uneven edges…  I would call that more unsafe…
Where in the rules does it say baseball cleats as a whole are not legal?

I clearly remember in the this years re-cert class that baseball cleats are legal in USSF if they are safe; unsafe in my opinion would be metal… or if the front stud sticks out farther then the others.  I did not want to disagree with the ref and tell him I was a ref and he was wrong as it was his game but I would like to have a better understanding for future to tell this parent if they need to get new cleats and I can address it with the club and the assigner.

USSF answer (March 26, 2008):
It is illegal to play soccer in football or baseball cleats of the traditional sort with toe cleats, even if the toe cleats are cut off. There is no documentation on this, other than the requirement that players’ equipment must be safe for them and all participants. Traditional football and baseball cleats are unsafe and not permitted in soccer games. In any event, the final decision rests on the opinion of the referee.…