2003 Part 2

CLUB LINESMEN/DO NOT CHAT WITH COACHES [LAW 6; LAW 18]
Your question:
thanks for the reply: one more that came up last night at disciplinary meeting: Ref is explaining a certain call he made with head coach at half-time in the center of the field. The coach had been invited onto the field. Discussion escaltes and becomes confrontational. A club linesmen seems to think there may be a problem, and he walks onto the field to see if the center referee needs assistance. The coach starts to scream at the club linesmen that he shouldn’t be on the field unless invited by the center. I should note that this is a U-10 match and the club linesmen is not a certified USSF ref, but a father of one of the players. The coach goes “nuts” because the linesmen refuses to leave until the coach settles down. My question is this: Does a club linesmen have to be invited onto the field by the center? And does it make any difference if this occurs either at half-time, or after the game?

USSF answer (June 30, 2003):
Under Section 6.6 CLUB LINESMEN, in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” we learn that “the relationship of club linesmen to the referee must be one of assistance, without undue interference or any opposition.” In this case, it would appear that the club linesman was attempting to be supportive of the referee and that the coach was out of line in more ways than one. This situation also illustrates the dangers of inviting coaches anywhere for anything unless the match is over — and even then it’s not a good idea.

NUMBER OF REFEREES IN THE U. S. A. [ADMINISTRATIVE]
Your question:
A. How many soccer referees are there in the US today? I realize that there are different levels, but in sum how many people are qualified from USSF’s point of view to officiate at some level of soccer?
B. How many referees is this number short of what USSF would like to see?

USSF answer (June 26, 2003):
There are currently 125,000 referees registered with the United States Soccer Federation. The Federation would like to see many more than that.

RESTARTS AND AFFECTING PLAY [LAW 13; LAW 12; LAW 18]
Your question:
Our referee association had an interesting debate about a call made after a corner kick. It seems the younger age groups have picked up a tactical “touch and go” play to their repetoire. The player taking the corner kick barely touches the ball forward and a teammate runs in to take possession, then, dribbles the ball to the goal. Not a problem in itself except the center referee missed the slight touch and stopped play thinking the second player had taken the corner. Of course, the call was an indirect for the defending team. This particular referee also stated, we should encourage the teams to let us know when this play was being made to avoid any confusion in the future. I maintain, referees should not be privy to “plays” and if I had been the center and missed the start, I would have looked for my assistant for a foul signal. After all, the AR is right there! The referee claimed he had to concentrate on what was going on in the box. HHHmmmm . . . positioning, maybe? Anyway, my argument was in the the minority . . . what do you think?

USSF answer (June 25, 2003):
The most important things to note here are that (1) THE REFEREE MUST BE ALERT AT ALL TIMES! It is inexcusable for a referee to miss any play that occurs within his or her view, particularly a restart. If the referee is inattentive and misses the restart, then he or she should look to the nearer assistant referee for assistance. (2) THE LAWS OF THE GAME ARE WRITTEN TO ENCOURAGE ATTACKING SOCCER AND THE SCORING OF GOALS. Referees must not take away an advantage LEGALLY GAINED by the team with the ball.

The remainder of this answer comes from a reply written back in September 2002 (and modified slightly to update references). It covers all aspects of deceptive play.

QUOTE
General Note Regarding Restarts
“Memorandum 1997” discussed amendments to the Laws of the Game affecting all free kick, corner kick, penalty kick, and kick-off restarts. These amendments centered on the elimination of the ball moving the “distance of its circumference” before being considered in play. In all such cases, the ball is now in play when it is “kicked and moves” (free kicks and corner kicks) or when it is “kicked and moves forward” (kick-offs and penalty kicks). IFAB has emphasized that only minimal movement is needed to meet this requirement.
USSF Advice to Referees: further clarification from IFAB suggests that, particularly in the case of free kicks and corner kicks, such minimal movement might include merely touching the ball with the foot. Referees are reminded that they must observe carefully the placing of the ball and, when it is properly located, any subsequent touch of the ball with the foot is sufficient to put the ball into play. Referees must distinguish between such touching of the ball to direct it to the proper location for the restart and kicking the ball to perform the restart itself. In situations where the ball must move forward before it is in play (kick-offs and penalty kicks), there should be less difficulty in applying the new language since such kicks have a specific location which is easily identified.
END OF QUOTE

It is not the referee’s responsibility to ensure that the opposing team is prepared for any restart. That is their job. The referee’s job is to ensure that the Laws of the Game are enforced. What you are questioning is not “trickery” by the kicking team; it is deception, which is allowed by the Laws. Here is an article that appeared a short while ago in our USSF referee magazine, Fair Play:

QUOTE
Affecting Play
Jim Allen, National Instructor Trainer

Using “devious” means to affect the way play runs can be perfectly legal. The referee must recognize and differentiate between the “right” and “wrong” ways of affecting play, so that he or she does not interfere with the players’ right to use legitimate feints or ruses in their game. The desire to score a goal and win the game often produces tactical maneuvers, ploys, and feints designed to deceive the opponent. These can occur either while the ball is in play or at restarts. Those tactics used in restarts are just as acceptable as they would be in the normal course of play, provided there is no action that qualifies as unsporting behavior or any other form of misconduct. The team with the ball is allowed more latitude than its opponents because this is accepted practice throughout the world, and referees must respect that latitude when managing the game. Play can be affected in three ways and each will probably occur in any normal game. In descending order of acceptability under the Laws of the Game, they are: influence, gamesmanship, and misconduct.
To “influence” means to affect or alter the way the opponents play by indirect or intangible means. “Gamesmanship” is the art or practice of winning a game through acts of doubtful propriety, such as distracting an opponent without technically violating the Laws of the Game. However, the referee must be very careful, for while the act may be within the Letter of the Law, it may well fall outside the Spirit of the Law. “Misconduct” is blatant cheating or intentional wrongdoing through a deliberate violation of the Laws of the Game.
Many referees confuse perfectly legitimate methods of affecting play through influence with certain aspects of gamesmanship and misconduct. Influence can cause problems for some referees at restarts. The ball is in play on free kicks and corner kicks as soon as it has been kicked and moves, and on kick-offs and penalty kicks as soon as it is kicked and moves forward. The key for most referees seems to be the requirement that the ball must “move.” The IFAB has directed that referees interpret this requirement liberally, so that only minimal movement is necessary. This minimal movement has been defined as the kicker possibly merely touching the ball with the foot. All referees must observe carefully the placing of the ball for the kick and distinguish between moving the ball with the foot to put it in the proper location and actually kicking the ball to restart the game. Please note: Feinting at a penalty kick may be considered by the referee to be unsporting behavior, but verbal or physical feinting by the kicking team at free kicks or in dynamic play is not. (See below.)
Influencing play is perfectly acceptable. The International Football Association Board (IFAB) and the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) have consistently ruled in favor of the use of guile by the attacking team to influence play and against the use of timewasting tactics and deceitful acts by the defending team. The IFAB and FIFA are so concerned over the failure of referees to deal with timewasting tactics that they send annual reminders noting that referees must deal with time wasting in all its forms. IFAB has also consistently ruled that the practice of forming a defensive wall or any other interference by the defending team at free kicks is counter to the Spirit of the Game, and has issued two associated rulings that the kicking team may influence (through the use of feinting tactics) and confuse the opponents when taking free kicks. The IFAB reinforced its renunciation of defensive tactics by allowing the referee to caution any opposing players who do not maintain the required distance at free kicks as a result of the feinting tactics, which can include members of the kicking team jumping over the ball to confuse and deceive the opponents legally. (See the Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game, May 2000, Law 13, Q&A 6.) The related practice of touching the ball at a free kick or corner kick just enough to put it in play and then attempting to confuse the opponents by telling a teammate to come and take the kick is also accepted practice.
Gamesmanship, by its very name, suggests that the player is bending the rules of the game to his benefit. However, while he is not breaking the letter of the laws that cover play, he may be violating the Spirit of the Laws. Indeed, acts of gamesmanship in soccer can range from being entirely within the letter of the Law to quite illegal. Examples of legal gamesmanship are a team constantly kicking the ball out of play or a player constantly placing himself in an offside position deliberately, looking for the ball from his teammates so that the referee must blow the whistle and stop and restart the game. These acts are not against the Letter of the Laws, and players who commit them cannot be cautioned for unsporting behavior and shown the yellow card. Referees can take steps against most aspects of this legal time wasting only by adding time. Remember that only the referee knows how much time has been lost, and he is empowered by Law 7 to add as much time as necessary to ensure equality. Acts of illegal gamesmanship fall under misconduct (see below). Examples: a player deliberately taking the ball for a throw-in or free kick to the wrong spot, expecting the referee to redirect him; a coach whose team is leading in the game coming onto the field to “attend” to a downed player; simulating a foul or feigning an injury. Misconduct is a deliberate and illegal act aimed at preventing the opposing team from accomplishing its goals. Misconduct can be split into two categories of offenses: those which merit a caution (including the illegal forms of time wasting) and those which merit a sending-off. While the attacking team may use verbal feints to confuse the defensive wall or may “call” for the ball without actually wanting it, simply to deceive their opponents, the other team may not use verbal feints to its opponents and then steal the ball from them, e.g., a defender calling out an opponent’s name to entice him into passing the ball to him. Full details on the categories of misconduct and their punishment can be found in the U. S. Soccer Federation (USSF) publication “7 + 7,” which can be downloaded from this and other USSF-affiliated pages.
Look at these methods of affecting play as escalating in severity from the legal act of influencing to gamesmanship, which can range from legal to illegal, to misconduct, which is entirely illegal. Each of these methods will be used by players in any normal game of soccer to gain an advantage for their team. Referees must know the difference between them, so that they can deal with what should be punished and not interfere in an act that is not truly an infringement of the Laws. Thorough knowledge of the Laws of the Game, the Additional Instructions on the Laws of the Game, the Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game, the USSF Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game, and position papers and memoranda from the National Referee Development Program can help the referee make the correct decision in every case.
END OF QUOTE

These principles apply at all levels of the game.

REFEREE COMMUNICATION DEVICES [LAW 5; LAW 6]
Your question:
I noticed the Referees wearing an earpiece and microphone during the Confederations Cup Competition in France. Is this something new FIFA is doing, and do you know who may be communicating with the Referees during these games? If someone is communicating with the referee using modern electronics what is your opinion?

USSF answer (June 25, 2003):
The referees are participating in a FIFA experiment and are wearing communication devices connecting them with the assistant referees. The referee can speak directly to the ARs, but the ARs must signal the referee individually to establish communication from their devices.

We will probably learn more about the communication devices after the competition is over.

HOLDING (INCLUDING “HAND CHECKS”) [LAW 12]
Your question:
Why is it, in the mens’ game, it is allowed for a player chasing an attacker with the ball to grab and hold? Unless the attacker is flagrantly thrown down, a foul is usually not called. This to me is using the “take him out” defense which is used to neutralize superior speed or skill. This does not seem to be allowed in the womens’ game, and they have more exciting field play, with more goals, but not the speed of the mens game. I don’t mind bumping and tackling, but the grabbing of the shirts and shorts to slow them down and sometimes dragging them down seems to be against the spirt of the game. Anyway, it just bothers me.

USSF answer (June 25, 2003):
If it bothers you, do something about it. Players are not allowed to grab and hold other players. That is called “holding” and is punishable by a direct free kick. While it is up to the referee to enforce the Laws, it is also up to the players to play responsibly and within the Laws. Work through your state association to have the Laws enforced more closely and to educate the players.

Do not forget that the International F. A. Board and FIFA have become so concerned about holding that they issued a directive in 2002 reminding referees that, if the holding is blatant and pulls a player away from the ball or prevents a player from getting to the ball, the action is misconduct (yellow card for unsporting behavior) in addition to being a foul.

SUBSTITUTIONS [LAW 3; RULES OF COMPETITION]
Your question:
Perhaps you could clarify the question I have regarding substitutes. If the Ref stops a youth game ( u19 or lower) to allow a injured player to be attended to–are subs allowed for uninjured players on either team? If the ball has been put out of play and the Referee signals for bench personnel to attend to an injured player—are any subs allowed (injured player only, or anyone, or nobody??). Also during the administering of a card–are subs allowed by either team? I have asked different Refs these questions and have received many different answers. I would appreciate having this cleared up.

USSF answer (June 25, 2003):
Under the Laws of the Game, players may be substituted at any stoppage in play. The reason you get different answers from various referees is that the competitions in which they officiate may have established rules different from the Laws of the Game.

GAMESMANSHIP [LAW 12; 7 + 7]
Your question:
I was recently at a Premier Level boys U17 game between a Colorado team and a team from Cal-North. The Cal-North coach was upset at some of the tactics that were being used by the Colorado team and was complaining to the referee in order to try and get some calls. The Colorado coach suggested that the tactics his team were using fell under the category of gamesmanship and did not warrant any action by the referee. Some of the tactics that I noticed looked a lot like delay and harrassment, and really disrupted the flow of the game. Can you help clarify the following items and let me know whether you think they should have been warned or carded.
– Kicking the ball 10 yards out of bounds on the opponents throw-ins to delay. 10-12 times
– Standing on the touchline in front of throwins to eliminate quick restarts. 5-7 times
– Running players between the kicker and the wall on free kicks to distract the kicking team. 3-4 times
– Exaggerated body language on fouls committed in front of attacking goal. Can’t knock a player down in their first 2/3 of the field, fall down at the slightest touch in the attacking third 10-12 times, mostly ignored
USSF answer (June 21, 2003):
One man’s gamesmanship is another man’s misconduct. There are legitimate ways to affect how play runs, but they are reserved for the team with the ball, not the opponents. Most of the tactics you list should be stopped immediately by the referee. Perhaps the first time the referee should simply warn the player, but after that a caution and yellow card for unsporting behavior or delaying the restart of play or failing to remain the required distance away at a free kick would be in order.

Deliberately holding the ball or kicking the ball away at a stoppage — no matter the direction or destimation — is considered to be delaying the restart of play.

Standing on the touchline in front of the thrower is legitimate, provided the player doing the standing does not move with the thrower or otherwise attempt to distract or impede the thrower. If he does that, he should be cautioned for unsporting behavior.

If the defending team runs players between the ball and the wall, that is failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a free kick, a cautionable offense. The same is true if the defending team sends a “stroller” past the ball just before the kick.

Faking an injury or exaggerating the seriousness of an injury or faking a foul (diving) or exaggerating the seriousness of a foul are considered to be unsporting behavior.

You can find a very useful document entitled “7 + 7” on various USSF-affiliated websites. It lists the seven cautionable offenses and the seven sending-off offenses, giving a breakdown for each sort of misconduct.

POOR REFEREEING [LAW 10; LAW 5; LAW 6]
Your question:
My team just finished playing a game where I was quite frustrated with the call a center and side ref made. The ball hit the top post on the goal and came straight down to hit the goal line and it spun out of the goal line into the field and not into the goal. The center ref admittedly says that he didn’t see it go in since he was 30 yards away and in the center of the field. The side referee was 25 yes and could not see it either. We ascertained this fact by going to his line after the game and there was no way to side the line of the goal line from this position let alone the split second of the balls position.

The side referee was approximately 13 yrs old and was obviously a friend of the team as they celebrated the win together after the game with the opposing team. This happened to disillusion our kids who played an away game and saw this display of jubilation and celebratory high fives with the opposing team and the side ref.

By the way the teams are U13 boy’s team.

I’d like to know the ruling when any ref could not possibly see the ball cross the line. I’d also like to know how can I send a complaint through the proper channels to show my frustration.

USSF answer (June 19, 2003):
The answer is simple: If the referee and the assistant referee cannot confirm that a goal has been scored — in other words, that the ball has completely crossed the goal line between the goalposts and beneath the crossbar — then no goal has been scored. This is not a protestable matter; it is a matter of fact. Any comments regarding fitness, less than optimal positioning, or apparent bias on the part of an official should be directed to the competition authority and/or to the referee organization.

We do apologize for the lack of fitness or preparedness of the referee and the assistant referee who were unable to be in the proper spot to see the action. We also apologize for the young assistant referee’s lack of common sense in celebrating with the winning team. That is uncalled for — and has now been dealt with by your state association.

REFEREES: STICK TO YOUR OWN BUSINESS! [LAW 3; LAW 5; LAW 18; ADMINISTRATIVE]
Your question:
In a recent recreational league women’s game, I had a player take the field who had just come out of a leg cast. She had broken two bones in her ankle 6 weeks prior in a game that I also officiated. I was surprised that she was out on the field and asked if she felt she could play without risk of further injury. She said yes and I allowed her to play. Keeping a close eye on her, I noticed three things: she was unable to turn on the ankle; she hobbled badly/she did not run; and her opponents gave her plenty of room fearing that they might cause her further injury. I expressed to her that I was uncomfortable with her playing and that she should consider taking more time to recover from a serious injury. She claimed to be OK.

I mulled it over for a half and at the end of the half came to the conclusion that one; she was a danger to herself, two; she was changing how the game would normally be played, and three; I might be held liable for a secondary injury. I asked influential players on her team to intercede and request that she not return for the second half. They asked but she would not comply. At that point I asked her directly to volunteer not to play in the second half. She again claimed she was OK and would return to play. Feeling that I had emptied my bag of game management options, I had no choice but to inform her that I would not allow her to return. Obviously, this was not a popular statement, but after some guarded conversation, she complied.

Reviewing my laws, I can not come up with anything other than the still not written but often invoked law 18, common sense, to back my authority to stop her from playing. Was I correct in not allowing her to play? Could I be held liable for a secondary injury? Is there a law prohibiting players from playing the game while seriously injured?

USSF answer (June 19, 2003):
You overstepped your authority by telling the player she could not play. If you have some pretty good evidence that she is seriously injured, you may stop play to have a player examined (and then removed from the field of play), but you may not order her off the field of play.

It is not likely that the referee would be held liable if the indicated course of action were followed. You can’t stop someone from suing, and there’s no way to guarantee that a referee would never be found liable under any circumstances, but it seems unlikely that a referee would be liable in such a case.

SHOW THE CARD! DO NOT LECTURE THE PLAYERS! [LAW 12; LAW 18]
Your question:
A fight broke out behind my back during the last 5 minutes of a U16 boys semi-final state championship game. The score at the time was 3 to 0. My AR’s told me that an attacker on the losing team ran up from behind and jumped on the back of a defender on the winning team with no apparent provocation. The defender wrestled the attacker to the ground and was on top of him when I turned and saw the two of them. Both benches ran out on the field but did not engage in violent conduct (NO BRAWL). I ran over and got the two players separarted and then with the help of my AR’s and both coaches I got both teams back to their benches. After deliberating with my assistants I decided to eject both of these players. I went over to each bench and told both the players and their respective coaches that I was ejecting the two players involved in the incident but I did not show the red card to either player. The two players immediately removed their jerseys and fully understood that they went being sent off. Both coaches also understood that the two players were being sent off because the losing coach wanted me to abandon the match (he wanted to replay the game and have another chance to win) and the winning coach requested that he sit his player down to cool off but not be given a card (he knows this player would be suspended for the next game and wanted him for the finals next week). I did not change my decision and the final 5 minutes were played without further incident. At the conclusion of the game both teams exhibited good sportsmanship and formed lines and shook hands. The next day the winning coach protested my send off of his player since he claimed his player only got involved to defend himself and that I never showed his player the red card. Is it necessary to show the red card when sending off a player? In this case both players were already off the field at their benches. My report listed the two players involved in the violent conduct as being sent off for violent conduct. Does this coach have a legitimate protest? The competition authority reviewed the protest and upheld my decision and agreed that both players were sent off and therefore suspended for the next game.

USSF answer (June 19, 2003):
The Law requires that the referee who sends off a player also show the red card: “A player is sent off and shown the red card . . ..” This makes everyone involved realize that the player has been dismissed. The competition authority obviously recognized that you had dismissed the player and rejected the specious argument of the coach that the dismissal should be quashed because you did not show the red card. This should be a warning to you and other referees for future games: Do it right!

OFFENSIVE, INSULTING, OR ABUSIVE LANGUAGE OR GESTURES [LAW 12; LAW 18]
Your question:
Up front: Excellent work you do with your column. Every referee (and I am in this end of the business for a total of over 30 years in Europe and in the US, not meaning that I am anywhere close to perfect) can learn a lot. I think every Instructor should make his students aware of your part of the webpage.

My question today:
We have in our area a referee, who makes the captains in his pre-game conference aware of the fact that he sees the mentioning of the word “God” -in any way- as a cautionable offense. And he acts accordingly.
I would understand a caution, if “Oh, my God” or similar is used to show dissent with a referees decision, but just for a missed pass or another mishap (and directed towards the player himself) to caution some body does not seem to be backed up by any part of the law, to me.

As I am not an American, am I missing some part of the use of the word of God and “bringing the game into disrepute”?

What are your thoughts about this?

Thank you very much for your answer.

USSF answer (June 17, 2003):
Many thanks for letting us know that you like the Q&As. We strive to make them as useful as possible.

Your concern about the referee who is zealous in his pursuit of The Deity on the field was addressed in a recent position paper, Misconduct Involving Language/Gestures, dated March 14, 2003, which can be found on this and other USSF-affiliated websites. The answer quotes freely from the position paper.

The matter of taking the name of God in vain can usually be considered a momentary emotional outburst. Such an act is deemed by the position paper as “borderline acceptable, perhaps a trifling offense only,” with which the referee should deal through a stern look or verbal admonishment. Although it is unlikely, if the use of the word goes beyond this and becomes dissent (or unsporting behavior), it is deemed unacceptable misconduct, for which the referee must caution the player and display the yellow card. And, again unlikely, if the use of the word is regarded as offensive, insulting or abusive language, this is more serious misconduct, for which the referee would send off the player and display the red card.

The referee must intelligently apply common sense, feel for the spirit of the game, and knowledge of the way in which player language can affect management of the match in order to distinguish effectively among these forms. Regardless of age or competitive level, players become excited as their personal or team fortunes rise or fall, and it is not uncommon for language to be used in the heat of the moment. Such outbursts, while possibly vivid, are typically brief, undirected, and often quickly regretted. The referee must understand the complex emotions of players in relation to the match and discount appropriately language which does no lasting harm to those who might have heard or seen the outburst. Of course, the player might well be warned in various ways (a brief word, direct eye contact, etc.) regarding his behavior.

The referee might well choose to talk to, warn, admonish, or caution players whose undesirable language occurs in a short, emotional outburst and send off a player whose language is a sustained, calculated, and aggressive verbal assault.

REFEREES MUST TAKE CARE NOT TO INJECT PURELY PERSONAL OPINIONS AS TO THE NATURE OF THE LANGUAGE WHEN DETERMINING A COURSE OF ACTION. THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THE REFEREE MUST BE ON THE EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF THE MATCH AND THE PLAYERS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OVERALL FEEL FOR THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME.

As to the referee’s announcement to the captains, the only comment we can make is that this is a very dangerous practice. Lecturing players tends to cause two things: Either they remember the lecture vividly and then expect the referee to live up to every word — which can be dangerous to the referee’s health — or they go brain dead and fail to listen at all. USSF referees are taught NOT TO LECTURE PLAYERS before the game, as it can only lead to trouble in managing the game and the players.

PADDED GOAL POSTS [LAW 1]
Your question:
Hi. I’m a concerned parent. My 16-year old daughter recently played in a soccer tournament in Macon, GA. She’s a goal keeper. While attempting to block a shot, she hit her knee against the goal post at a full run. The goal post was a square, steel guirder. It split her knee wide open. She ended up with 16 stitches (8 inside, 8 outside), but thankfully, other than the scar, there doesn’t appear to be any permanent damage. We won’t be sure until she goes back to keeper training. I’m on a campaign now to make all goal posts round or padded. If she had hit her head instead of her knee, I’m afraid we would have lost her. It is not at all unusual for goalies and players to hit the goal posts during the excitement of the game. I understand that Law 1, The Field of Play, states that goals are to be made of wood, metal or other approved materials. Their shape may be square, rectangular, round or elliptical and they must not be dangerous to players. I think my daughter’s injury shows how square metal posts can be very dangerous to players. I’d like to find out how to petition to change that law so that goal posts are safer. Any assistance you can offer is greatly appreciated.

USSF answer (June 17, 2003):
You will be fighting an extremely uphill battle to have the Law changed. First, you must have your state put forward a proposal to the Federation (USSF). It must be approved by USSF — unlikely — and then forwarded to the International Football Association Board (IFAB), the people who make the Laws of the Game. (No, it is not FIFA, no matter how many people think so. FIFA simply publishes and administers the Laws for the IFAB.) It is even more unlikely that the IFAB would make this change. The Laws already offer a multiplicity of options for goals, so each step along the way will simply suggest that you lobby for a change locally.

As to padded goals, these are mandated by at least one park system — but not by any soccer programs — here in the United States. I believe it is somewhere in Georgia. Such goals are not popular with the players, because they cause unpredictable bounces of the ball, allowing it to either drop immediately to the ground or deflect away in random directions.

GRADE 9 OFFICIALS [ADMINISTRATIVE]
Your question:
This is not an onfield rules question but one regarding responsibilities of grade level. My understanding of Grade 9 officials is that they are qualified to officiate at center or as an assistant on U-14 games or below. This is information I have gathered from my Grade 8 recertification course this year and from the USSF Referee Administrative Handbook. The referee assignor in our area is convinced that Grade 9 officials can only act as AR’s. I have included the text of our recent e-mail’s below for further details regarding this issue. If you could shed some light on this, I would certainly appreciate it.

USSF answer (June 16, 2003):
Grade 9 officials may do centers or lines on U-14 RECREATIONAL games. They may also act as assistant referees on U-14 COMPETITIVE games, but may not be the referee on U-14 competitive games.

FOULS IN THE PENALTY AREA
Your question:
I’ve been a ref for 4 years. Over that time, the books I’ve read and the clinics I’ve been to have put forth the guideline that a foul is a foul, we should call them consistently wherever they occur, including the penalty area. In watching professional and international games it is clear that those refs operate on a different principal. So, what’s the deal? Are the standards different for youth and amateur vs. the pros? This isn’t addressed in either the LOTG or the USSF’s Advice to Referees, that I can find.

USSF answer (June 13, 2003):
The standards are the same for youth and adult soccer as they are for the professionals. About the only thing that might be different is that the referees at the professional level are better at discriminating between what is truly a foul and what less-experienced referees may call in a youth or adult league game.

Yes, a foul is a foul is a foul . . . but what the referee DOES about the foul is greatly dependent on the skill and experience of the players, the “temperature” of the match at that point, and a host of other factors. Ralph Waldo Emerson warned that “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” — which is good advice for referees. Consistency is not always a good thing.

PERSISTENT INFRINGEMENT
Your question:
Despite the excellent advice and guidance provided in 2002 regarding Persistent Infringement, I am unable to locate a definitive, written reference to the following question. After having issued a caution for four hard fouls against the same opponent, how should the referee regard additional infringement by the same player? Assuming the same behavior continues, would one or two more fouls be enough for a second caution? Does the first yellow card ³cover² the first four fouls, suggesting three more is more appropriate? Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated.

USSF answer (June 13, 2003):
Perhaps you are looking too hard and failing to see what is right in front of you. If a player has been cautioned and shown the yellow card for persistently infringing the Laws of the Game, then if he continues to infringe the Laws he should be cautioned again (second yellow card) and then sent off and shown the red card for receiving a second caution in the same match.

In addition, the referee in this case should look to his man-management skills. If the referee’s only tool in managing players is his cards, then he will have many very long and difficult games.

DANGEROUS FIELDS
Your question:
We are working games for an adult league this summer whose fields raise a question. The touch lines have been placed so that on each field, two American Football goal posts have their centered upright on a touch line. While this requires care by the AR on that side, we “work around” the problem in order to have games. (The league was unable to secure other fields due to drought closures.) While the post holding the goal is on the touch line, the right angle extension and goal assembly (the horizontal and upright portion) extend over the pitch.

These obstuctions do not meet the criteria for an “outside agent” nor are they part of the soccer / American football goals. Is the 2000(?) answer still in effect and should these goal posts be treated as one would the trees or wires overhanging the field? “Trees or wires overhanging the field are pre-existing conditions and do not affect either team more adversely than the other. If a ball hits them, play should continue, unless the ball rebounds into touch or over the goal line, in which case the appropriate restart would be based on which team had played the ball last.”

USSF answer (June 11, 2003):
Before answering the original question, a statement for you and other referees to ponder: While these fields are obviously unsafe, they apparently have been approved for use by the competition. In that case, the officials — who can certainly choose not to work these games — must exercise great care to protect both themselves and the players.

Given that the fields, as they exist, have been approved by the competition, the posts on the lines constitute pre-existing conditions, so any ball that strikes any part of them and rebounds into the field will be considered to be in play.

NOTE: We have seen photos and these fields are scary. The matter has been reported to referee authorities in this state.

EARLY MOVEMENT FROM THE WALL/’KEEPER MOVEMENT
Your question:
Late in a tied, competitive adult co-ed game, an obvious DFK was awarded 25 yards from goal. A defensive player broke from the wall and charged the ball after the whistle but just before the kick. Timing was such that a whistle would have been simultaneous with the kick. I decided to hold off and see what happened. The keeper deflected the shot, which fell to the attackers who eventually somehow scored in the resulting melee. I awarded the goal, started breathing again, and warned the encroacher.

Questions: Should I have whistled the encroachment immediately, regardless of the impending kick, cautioned the encroacher, and allowed a re-kick? Should I have stopped it when the GK deflected the shot, cautioned the encroacher, and allowed a re-kick? Or what? This was a very intense situation – highly emotional. A lot was going on in the wall, etc. I like it when the game ramps up like that; I just want to get it right. Good fun! Thanks!

Note on your comments re the AC Milan GK coming off his line during the PKs: I understood you to instruct referees to uphold Law 14, which would include penalizing the GK for coming off the line, and awarding a re-kick. I keep hearing this, even at advanced clinics, yet in reality I do not observe this part of Law 14 being enforced in the World Cup, UEFA, MLS, whatever. Any ref who dares to enforce GK encroachment really hears it from players, coaches, etc. They all watch the same games we do. It’s not going to work until we all observe it being enforced consistently at the highest levels. I want to make it through the parking lot alive, too, just like Mr. Markus and his crew.

USSF answer (June 10, 2003):
1. Your decision to wait on enforcing the requirements of Laws 12 and 13 was correct in this case, although you could have cautioned and shown the yellow card to the player who failed to respect the required distance at the free kick. The basis for waiting is that, under Law 5, you can apply advantage to misconduct just as is done with fouls.

2. Enforcement of the requirement that the goalkeeper remain on the goal line until the ball has been kicked has to begin somewhere. The IFAB has amended the Additional Instructions for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials for 2003 to read: “The Penalty Kick. It is an infringement to enter the penalty area before the kick has been taken. The goalkeeper also infringes the Laws if he moves from his goal line before the ball has been kicked. Referees must ensure that when players infringe this Law appropriate action is taken.”

The USSF Advice to Referees regarding this change is as follows:
“The reference to ‘enter the penalty area before the kick has been taken’ includes players moving closer than ten yards to the ball (i. e., entering the penalty arc) and moving closer to the goal line than the ball (i.e., moving closer to the goal line than twelve yards). Referees must also ensure that the goalkeeper does not move off the goal line before the ball is in play. However, although the International Board emphasized the need for referees to take appropriate actions when players violate the requirements of Law 14, referees must continue to differentiate between those violations which clearly had an impact on subsequent play and those trifling violations which clearly had no impact.”

In other words, the referee must have the courage to punish infringements that are not trifling and to order the kick to be retaken.

MORE REFEREES IN NEED OF IMPROVEMENT/DUTIES OF THE CAPTAIN
Your question:
I have always felt that being a referee is a tough job and as a parent and spectator I try not to make the job any more difficult than it already is. Here is my question. As I understand the rules of the game in Wright County Minnesota, the coach and players can discuss rules and/or calls with the referees before or after the game. It is the responsibility of the team captain to present any questions, concerns or disputes to the referees during the game. Of course all discussions need to take place in a timely and respectful manner. Based on the assumption that my understanding of the rules is correct, what other course of action should the player have taken in the following scenario: I have a daughter, in the U-18 level who played goalie in Eden Prairie on tuesday evening June 3rd. During the course of the game Jessica and other players were subjected to verbal abuse by a group of spectators. This verbal abuse took place while the spectators were directly behind the goal and included such comments to the goalie as “they are coming to get you” and “eat it goalie”. Comments to the other players included racial slurs such as “Asians get off the field”. These comments were delivered with enough malice to bring tears to my daughter’s eyes. A true sportsman, Jessica did not acknowledge them or their comments. The team captain requested that the center referee ask the spectators to “quit harassing my goalie”. No action was taken. After the completion of the game, Jessica waited until the teams had wished each other well and approached the nearest referee, who happened to be a side line judge. Jessica said in a respectful voice “Excuse me sir, I believe it is unfair….”. This is as much as the referee allowed Jessica to speak. At this time he interrupted her, pointed to the parking lot and said “Go home” and walked away. My daugter felt the calls the referees made during the game were correct and fair to both teams. She was obviously unhappy with the negative support shown by her opponent’s fans. The player wished to exercise her right to object to the lack of action taken regarding the spectators. So the question remains what should a player do if they feel there is a problem?

USSF answer (June 9, 2003):
There are good and bad referees all over the place. Your team happened to get two of the bad ones, people who cannot be bothered to protect the Spirit of the Game. The people behind the goal should not have been allowed to bother the goalkeeper (whether your daughter or not ) and the referee should have dealt with these people.

The captain cannot raise any issues with the referee or the assistant referee. The captain’s duties are spelled out in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:
19.4 THE ROLE OF THE TEAM CAPTAIN
The role of the team captain is not defined in the Laws of the Game. He usually wears an armband. The captain is responsible to the referee for his team, but has no special rights or privileges. By practice and tradition, certain duties fall upon the team captain:
-to see that the referee’s decisions are respected by the captain’s teammates and by team officials;
-to counsel a teammate who may be reluctant to leave the field at a substitution ‹ but neither the captain nor the referee may insist that the player leave;
-to represent his or her team at the coin toss to determine which direction the team will attack to begin the game (and subsequent overtime periods) or which team will take first kick in kicks from the penalty mark;
-to be the team representative to whom the referee must go to obtain the name or names of members of that team who must be withdrawn from participating in kicks from the penalty mark in order to match the size of the opposing team (which has fewer players on the field before or during the kicks from the penalty mark procedure as a result of injury or misconduct).

However, a captain — or any other player — who has a legitimate concern should be able to speak with the officials politely, as your player did, and expect to get a polite response in return.

Please accept our apologies for these incidents, which should never have been allowed to happen. We have informed the state authorities of the matter, hoping that they will deal with the officials concerned. And you might consider filing a report with your daughter’s team’s league — perhaps not so much regarding the referee’s behavior as the behavior of the spectator’s. This is based on the theory that the competition authority has some responsibility here as well.

JUNIOR AND SENIOR ASSISTANT REFEREES?
Your question:
Lately, I have heard of Junior and Senior Assistant Referees. What is the difference? Is the center referee supposed to assign them these positions? Do they have any special responsibilities? Thank you very much for your response.

USSF answer (June 9, 2003):
At the professional level and perhaps in highly-organized adult soccer, the senior and junior assistant referees are designated as such by the assignor. In other competitions the distinction is either not made or the designation of senior assistant referee is made by the referee.

The significance of the terms varies with the competition. In some competitions, the fourth official official will take over if the referee cannot continue with the game. In other competitions, particularly those that do not assign fourth officials, the senior assistant referee will take over if the referee cannot continue. One feature of the senior AR that is standard for all competitions is that the senior takes the team bench side of the field.

YOUTH SUBSTITUTION RULES
Your question:
There has been a bit of a flap of late . . . about subs in U16-19 boys games. The question came up for me, too, as the assignor in the local state Snicker’s Cup finals, and the tournament’s decision was that subs were unlimited in the Snicker’s Cup competition regardless of the age group or gender.

Under the LOTG, a national association can set the rules for competition, and as such, they can mandate how many subs may be nominated, from 3 to 7. And, in “other matches” subs may be used if the teams reach agreement on how many, and the ref knows this before they start.

In the US, virtually all youth matches at the U16-19 level, whether boys or girls, and most, if not all, recreational adult leagues, use an unlimited sub format, at least they do everywhere I’ve been, and including my home state. Under Law 3 a maximum of 7 subs are available, which is what USYSA has adopted by mandating in youth games rosters be cut off at 18, or at least that is my argument. But how do they get around the provisions of Law 3 which say a player who is substituted may not take further part in the match? Technically, the U16-19 boys, and all adult male recreational leagues who are not “veteran” footballers” have to do the limited sub routine. One could be a bit cynical and say the U16-19 boys and all adult male players under the age of 35 suffer from the disability of being young and male, which from the many games I’ve done at this level is not entirely preposterous, however, surely that is not what they meant?

It seems the states have adopted the practical view that it is impossible to have two standards of substitution within one sphere of competition, and so they extend the rule for the many to cover the few (the U16’s & up males). It is clearly stated in the [state] Rules of Competition that all age groups have unlimited subs, and the men’s league gets around it by not mentioning it at all, and the common practice has always been that subs are unlimited. I guess you would tell me the intelligent referee will go with the flow here, as common sense would dictate?

But, if the referee in a U19 boys game allows unlimited subs as per local practice, and an appeal of the game is made by a team who had only 14 players, one of whom was never used, the two who came out never went back in, and assume it is appealed all the way to national, what will be the most likely decision on this issue? Did the referee commit an error of misapplication of the LOTG? If so, does it require the replay of the game? Is the referee in any danger from a litigation standpoint if s/he did not enforce the letter of the Law, both from a liability stand point, and from the view of USSF, who must defend him/her?

The issue is one that comes up over and over in clinics, and it has been difficult to give a definitive answer, given the black and white print in our flexible little book. Can you provide me with some help here?

USSF answer (June 9, 2003):
According to the most recent USYSA policy on players and playing rules,
QUOTE
Rule 301. RULES OF PLAY

Section 1. Except as provided by USYSA or its State Associations, the FIFA ³Laws of the Game² apply to all competitions sponsored by USYSA. Players under 10 years of age may play soccer in accordance with the rules of USYSA¹s Development Player Program‹Modified Playing Rules for Under 10, Under 8, and Under 6.

//snip//

Rule 302. SUBSTITUTIONS

Section 1. Except as provided by USYSA or its State Associations, substitutions shall be unlimited except where specified otherwise in the rules and regulations for a special competition.

Section 2. Substitutions may be made, with the consent of the referee, at any stoppage in play. END OF QUOTE

Some special competitions do run slightly different rules, as provided in the policy manual. For specifics on local competitions, consult with the competition authority. Following the rules of the competition will rarely get the referee in trouble.

FAILURE TO RESPECT THE REQUIRED DISTANCE
Your question:
I have a question regarding free kicks near the penalty box. If a wall is set up 10 yards away from the ball, and then the ball is kicked and the wall jumps forward, is it encroachment??? Some local officials think it is, some don’t. There has been some discrepency in our area. E-mail me back with the answer of if it is encroachment or not; and if it is, is it a yellow card???

USSF answer (June 5, 2003):
There is no such thing as “encroachment” under the Laws of the Game. If an opposing player moves too close to the ball before it has been kicked, he has failed to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner kick or free kick, a cautionable offense — if the referee believes it to have been such.

In the scenario you present, the opposing players did not move toward the ball until it had been kicked, so they have not infringed on the Law. No offense.

WITH WILD ABANDON
Your question:
Is a rule about abandonment of a game listed in the ‘Laws of the Game’ booklet? What is the rule that applies if one team abandons a game that is underway?

USSF answer (June 5, 2003):
According to Law 5, the Referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or because of outside interference of any kind.

A team has no right or authority to abandon a game. If a team refuses to take the field after a stoppage (e. g., the midgame break) or if enough players apparently deliberately remove themselves from the field that the number of players drops below the minimum (7), the intelligent referee will first attempt to determine and (if possible) correct the cause. If this action is unsuccessful, the referee must declare the match abandoned. Full details of the circumstances must be included in the match report.

JUST WRITE UP THE REPORT — NO EDITORIALIZING
Your question:
Referee report is reporting three send-offs for “violent conduct”. Besides the sanctions imposed for mandatory dismissal for next “same” game, and the only thing written on report is : striking and opponent. All 3 players fists involved. Ball not in play. Striking after foul.

Question …. should here be a separate referee report for each player involved?

Question #2.. should there be anytihng in a report that would indicate that more than one, or two, game suspension be imposed?

USSF answer (June 5, 2003):
There should be a separate write-up for each send-off/red card for violent conduct. There is no call for the referee to make any comments recommending the length of the suspension. The severity of the incident should be made clear in the individual write-ups, rather than through editorial comment.

Any punishment for a caution beyond the game in which it occurs is up to the competition authority to decide. Any punishment for a red card beyond the game in which it occurs and suspension from the team’s next match is up to the competition authority to decide. The referee should stick to the formal reason for the card (yellow or red), plus any additional FACTS which indicate why this particular reason is appropriate.

A referee could, if appropriate, provide supporting facts to indicate that a card was given to the wrong player, but even this must be decided by the competition authority.

OWN GOALS
Your question:
In our Grade 8 training class the instructor said several times that “you can’t score against yourself.” Does this mean that if the defending team, while trying to defend their goal, accidently kicks the ball into their own goal I restart with a corner kick?

USSF answer (June 5, 2003):
Your instructor was referring to those instances in which play is being restarted. The Laws of the Game do not allow a team to score against itself directly from any restart (goal kick, corner kick, throw-in, and so forth). “Directly” means that no one on either team has touched the ball between the restart and the ball entering the goal. A team can score against itself, called an “own goal,” during any time that the ball is in play and from any sequence following the next touch after a throw-in or indirect free kick.

THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW . . .
Your question:
1. I would like you to tell me what FIFA will do in this game incident: In Our Soccer League ATLETICO is playing COBRAS in a Championship match.

Team atletico scores early in the first half and the score stays 1-0 at the end of the half.

starting the second half COBRAS have 12 players in the field and the Referee and AR’s did not notice it games goes on and COBRAS scores the tying Goal in the 8th min. game restarts and in the 10 min. a Fan notices that Cobras is playing with 12 players and talks to the AR who brings it to the attention of the center referee, he cautions w/ a Yellow card to the extra player and game continues at 83 min. COBRAS scores again making it 2-1 and stays like that until the end of the game. Now ATLETICO Protests to the League in the Basis that the tying goal should have been disallowed because the other team had 12 players at time of scoring. What FIFA would do? take it to the Appeals Board and let them decide about Replaying the whole game with score 1-1?, or replay 10 min with the score 1-1 or 2-1 ? what this League should do?

2. I have a question regarding having too many players on the field. In my game this past weekend, the other team began the second half with 12 players, without the ref or linesmen spotting this infringement. it was about 15 minutes into the half when the other team scored a crucial ting goal. It was at this time that a spectator informed our team that the other team had been playing with 12 players since the beginning of the second half. We then pointed this out to the ref, and as he was counting the players on the other team, one player ran off the field to their bench. The ref then cautioned the coach of the other team for playing with 12 players, but did not take away the goal that was scored.

I looked in the FIFA Laws of the Game, and didn’t see anything really like this situation. It seems clear cut that if a team commits a foul, or some type of infringement such as offsides, and then scores, the goal should be withdrawn. What would you say to this?

3. i have a little inquiry about the officiating of a game i was in this weekend. it happen to be a semifinal game for the ‘copa tecate cup.’ the game was 1-1 at half time and the opposing team had 12 players on the pitch. this wasn’t noticed until after they scored to make it 2-1. when someone brought it to the refs attention he simply gave them a yellow card and the game resumed. my question is what is the official procedure for a ref to my scenario. does my team have a case in pleading for a replay (rematch). please let me know the proper rules and how it should be handled.

USSF answer (June 5, 2003):
If the referee had already restarted the game after the goal was scored, then there is nothing the referee can do about it. If the referee had noticed that there were too many players before restarting, then the goal would have been taken away. Naturally we are concerned that the referees and assistant referees did not notice the extra player, as they are expected to count players all the time, just to be safe.

In any event, the referee’s action in cautioning the coach was incorrect and not in accordance with the Law. The proper action would be to caution the 12th player (assuming this person could be identified). The referee must submit complete details in his match report.

And FIFA would do nothing other than this if they were dealing with the game.

DECEPTION BY THE TEAM WITH THE BALL
Your question:
I was refereeing at a tournament and was a center for an U12 match. I awarded a direct kick about 20-25 yds out to team A. Team A then asks for ten yards, I instruct Team A to wait for my whistle before restarting. I count off the ten yards, take position, and blow my whistle. Team A then has player 1 straddle the ball as if to tie his shoe and says aloud, “Wait, I have to tie my shoe”. While straddling the ball, player 2, who was standing next to the ball, proceeds to tap the ball to player 3 who one times it into the goal. I awarded the goal. My thinking was, I blew the whistle ball, the ball was in play, regardless if player 1 had said anything at all. Team B argued that Team A (player 1) had asked for time to tie his shoe. My reply was, I blew the whistle to initiate play, plus I never acknowledged the player wanting to tie his shoe. Was I right in awarding the goal, or as I overheard (from a coach from the same club) later refereeing another game that I should have awarded a indirect free kick to Team B because of unsportsman like behavior?

USSF answer (June 3, 2003):
Your response to the situation was correct. Just to benefit other referees (and players and coaches, who also read this material), here is some reading material from an answer of April 2002:

BEGIN QUOTES FROM ANSWER OF APRIL 2002

QUOTE
General Note Regarding Restarts
“Memorandum 1997” discussed amendments to the Laws of the Game affecting all free kick, corner kick, penalty kick, and kick-off restarts. These amendments centered on the elimination of the ball moving the “distance of its circumference” before being considered in play. In all such cases, the ball is now in play when it is “kicked and moves” (free kicks and corner kicks) or when it is “kicked and moves forward” (kick-offs and penalty kicks). IFAB has emphasized that only minimal movement is needed to meet this requirement. USSF Advice to Referees: further clarification from IFAB suggests that, particularly in the case of free kicks and corner kicks, such minimal movement might include merely touching the ball with the foot. Referees are reminded that they must observe carefully the placing of the ball and, when it is properly located, any subsequent touch of the ball with the foot is sufficient to put the ball into play. Referees must distinguish between such touching of the ball to direct it to the proper location for the restart and kicking the ball to perform the restart itself. In situations where the ball must move forward before it is in play (kick-offs and penalty kicks), there should be less difficulty in applying the new language since such kicks have a specific location which is easily identified.
END OF QUOTE

It is not the referee’s responsibility to ensure that the opposing team is prepared for any restart. That is their job. The referee’s job is to ensure that the Laws of the Game are enforced. However a cautionary comment is probably in order here: The referee must be wary of being dragged into any otherwise legal deception practiced by the team with the ball. In this situation, the referee (you) may have contributed to the success of the kicking team’s plot by not acknowledging the request and delaying the restart until the player tying his shoe was finished. The defenders were possibly lulled by the direct request and the reasonable expectation that the referee (you) would grant that request.

What you are questioning is not “trickery” by the kicking team; it is deception, which is allowed by the Laws. Here is an article that appeared a short while ago in our USSF referee magazine, Fair Play:

QUOTE
Affecting Play
Jim Allen, National Instructor Trainer

To “influence” means to affect or alter the way the opponents play by indirect or intangible means. “Gamesmanship” is the art or practice of winning a game through acts of doubtful propriety, such as distracting an opponent without technically violating the Laws of the Game. However, the referee must be very careful, for while the act may be within the Letter of the Law, it may well fall outside the Spirit of the Law. “Misconduct” is blatant cheating or intentional wrongdoing through a deliberate violation of the Laws of the Game. Many referees confuse perfectly legitimate methods of affecting play through influence with certain aspects of gamesmanship and misconduct. Influence can cause problems for some referees at restarts. The ball is in play on free kicks and corner kicks as soon as it has been kicked and moves, and on kick-offs and penalty kicks as soon as it is kicked and moves forward. The key for most referees seems to be the requirement that the ball must “move.” The IFAB has directed that referees interpret this requirement liberally, so that only minimal movement is necessary. This minimal movement has been defined as the kicker possibly merely touching the ball with the foot. All referees must observe carefully the placing of the ball for the kick and distinguish between moving the ball with the foot to put it in the proper location and actually kicking the ball to restart the game. Please note: Feinting at a penalty kick may be considered by the referee to be unsporting behavior, but verbal or physical feinting by the kicking team at free kicks or in dynamic play is not. (See below.)

Influencing play is perfectly acceptable. The International Football Association Board (IFAB) and the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) have consistently ruled in favor of the use of guile by the attacking team to influence play and against the use of timewasting tactics and deceitful acts by the defending team. The IFAB and FIFA are so concerned over the failure of referees to deal with timewasting tactics that they send annual reminders noting that referees must deal with time wasting in all its forms. IFAB has also consistently ruled that the practice of forming a defensive wall or any other interference by the defending team at free kicks is counter to the Spirit of the Game, and has issued two associated rulings that the kicking team may influence (through the use of feinting tactics) and confuse the opponents when taking free kicks. The IFAB reinforced its renunciation of defensive tactics by allowing the referee to caution any opposing players who do not maintain the required distance at free kicks as a result of the feinting tactics, which can include members of the kicking team jumping over the ball to confuse and deceive the opponents legally. (See the Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game, November 1990, Law XIII, Q&A 7 and 8.) The related practice of touching the ball at a free kick or corner kick just enough to put it in play and then attempting to confuse the opponents by telling a teammate to come and take the kick is also accepted practice.

Gamesmanship, by its very name, suggests that the player is bending the rules of the game to his benefit. However, while he is not breaking the letter of the laws that cover play, he may be violating the Spirit of the Laws. Indeed, acts of gamesmanship in soccer can range from being entirely within the letter of the Law to quite illegal. Examples of legal gamesmanship are a team constantly kicking the ball out of play or a player constantly placing himself in an offside position deliberately, looking for the ball from his teammates so that the referee must blow the whistle and stop and restart the game. These acts are not against the Letter of the Laws, and players who commit them cannot be cautioned for unsporting behavior and shown the yellow card. Referees can take steps against most aspects of this legal time wasting only by adding time. Remember that only the referee knows how much time has been lost, and he is empowered by Law 7 to add as much time as necessary to ensure equality. Acts of illegal gamesmanship fall under misconduct (see below). Examples: a player deliberately taking the ball for a throw-in or free kick to the wrong spot, expecting the referee to redirect him; a coach whose team is leading in the game coming onto the field to “attend” to a downed player; simulating a foul or feigning an injury. Misconduct is a deliberate and illegal act aimed at preventing the opposing team from accomplishing its goals. Misconduct can be split into two categories of offenses: those which merit a caution (including the illegal forms of time wasting) and those which merit a sending-off. While the attacking team may use verbal feints to confuse the defensive wall or may “call” for the ball without actually wanting it, simply to deceive their opponents, the other team may not use verbal feints to its opponents and then steal the ball from them, e.g., a defender calling out an opponent¹s name to entice him into passing the ball to him. Full details on the categories of misconduct and their punishment can be found in the U. S. Soccer Federation (USSF) publication “7 + 7” and on the USSF Referee Homepage [at the URL given there].

Look at these methods of affecting play as escalating in severity from the legal act of influencing to gamesmanship, which can range from legal to illegal, to misconduct, which is entirely illegal. Each of these methods will be used by players in any normal game of soccer to gain an advantage for their team. Referees must know the difference between them, so that they can deal with what should be punished and not interfere in an act that is not truly an infringement of the Laws. Thorough knowledge of the Laws of the Game, the Additional Instructions on the Laws of the Game, the Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game, the USSF Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game, and position papers and memoranda from the National Referee Development Program can help the referee make the correct decision in every case.
END OF QUOTE

These principles apply at all levels of the game.
END QUOTES FROM ANSWER OF APRIL 2002

And, in any event, even were the referee to say that cautionable misconduct occurred, the restart (after the card) would be the original free kick, not an indirect free kick new restart because, by definition, the misconduct occurred during a stoppage of play. The most the referee could do here, under appropriate circumstances, is to decide that the ploy was in fact a delay of the restart of play.

SPIKING THE BALL/OFFENSIVE, INSULTING OR ABUSIVE LANGUAGE OR GESTURES
Your question:
Question #1:
Why is illegal to “spike” the ball on a throwing? A player in a game yesterday threw the ball in, with two hands, over her head, and had two feet on the ground. The ball landed 2 yards in front of her with a fairly high bounce so the AR ruled it a bad throw for “spiking” the ball on a throw in.

Question #2:
Subsequently to being called for the bad throw in this player used foul and abusive language…not directed at the AR but just in general at the call itself. Is this a yellow card or red card offense?

USSF answer (June 3, 2003):
1. Even if a throw-in may have met the literal requirements of Law 15, it is commonly accepted throughout the world that a throw-in “spiked” into the ground is not legal.
2. The use of offensive, insulting, or abusive language (or gestures) is punished by send-off and red card. However, the referee might decide to caution for the language if it doesn’t fit into one of those categories but it is instead unsporting behavior (bringing the game into disrepute) or was committed to express dissent with an official’s decision.

CHARGING FOR THE BALL
Your question:
I recently centered a U-13 Girls game. One of the defenders displayed text book form in her shoulder charges throughout the game. Hands at her side, shoulder to shoulder with other player to drive her off the ball. But, she never made any simultaneous attempt to using her feet to win the ball from the player in possession. Only after she had completely driven the player off did she then collect the ball. The sidelines were screaming for push fouls all game, but there was no violent conduct involved. Perfect form, arms in, constant pressure shoulder to shoulder, but no pushing or hip checking. The only thing that struck me as odd was that she did not go after the ball until the other player was completely driven off. There were one or two occasions where a teammate of the shoulder charging player was able to come in and collect the ball. In all cases, I saw nothing that warranted a foul or impedance call. Did I miss something?

USSF answer (June 3, 2003):
A player charging “for the ball” need not _play_ the ball at all, but she must be challenging for the ball. Please make the distinction necessary to apply the Law correctly.

“Impedance”? Surely you do not mean that you were concerned about electrical charges, rather than soccer charges.

UNUSUAL SUBSTITUTION RULES/TEMPORARY EXPULSION
Your question:
I have a couple of questions regarding the type of allowable (or anticipated) modification to the LOTG regarding youth players and substitutions.

The following rule applies to U7-12 ages in a local (affiliated) league:
1. Substitution shall be limited to a maximum of three players per substitution.
2. Players who have been substituted for may re-enter the game.
3. Substitution is not allowed for players ejected from the game.
4. Substitution can be made without the consent of the referee under the following circumstances:
A. The player being substituted for must have left the field of play at the touchline directly in front of his team’s technical area.
B. Each player must identify whom he or she is substituting for. (High five, hand shake, or hug)

Failure to follow the above procedures could result in referee awarding a five-minute penalty against the offending team. (Play short)

I don’t have any issues with items 1-3, however, number 4 seems to raise some issues (besides the practical effect of turning substitution into the system often seen in indoor soccer).

1. Can such a modification which removes the referee’s authority over the making of substitutions be made under FIFA/IFAB/USSF rules?
2. Can a modification which requires a team to play short for an infraction of a modified rule be made under FIFA/IFAB/USSF rules? USSF answer (June 3, 2003):
1. Subject to the agreement of the national association concerned and provided the principles of the Laws are maintained, the Laws may be modified in their application for matches for players of under 16 years of age, for women footballers, for veteran footballers (over 35 years) and for players with disabilities. Substitution is among the areas of the Laws that may be modified. While the Federation probably would not approve items 1 or 4 of the list, there is little that can be done to police it. Referees do have the option of not working in competitions that use rules contrary to the Laws of the Game.
2. The International F. A. Board has reaffirmed for 2003 its instructions that no rules permitting temporary expulsion (being forced to play short for an infringement of the Laws) may be used. Here is an excerpt from USSF Memorandum 2003:
TEMPORARY EXPULSIONS
The Board re-affirmed the decision taken at its last meeting that the temporary expulsion of players is not permitted at any level of football. USSF Advice to Referees: This instruction, which was first discussed in Memorandum 2002, is not subject to implementation by the referee: it is a matter for the competition authority. ³Temporary expulsion² in this context refers to a rule purporting to require that a player leave the field temporarily under certain conditions (e.g., having received a caution a so-called ³cooling off² period) and does not include situations in which a player must correct illegal equipment or bleeding.

“INTENT” VERSUS RESULT
Your question:
I recently overhead two referees discussing this incident which actually occurred in a game:
During an attack on goal, the ball popped into the air. The defender backpedaled while attempting to play the ball with his head. His legs got tangled with each other and he fell over, banging into the attacker, knocking him down, in the penalty area, while he was attempting a shot on goal. The Center Referee made no call stating that there was no intent on the part of the defender to foul the attacker. I was dumbfounded when I heard this! In interviewing many other experienced referees, I found that at least half of those I spoke to shared this view.

Is this “intent” clause a way for referees to duck out of making tough calls? I thought a foul had to be “careless, reckless…” but not necessarily intentional. Do we have to assess the payer’s intent now before making a call? Please shed some light on this.

USSF answer (June 2, 2003):
Let there be light! Despite the fact that we referees are no longer required to judge “intent” in an act by one player against another, but to judge the result of the act instead, we are allowed to distinguish between an act that is accidental and one that is deliberate.

In the case you cite, of a player stumbling and colliding with an opponent, we would judge the act to be careless, reckless, or involving the use of excessive force — and thus a foul — only if the player had already begun to trip (or attempt to trip), push, kick (or attempt to kick), strike (or attempt to strike), jump at or charge his opponent. If the player was still merely pursuing the opponent and happened to stumble and fall, colliding with the opponent on the way down, there has been no foul, as the act was simply accidental or inadvertent.

Referees who call such acts fouls are doing a disservice to the game and to other referees. These are cases where the referee simply calls out “No foul” — or something similar; anything other than “Play on” or “Advantage” — because there has been no foul.

ODD-SIZED GOAL POSTS
Your question:
If a goal post is smaller in dimension front-to-back than the goal line, does the front of the goal post go to the front edge (field side) of the goal line, outside edge (out-of-touch side) or split the difference and go within the goal line?

Example: Our U-10 size goal posts are 4″ wide but only 2″ deep. Goal line is sprayed 4″ wide. Where is the front edge (or back edge) of the post located?

The USSF 2002-2003 Law Book, Law #1 states: The goal post must be in the center of the goal line.

My Grade 8 USSF referee instructor said the front edge of the goal post must be on the front edge of the goal line.

My association’s three senior referees (over 10-20 years of experience each) states the back edge of the post must be on the outside edge of the goal line. Please give me an “official” answer.

USSF answer (June 2, 2003):
You and your association’s three senior referees may well be astounded to learn that the goalposts used in your example do not conform to the Laws of the Game and should not be used in any competitive match. Law 1 tells us: “Both goalposts and the crossbar have the same width and depth which do not exceed 12 cm (5 ins). The goal lines are the same width as that of the goalposts and the crossbar.” That means that a four-inch wide goal line requires a goalposts that are both four inches wide and four inches thick.

However, if there is no alternative to the goals available for the game, then the goals should be so aligned that the back or outside edge of the goal post is at the outer edge of the goal line, thus allowing the referee and assistant referee to determine more precisely whether or not a goal has been scored.

GOALKEEPER MOVES ON PENALTY KICK OR KICK FROM THE PENALTY MARK
Your question:
Isn’t there a rule that says the GK can’t move forward prior to the ball being kicked in PK’s? Both goalie’s, but especially AC Milan’s GK, were jumping way off their line as soon as the whistle was blown, and not only did the ref’s not call it, but no one said anything about it. There was one goal where the keeper took literally four steps off the line before the ball was kicked. Am I misunderstanding the rule? or is it just not enforced at the higher levels of soccer?

A friend of mine was in a tournament and had three of the five shots called back to retake for this infraction, but professionals can get away with it. What’s the deal?

USSF answer (June 2, 2003):
This is an excellent time to point out a change in the Laws of the Game, specifically the Additional Instructions for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials, effective 1 July 2003. Although the change affects only competitions that begin on or after 1 July 2003, the information is valid at this very moment. The following is a quote from the USSF Memorandum 2003 (which may be downloaded from this site):

The Penalty Kick It is an infringement to enter the penalty area before the kick has been taken. The goalkeeper also infringes the Laws if he moves from his goal-line before the ball has been kicked. Referees must ensure that when players infringe this Law appropriate action is taken.
Reason:
Law 14 was amended in 1997, taking away the necessity for referees to caution when player(s) entered the penalty area prior to the penalty kick being taken. The amendment also allowed the goalkeeper to move along his goal line. Nowadays, infringements often occur at a penalty kick, yet the referee seldom takes action.
USSF Advice to Referees: The reference to ³enter the penalty area before the kick has been taken² includes players moving closer than ten yards to the ball (i.e., entering the penalty arc) and moving closer to the goal line than the ball (i.e., moving closer to the goal line than twelve yards). Referees must also ensure that the goalkeeper does not move off the goal line before the ball is in play. However, although the International Board emphasized the need for referees to take appropriate actions when players violate the requirements of Law 14, referees must continue to differentiate between those violations which clearly had an impact on subsequent play and those trifling violations which clearly had no impact.

LEARN TO COPE!
Your question:
I want to know what to do if a parent keeps bothering you and the ref does nothing about it.

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
Close your ears and get on with the job — and at the next stoppage get the referee’s full attention and remind him or her of the referee’s obligation to protect the entire officiating team. If the referee takes no action at that time, the best you can do is to continue working and then submit a full report to the appropriate authorities after the game.

WHAT AGE FOR PUNISHING OBVIOUS GOALSCORING OPPORTUNITY DENIED?
Your question:
In your opinion at what age level or skill level should a ref start applying the LOTG pertaining to GSO? I know your always apply the LOTG but you know what I mean.

Example: Two of the games I did during a tourney were U10 and U8. In both games there was an incident where attacker gets around last fullback starting 1 on 1 with goalie when fulback pushes player in the back and they fall.

I was told by a high up ref in our state that at U6 there is no GSO. What about at U10? I did the final game and had a similar situation except IMHO, there were some defenders that could have caught up with the attacker and at least blocked the shot, so no GSO. But what if no one could have caught the player. Is it a GSO or not? I usually do U12 or U14 and I know there are a lot of GSO and a few DGSO’s.

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
If a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity, no matter what the age or skill level, the Law must be followed. The intelligent referee will remember that these events occur only if they are, in the referee’s opinion, actual denials of goals or obvious goalscoring opportunities.

There is also the problem that you are mixing several age groups. At the U-6 level, it would be rare for any referee ever to call an obvious goalscoring opportunity, because, at that level, they aren’t generally even supposed to be keeping score (no goal … no OGSO). Soccer below the U-10 level is not what is contemplated by the Laws, so the intelligent referee would do well to think of it as more or less organized exercise. U10 and above, go with the Law.

INJURED PLAYER CHANGE BEFORE THE GAME AT PRO LEVEL
Your question:
In the professional “A League” match, a coach submitted his teams roster for that game. While the teams were warming up before the game a named starter was injured and would not be able to play in that game. The coach approached the referee crew to ask if he could move a sub to the starting 11 and put another name on the roster as a substitute.

The referee crew allowed the coach to remove the starters name from the roster and move a named sub to the starting 11. However we did not allow the coach to add another sub to his roster. Therefore he only had 6 possible subs to choose from instead of 7 for the 5 subs he is allowed during the match.

My question is where can we find the written rule or memorandum that explains this type of situation?

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
The same principle expressed in the MLS handbook for referees, Section 11.2.3 (A) “Pregame Injury, Illness or Dismissal,” should apply to any professional game:
“After the exchange of the Official Game Rosters, Roster changes by either head coach shall be made only in case of injury, illness or dismissal during the warm-up period. A player who is removed from the official starting lineup shall not be eligible for substitution into the Game, with the exception of the Goalkeeper. However, an eligible Active Roster Player may be added to the Official Game Roster to replace an injured or ill Player, not a dismissed player. A starting player’s vacant Roster position may only be filled by a current, named substitute from the Official Game Roster. The replacement player can only be added to the list of eligible substitutions, not as a starting Player. Any Player dismissed prior to the Game is not eligible and may not be replaced on the Roster (a named substitute may fill the roster position of a starting Player who has been dismissed).

“No changes or additions to the Official Game Roster may occur once the Teams exit the locker rooms for Pre-Game introductions when the Game Roster becomes frozen and final.”

NO GOALSCORING OPPORTUNITY ON INDIRECT FREE KICK
Your question:
Indirect free kick about 20 yards out. A wall is set up with a defender on both posts. The attacker kicks is directly to the goal knowing it is a IDF, the defender on the near post it’s clearing going in but foolishly knocks tha ball over the cross bar. Since this is a IDF should the restart be… Yellow card corner kick, or penalty kick?

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
There can be no goalscoring opportunity on an indirect free kick, so the correct answer depends on what you mean by “knocks the ball.” If you mean the player “knocked” the ball with his hand, then the correct answer is caution/yellow card for unsporting behavior, with a penalty kick restart. If you mean the player “knocked” the ball with some part of the head, torso, or legs/feet, then the answer is corner kick.

RETAKING A KICK FROM THE PENALTY MARK
Your question:
Recently, in a U17 game that came down to a penalty shootout, a player stepped up to take her shot, which was saved by the opposing keeper. However, the referee allowed the shooter to re-take her shot, which resulted in a goal. Under what circumstances can the referee allow the shooter to re-take his/her shot in a penalty shootout?

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
Given your scenario, there are only two reasons to retake the kick from the penalty mark. If the referee gives the signal for a kick to be taken and, before the ball is in play, one of the following situations occurs:
The goalkeeper infringes the Laws of the Game:
– the referee allows the kick to proceed
– if the ball enters the goal, a goal is awarded
– if the ball does not enter the goal, the kick is retaken

A player of both the defending team — including the goalkeeper — and the attacking team — including the kicker — infringe the Laws of the Game: – the kick is retaken

There are other reasons to retake penalty kicks, and these might apply to kicks from the penalty mark, but they do not apply to your scenario.

THE “V8” CLAUSE
Your question:
Law 16 states that the ball must be kicked beyond the penalty area. No dispute. But in a recent adult match, the ball was kicked to a defender, who touched the ball with his foot while the ball was still on the PA line. No attacking player was within 20 yards. The CR whistled it, and ordered the kick to be retaken. While this is technically correct, isn’t it trifling? Since it had no impact on the game, wouldn’t the CR have been wiser to simply ignore it and allow play to continue, since the restart is simply a retake of the kick? If it were a youth match, I might view it differently, but no one gained any advantage, and it was not an attempt to circumvent the LOTG.

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
Trifling is in the eye of the only beholder who counts, the referee.

STEPPING DOWN ON THE BALL DOES NOT COUNT AS KICKING
Your question:
A ball is placed inside a corner arc in preparation for a corner kick. Player A taps the top of ball with the sole of her shoe and then runs away. Player B (on the same team) then runs over to the ball and dribbles it out of the corner arc.

Law 17 (and 13 as well) says that “the ball is in play when it is kicked and moves”. The coach who has taught this play believes the ball is “kicked” (with the sole of the shoe) and that the ball “moves” (it just happens to move downward). Others believes that this type of “kick” violates the spirit of the Law.

FIFA’s Q&A Law 13, Question #5 indicates that a free kick may be taken by lifting the ball. Is a ball that is “tapped” (i. e., pushed down) considered “kicked” and “moves”?

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
While the referee should strive to be as accommodating as possible regarding the “moves” requirement on free kicks, a simple push downward with the sole of the shoe would probably not qualify as a kick at the ball.

INDICATING NON-PARTICIPATION IN AN OFFSIDE SITUATION
Your question:
The situation is as follows: the blue team has pulled all of their defenders up so that they are straddling the halfway line. A red attacker [red-1] is about ten yards closer to the blue goal [in an offside position]. A red player plays the ball toward red-1. Red-1 stands as though he could play the ball but instead allows Red-2 [who was not in offside position] to run onto the ball and play it. The questions: (1) Should the assistant raise his/her flag signalling an offside; and, (2) Should the referee blow his whistle and stop play for an offside offense.

USSF answer (June 1, 2003):
This is an old and time-honored (and legal) tactic to beat the offside trap — provided that the player in the offside position clearly signals his non-participation in the play by standing at attention or turning his back to play.

Just to make it clear: No, the assistant referee should not flag and, no, the referee should not blow his whistle. And the player’s action must be clear and definitive to avoid the offside decision.

HANDLING AND THE SHOULDER
Your question:
The scenario: A ball is cleared by the defense into the air and over midfield. The attacking team player is in position to recieve the ball, but instead of heading it, decides instead to hit it with his shoulder, which he clearly “shrugs” in an effort to propel the ball forward and to the side to space so he can play it. I stopped play for deliberate handling in this case. Of course, the player was flabergasted that he used his shoulder and that’s not handling. I assured him shoulder use was, in fact, handling. I know that the rules state that use of the outside of the shoulder constitute handling, but does use of the top of the shoulder constitute likewise (this is the area that was used by this player)? I was pretty confident when I made the call, but as I have mulled it over since, I am not as sure as I thought.

USSF answer (May 29, 2003):
For purposes of determining deliberate handling of the ball, the “hand” is considered to be any part of the arm-hand from fingertip to shoulder. Using the top of the shoulder is not considered as using the hand.

NOTE: This represents a change to the information in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” section 12.11, which will be reworded to reflect this change in the next edition.

SWITCHING THE GOALKEEPER WITH A FIELD PLAYER
Your question:
A referee has called for a penalty kick, can the coach switch the goalie with another player already on the field?

As an example, we were late in a game where we were winning 2-1, and we only had 11 players so our normal goalie had been rotated out onto the field as sweeper, to give the girls a break. Then we had a player commit a foul within the box. The referee correctly called for the penalty kick, then I asked if I could sub the goalie. I was told no. The other team kicked the penalty kick which went over the net, then the referee said the kick had occurred without the proper start signal, so the kick was retaken. Is this also correct? The game was tied on the 2nd penalty kick, the game lasted 1 more minute.

USSF answer (May 29, 2003):
Why doesn’t someone with good experiences with a referee ask questions?

In the first case, the referee did indeed screw up. A field player may exchange places with the goalkeeper at any stoppage in play, provided the referee is informed before the change is made. This does not count as a substitution, so your terminology may have confused the referee.

In the second case, the referee was correct. A penalty kick must be retaken if a player kicks before the referee has given the signal to kick.

Let us add that someone may have been confused by rule differences. Under the Laws of the Game, of course, the goalkeeper could be substituted in accordance with Law 3 because it was a stoppage (assuming the team had a substitution left). In high school rules, this would not be permitted unless the goalkeeper were injured or otherwise required to leave the field (high school rules do not differ from the Laws of the Game on the question of swapping a field player and the goalkeeper).

TWO BALLS ON THE FIELD
Your question:
At a recent youth tournament, with a number of fields side by side, a ball from one game is kicked onto a nearby field in the vicinity of the penalty area, in the midst of active play and near that game’s own ball. A player on this field, mistaking the rogue ball for that game’s ball strikes it and it hits the goal tender knocking him down briefly. While he is down a goal is scored with the legitimate ball. The goal was counted. Was that the proper call, and if not what should have been done, and why?

USSF answer (May 29, 2003):
No goal can be awarded. The intelligent referee will stop the game and restart with a dropped ball at the point where the original ball was when the second ball entered the field.

REFEREE ASSAULT
Your question:
Could you explain referee assault? Give examples? What is NOT referee assault? Is there a place that this is written? It is very controversial and many people – refs. and others – think that just touching the referee accidentally is a red card. Are there red card and yellow card assault differences?

USSF answer (May 29, 2003):
The information given here applies to all games played under the aegis of the United States Federation other than those played within the realm of Professional League Member activities (which are dealt with under a separate policy number). Full details may be found in Policy 531-9, Misconduct Toward Game Officials (amended 7/20/01). This response does not cover either hearings or appeals. For details on those matters, consult Policy 531-9.

Definitions
The term ³referee² includes all currently registered USSF referees, as well as any non-licensed, non-registered person serving in an emergency capacity as a referee (under Rule 3040) and any club assistant referee.

Referee assault is an intentional act of physical violence at or upon a referee. In this response, ³intentional act² means an act intended to bring about a result which will invade the interests of another in a way that is socially unacceptable. Unintended consequences of the act are irrelevant.

Assault includes, but is not limited to the following acts committed upon a referee: hitting, kicking, punching, choking, spitting on, grabbing or bodily running into a referee; head butting; the act of kicking or throwing any object at a referee that could inflict injury; damaging the referee¹s uniform or personal property, i.e. car, equipment, etc.

Referee abuse is a verbal statement or physical act not resulting in bodily contact which implies or threatens physical harm to a referee or the referee¹s property or equipment.

Abuse includes, but is not limited to the following acts committed upon a referee: using foul or abusive language toward a referee; spewing any beverage on a referee¹s personal property; spitting at (but not on) the referee; or verbally threatening a referee.

Verbal threats are remarks that carry the implied or direct threat of physical harm. Such remarks as ³I¹ll get you after the game² or ³You won¹t get out of here in one piece² shall be deemed referee abuse.

Penalties and Suspensions
(A) Assault
(1) The player, coach, manager, or official committing the referee assault is automatically suspended as follows:
(a) for a minor or slight touching of the referee or the referee’s uniform or personal property, at least 3 months from the time of the assault;
(b) except as provided in clause (c) or (d), for any other assault, at least 6 months from the time of the assault;
(c) for an assault committed by an adult and the referee is 17 years of age or younger, at least 3 years; or
(d) for an assault when serious injuries are inflicted, at least 5 years.
(2) A State Association adjudicating the matter may not provide shorter period of suspension but, if circumstances warrant, may provide a longer period of suspension.
(B) Abuse
The minimum suspension period for referee abuse shall be at least three (3) scheduled matches within the rules of that competition. The State Association adjudicating the matter may provide a longer period of suspension when circumstances warrant (e.g., habitual offenders).

Procedure for Reporting Assault and Abuse
(A) Procedures for reporting of referee assault and/or abuse shall be developed and disseminated by the National Referee Committee to all Federation registered referees for use in their National State Association.
(B) Referees shall transmit a written report of the alleged assault or abuse, or both, within 48 hours of the incident (unless there is a valid reason for later reporting) to the designee of the State Association and the State Referee Administrator. For tournaments or special events, the referee shall transmit a written report to the tournament director on the day of the incident and to his home state SRA within 10 days of the incident.

Any instance of referee assault or abuse by a player or substitute is immediate grounds for dismissal/red card — and for a team official it is grounds for dismissal alone, as no card may be shown to a team official. In addition to the report of the assault, the referee must also include full details in the official match report.

MAY KICKING TEAM PLAYERS STAND IN FRONT OF THE WALL?
Your question:
Can you have a member of your team stand in between the kick-taker and the defensive wall. So for example the wall’s 10 yards away from the ball can one of your own players stand 5 yards away from the ball.

USSF answer (May 27, 2003):
Yes, a member of the kicking team may stand between the wall and the kicker. The only restriction on distance from the ball is on the opposing team, not the kicking team. The opposing team must remain ten yards away from the ball until it is in play.

COACH WANTS BETTER REFEREES
Your question:
Through the ten years I have been actively involved in youth soccer U-5 to U-15. I have also been playing for close to thirty years. It is obvious that most officials avoid calling dangerous play. High kicking, boot up tackling, sliding from behind, low heading and playing the ball on the ground are routinely encouraged by officials not controlling the game. I understand FIFA rules that the coaches are to coach teams not officials. However the number of negligent officials greatly outweigh the good and need to be corrected during the game. Until officials are held accountable for game management by the licensing authorities and graded on performance I feel that coaches must still instruct officials when players safety is in question.

An official in a U-9 game I had a few days ago would not leave the midfield line during the game. He was never in a position to align himself up with the last defender since the last defender on his side never approached the mid fields strip. At some point coaches need to assist officials who have a very small grasp on the game. If officials were trained to listen to corrective critisim rather that take “the dont talk to me I am a god mentality” the games would be played and officaited in a better manner. There is no place in youth sports for primadonnas Coach of Official.

USSF answer (May 27, 2003):
The coach who wants to see better officiating can do several things to help:
(1) Report both the good and the poor official to the State Referee Administrator and to the assignor for the competition. If you are consistent in your criticism, win or lose, and others contribute the same sort of consistent reporting, the refereeing should improve. Many assignors are very conscientious in trying to match officials with the most suitable games. Others are not and will assign any warm body to a game. That is something that can be addressed only within your state association — and it must be documented. Ranting without documentation gets nowhere.
(2) Obey the Laws of the Game and behave responsibly. This can prevent the players from becoming more excited about the referee than about playing the game as best they can. It will also help to prevent the parents from going over the top with their abuse of the referee. The coach has the right to speak to the referee only to exchange introductions at the beginning of the game. The coach has no right to offer any criticism to the official, whether directly or obliquely, in any form other than a written report to the appropriate authorities.
(3) Coach the players to play the game, not the referee. And set an example in this, as suggested in (2) above.
(4) Take a refereeing course and do a few games in the middle. Then come back and tell me how easy it is.

THE “V8” CLAUSE
Your question:
Advice to Referees, paragraph 14.10, requires that a penalty kick be retaken for infringement by the attacking or defending team (depending on the specific circumstance). However, it also advises referees to use judgement to disregard trifling or doubtful violations of this requirement.

Can you provide guidance on what constitutes trifling violations? Does the infringement alone, without impacting the shooter or the goalkeeper, constitute a violation?

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
Some very wise words that were once in the Laws of the Game, Law V, International Board Decision 8, familiarly known as the “V8” clause, instructed referees that “The Laws of the Game are intended to provide that games should be played with as little interference as possible, and in this view it is the duty of referees to penalize only deliberate breaches of the Law. Constant whistling for trifling and doubtful breaches produces bad feeling and loss of temper on the part of the players and spoils the pleasure of spectators.” These same words are preserved as an embodiment of the Spirit of the Game in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” section 5.5.

Trifling is trifling when the result of the action makes absolutely no difference to the game. Or, in other words, when the result is to get the ball back into play, the Law has been served and what comes after that is just part of the game.

Doubtful means it probably wasn’t a foul at all, but people reacted and started asking for the doubtful “foul” to be called.

The “severity” of the infringement is not the issue; the issue is what effect did it have. The intelligent referee’s action: If the infringement had no obvious effect on play, consider the infringement to have been trifling and let it go. If it was not trifling, punish it.

We cannot give a list of possible “trifling” violations of the Law. The referee need consider only this: Was there an offense? Could it have been called? Should it be called if, in the opinion of the referee, the infraction was doubtful or trifling? No.

RENDERING (PARA)MEDICAL ASSISTANCE
Your question:
I was wondering if, as a referee I could step in if there was a medical emergency. I thought before that I have heard that you are not supposed to at all, but it wasnt’t very clear. I was wondering if there is an USSF rule about that.

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
In this litigious society of ours, a referee who is not a licensed medical practitioner would be well advised to stay out of any medical emergency that occurs during the game that referee is working.

The situation is generally controlled by state law (sometimes called a “good Samaritan” law, but also laws that cover specific professions). In some states, you are expected to perform whatever emergency services you are trained/certified to do. An EMT who is also a referee must therefore take off his referee hat and put on his EMT hat if faced with a serious injury on the field. Otherwise, stay out of it and remember that there are other important referee things you could be doing while staying out of it.

COUNT THE ‘KEEPER TOO!
Your question:
What role does the keeper play in offsides? Are they considered one of the last two defenders? Or are they in addition to the last two defenders?

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
A good question, as far too many people ask it and it needs answering.

According to Law 11 (Offside), “a player is in an offside position if he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent.” Notice that the Law does not speak of defenders or goalkeepers, but of opponents. The opposing team is composed of the goalkeeper and ten other players, who may be defenders, midfielders, attackers, or whatever fancy name the coach happens to attach to a particular position — but they are all “opponents.” The goalkeeper is normally one of the last two opponents a player on the other team sees between himself and the opponents’ goal line, but the goalkeeper does not have to be one of the last two opponents. But, when he is one of the last two, he counts!

KEEP YOUR EARS AND YOUR MOUTH SHUT!
Your question:
I answered the desperate call in my community when they asked for referees last fall. I ref’d, and played, years ago but had gotten out of it. I moved to [another state] and thought it would be a great way to get exercise, make money, and help kids learn the game. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult to continue to do this week after week, not because of players, but the coaches and spectators. They make it very difficult with the constant badgering, comments, and remarks directed at the referee. (Even the players tell them to be quite). The league that I primarily ref for has instituted a T.S.L. ( Team Sportsmanship Liaison) for each game, and the ref now fills out surveys on how each team, coach, and spectators conduct themselves during the match. But, nothing changes.

Before each game I meet with each coach and team and clearly explain the rules and how the game will be called, what I am looking for, etc.

I have no problem making coaches or spectators leave, but all that does is slow down the game, take away from the players time on the field, and raise my stress level. Do you have any suggestions, or have heard of other ways to control or minimize this action??

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
In most cases, the referee should work actively to tune out comments by the spectators, particularly at youth matches, most of whom know little about the game, but who want to “protect” their children. Why should the referee tune them out? Because the referee can do nothing about comments that do not bring the game into disrepute. If the referee fails to “tune out” the spectators, they will take over (psychological) control of the game and the referee is lost.

However, do not despair. The referee does possess a powerful tool with which to control spectators. The referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match because of outside interference of any kind. If no other recourse remains, the referee may inform the team that the match is suspended and may be terminated unless “that person over there” is removed from the area of field.

And here is some more practical advice: For most referees and particularly for referees who don’t have a lot of experience (we are talking many hundreds of games), it is generally not a good idea to assemble the masses — coach, team, etc. — and “clearly explain the rules and how the game will be called, what I am looking for, etc.” The Guide to Procedures indicates what must be done prior to the match and, aside from identifying oneself and providing a brief professional greeting to the coaches, nothing more is called for . . . and certainly not any extended disquisition on the Laws of the Game. The more the referee opens his mouth, the more hanging rope is provided to the coach (or anyone within hearing distance) that can be used against the referee later on — “But you SAID you were going to do . . .”!

REDUCE TO EQUATE
Your question:
During one of your responses this past posting, you talked about circumstances of unsporting behavior during the taking of a PK. It got me to considering the following scenario which I am baffled on.

What happens if a player taking the PK receives his second caution of the match for his unsporting behavior and is sent off (or commits some other foolish act to receive a straight send off I suppose)? Now, during the course of the match, this answer is simple, another player simply takes a kick since any player on the team may take a penalty kick for a foul during play. But what about the taking of kicks from the mark to determine a winner? In this case there is a previously determined order in the taking of kicks that must be followed. Who should replace the shooter in this case, and what happens to the kick order for the other team? It seems they must then reduce to the matching number of kickers, but in what way is this done?

I know it’s a fairly unlikely scenario, but it’s not often I come up with one that I am truly and completely stumpped on.

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
It’s time for a reminder to all referees about the memorandum put out June 11, 2002 regarding the principle of “reduce to equate.” Your answer lies within. We might also point out that there is no “predetermined order” for taking kicks from the penalty mark. The referee simply notes down the numbers of the players as they take their kicks. If a player is dismissed during the taking of kicks from the penalty mark, a player who has not shot during this round of kicks moves up. The other team does not have to reduce its numbers.

Where you strayed from the true path was in assuming (as, unfortunately, many referees do) that the coach must give the referee a list of five players who will start the procedure and that the players must kick in this order. No, no such list is required or given; no, no order is required (aside from the rule against kicking twice).

To: Chair, State Referee Committee
State Referee Administrators
State Directors of Referee Instruction
State Directors of Referee Assessment
National Referees
National Assessors
National Instructors
From: Alfred Kleinaitis
Manager of Referee Development and Education

Re: Kicks from the Penalty Mark
The “Reduce to Equate” Principle

Date: June 11, 2002

The Laws of the Game provide for the taking of kicks from the penalty mark as one way to decide which team will advance when, after regulation play and any extra periods of play required by the rules of competition are ended, the score remains tied.

The specific rules governing the match (³the rules of competition²) can differ in this regard. For example, FIFA requires up to two fifteen minute periods of play with the first goal ending the match.

The purpose of this position paper is to focus on one particular element of the taking of kicks which has recently been introduced and remains subject to some uncertainty the ³reduce to equate² principle. Introduced into The Laws of the Game in 2001, the principle ensures that teams begin the procedure with the same number of players.

The following guidelines are to be used in implementing ³reduce to equate² in those matches for which the rules of competition mandate the taking of kicks from the penalty mark. ³Regulation play² includes any extra periods of play called for by the rules of competition. ³Kicks² will refer generally to the taking of kicks from the penalty mark.

– The kicks phase of the match begins at the moment regulation play ends (including any overtime periods of play.)

– A team might have fewer than eleven players eligible to participate at the end of regulation play due to injury or misconduct or because the team began the match with fewer players.

– The captain of the team with more players must identify which of its players will not participate if regulation play ends with the team at unequal sizes.

– ³Players eligible to participate² includes those players who are legally on the field at the end of regulation play, plus any other players off the field temporarily (e.g., to correct equipment, bleeding, or having an injury tended).

– Only the goalkeeper may be substituted in the case of injury during the kicks phase and only if the team has a substitution remaining from its permitted maximum.

– Once kicks begin (following any ³reduce to equate² adjustment), a player may become unable to participate due to injury or ineligible to participate due to misconduct.

– Under no circumstances will a team be required to ³reduce to equate² if the opposing team loses one or more players due to injury or misconduct occurring during the kicks phase of the match.

– Until a result is produced, both teams must continue to use their eligible players without duplication until all (including the goalkeeper) have kicked, at which time players who have already kicked may kick again. If one team has fewer players than the other, it will need to begin using again its players who have already kicked sooner than will the opposing team.

NO DUAL SYSTEM!
Your question:
I am an assignor for games U-10 through U-19 and am also a high school referee. In high school we use duals quite a bit and it is a great way to officiate a game when you only have two referees. In my assigning duties, I am often unable to find more than two officials for one of the youth games and I would like to be able to use the dual system, yet I know that FIFA strictly prohibits duals. Why can’t FIFA allow the use of dual referees in youth soccer? We have a chronic shortage of officials and this would one way to help ensure fair play.

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
The United States Soccer Federation does not recognize the two-man or dual system of control. Games played under the auspices of US Youth Soccer or US Soccer may be officiated only under the diagonal system of control, as provided for in the Laws of the Game. You can find the information you need in the Referee Administrative Handbook:

QUOTE
POLICY:

Systems of Officiating Soccer Games

The Laws of the Game recognize only one system for officiating soccer games, namely the diagonal system of control (DSC), consisting of three officials – one referee and two assistant referees. All national competitions sponsored by the U.S. Soccer Federation. require the use of this officiating system.

In order to comply with the Laws of the Game which have been adopted by the National Council, all soccer games sanctioned directly or indirectly by member organizations of the U. S. Soccer Federation must employ the diagonal system (three officials). As a matter of policy, the National Referee Committee prefers the following alternatives in order of preference:
1. One Federation referee and two Federation referees as assistant referees (the standard ALL organizations should strive to meet).
2. One Federation referee and two assistant referees, one of whom is a Federation referee and one of whom is a trainee of the local referee program.
3. One Federation referee and two assistant referees who are both unrelated to either team participating in the game but are not Federation referees, (only if there are not enough Federation referees to have #1 or #2).
4. One Federation referee and two assistant referees who are not both Federation referees and who are affiliated with the participating teams, (only if there are not enough Federation referees to have #1 or #2).

Member organizations and their affiliates should make every effort to assist in recruiting officials so that enough Federation referees will be available to permit use of the diagonal officiating system for ALL their competitions.
END OF QUOTE

If only two officials turn up at the field, one must be the referee (with the whistle), while the other becomes an assistant referee. They split the field between them, but only one may make the final decisions and blow the whistle.

OFFSIDE
Your question:
The goalie makes a save from a shot from a forward. He then punts the ball, it lands on the opposing teams side of the field, where there is a teamate in the offside position, he gets the ball and scores. The referee said that the player was not offside, is that the correct call? He is not offside on a goal kick, but not on a kick where the goalie made the save.

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
In this case, the referee was wrong. If a player is in an offside position and is actively involved in play by gaining an advantage from that position when his goalkeeper punts the ball to him, the player must be declared offside.

WHAT IS AN “ASSIST”?
Your question:
Please define an “assist.”

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
Assists are those plays of the ball which contributed to the scoring of a goal. Their type and number are determined by either the competition authority (the people who sponsor the league, cup, tournament, whatever) or statisticians. As such, they are not a matter of concern for referees in any affiliated competition. Real referees don’t care about assists, unless you mean assistant referees, and certainly do not keep track of them nor have any need to know about them.

THE “SPORTING THING”
Your question:
In a recent match in which I played, my team was down by a single goal late in the game. One of the opposing players went down with an “injury” after being barely touched by one of my teammates. I was sure, as was the rest of my team, that this was a delay tactic by the injured player. Just after the injury, the ball came to be in my possession in my own half and I decided to keep playing and dribble the ball upfield. I realize that the sporting thing to do would be to kick the ball out-of-touch to allow the injured player to receive treatment, but I am not aware of any rule that requires me to kick the ball out-of-touch. The referee told me to kick the ball out of play. I initially hesitated as I did not realize that it is within the referee’s powers to force a player to do such a thing. When I did not initially kick the ball over the sideline, the referee threatened to card me if I did not kick the ball out of play. I eventually kicked the ball out and the injured player made a miraculous recovery. I just feel that if I had been the referee and the player was truly injured, I would have blown the whistle to stop play and restarted with a drop ball after the injured player had been attended to. I realize that referees are required to maintain the safety of the players on the field , but are referees allowed to enforce this sporting out-of-touch play, or did the referee overstep his authority?

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
Other than sending a player off the field to make equipment corrections, the referee cannot order a player to make any specific play during the game, and certainly cannot threaten to caution or send that player off for not obeying that order. The only orders a referee can give is for a player to leave the field for repair of equipment or because the player has been dismissed.

If the referee believes that a player is seriously injured, then the referee has the power to stop the game and then restart it with a dropped ball. (If the referee believes that a player is not seriously injured, then the referee must allow play to continue until the ball goes out of play naturally.)

WHAT INFRINGEMENT?
Your question:
What is the call: 1. The goalkeeper released the ball while standing inside the eighteen yard box, the ball traveled outside the box and the goalkeeper kicked the ball. 2. The goal keeper threw the ball outside the eighteen yard box, then the goalkeeper kicked the ball as it bounced outside the box.

USSF answer (May 22, 2003):
What is the call? A counter question: Where is the infringement of the Law? The referee cannot make a call without a reason, and there is no reason here. The call is that there has been no infringement of the Law — the referee should keep his mouth shut and his whistle at his side.

Perhaps the nature of your confusion might be clearer if you wrote back to indicate what infringement you think MIGHT have occurred in these two situations.

CHECK THE CARDS!!
Your question:
I reffed a game today, U9 boys, where after the game was over it was brought to my attention that a player on one of the teams was put on the lineup sheet and played but isn’t on that team (not on the official roster). I approached the coach, asked to see their player cards…he said to see the manager, the manager first said that since we played the game it was too late to make a difference….again, I asked him for the cards, he said he didn’t have them….then, I asked him which player was the one not on their team, he wouldn’t tell me…I paused, he started laughing at me, then I gave the manager a red card for not cooperating and for his demeaning attitude…….then, I asked the managers from both teams to wait for me to call the head of refs in our area to help me with whether to have them sign the Official Referee Report(and Team Line Up sheet)……I couldnt reach the person…..so, I didn’t have them sign the report………………..
1. Should the game be allowed to stand? (by the way, the team with the ineligible player won).,
2. Should I still have had them sign the sheet?
3. Did I have the right to Red Card the manager for this type of behavior?
I am not turning in the Ref Reports until I find out these answers……please give me your opinion…..I also have a call into the Ref Liason for our League……thanks so much.

USSF answer (May 19, 2003):
This question was answered here on April 3, 2003: “This is a problem for the competition authority to resolve, not the referee. If the player has a legitimate pass and is listed on the team roster, there is nothing the referee can do.
“Although the referee is not in a position to make any ultimate determination here (the player must be allowed to play), the referee can and should include details of the incident in his game report.”

You should have checked the roster and the player cards thoroughly before the game. As you did not do that, you can only include full details in your match report. The competition authority will have to resolve the matter.

Furthermore, your misuse of the red card should be noted. First, we don’t show cards to coaches unless local rules permit it and, second, a red-card-like action (card shown or not) for this would hardly be appropriate.

NOTE: The questioner has since informed us that the player registration cards in this league are checked before the game by the team managers, not the officiating crew. So why didn’t the opposing manager say something before the match, instead of waiting till the game was over?

ACCIDENTAL HANDLING SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHED!
Your question:
Two questions:
1) In the case of accidental handling, and the player who made contact then plays the ball…….handling or not?

Under 12.9 in the Laws of the game, it states:
“Deliberate contact” means that the player could have avoided the touch but chose not to, that the player’s arms were not in a normal playing position at the time, or that the player DELIBERATELY CONTINUED AN INITIALLY ACCIDENTAL CONTACT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GAINING AN UNFAIR ADVANTAGE.

This would seem to indicate that you would call handling in the above situation. But later in the law it states:
The fact that a player may benefit from the ball contacting the hand does not transform the otherwise accidental event into an infringement.

The two parts of the law seem to contradict each other. Is this situation handling or not?

2) The goalkeeper, in the process of releasing the ball, goes well beyond the penalty area (2-3 feet) with the ball in her possession (hand). I called handling and restarted with a DFK for the opposing team. Another referee thought the restart would be a IFK. What’s the restart?

USSF answer (May 18, 2003):
Much as we would like to claim credit — or maybe not — the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” is not the Laws themselves. Those portions of Section 12.9 of the Advice to Referees read exactly as you have cited them. Unfortunately, you have misread the first of them to fit your premise. You then compound the sin by carrying the analogy into a totally different area, that of the goalkeeper carrying the ball outside the area. You did one thing right by awarding the direct free kick for the opposing team.

The first portion refers to a ball that hits the player’s hand accidentally, at which time the light bulb goes on in the player’s head, suggesting that this would be a good time to make use of that accidental contact by embellishing it a bit and moving the ball voluntarily and deliberately a little farther along the path toward the opponent’s goal. That is different from the second portion, which describes a ball accidentally hitting the player’s hand and falling into a favorable position of its own momentum. The first is wrong and should be punished, while the second is fortunate for the player but not illegal — and should not be punished.

SHOW RESPECT TO PLAYERS AND COACHES
Your question:
Can you tell me how a referee can give a coach a red card after the game? When the coach simply and gentelmanly told the referee that he thought he missed a few calls. There was no prior cautions (yellow card) issued during or after the game. Is the referee allowed to over react in situations and players or coaches have no recource. Alot is written about conduct of coaches and players but not much on referees! For example, a referee has an argument with their significant other and still fells irritated at a game later, and hands out yellow and red cards. How can you protest under the laws of the game if you cannot protest the referees judgement calls. Thank you

USSF answer (May 18, 2003):
Some facts of the game:
(1) Referees do not have to explain their calls, and neither players nor coaches should question the referees under any circumstances. Coaches are expected to provide their players with encouragement and helpful suggestions (also known as responsible behavior), players are expected to play, and the referee is expected to manage the game — with full respect for the players and coaches for the work they are doing, as well as with a certain amount of communication directly related to events during the game. The referee is under no obligation to explain anything to the teams, but most referees are willing to say that it was an unfair charge or tripping or whatever it might have been — if approached in a polite manner and not badgered by the player or the team official.

We tend to discourage this, as it has been our experience that providing such explanations seldom serves any purpose other than sparking further debate from those who really don’t want an explanation in the first place. In any event, they often also divert the referee’s attention from what is more important. “Persons who are not players, named substitutes, or substituted players cannot commit misconduct within the meaning of Law 12 and therefore cannot be shown yellow or red cards nor will their behavior be described in match reports as misconduct. Law 5 is very clear that “team officials” (coaches, trainers, etc.) must behave responsibly and, if they fail to do so, the referee has two primary courses of action. First, the referee may warn the team official that the irresponsible behavior puts him or her at risk. Second, the referee may expel the team official from the field and its immediate area. It is not necessary for a warning to be given in cases of extreme provocation.”

According to the same memorandum, such action may be taken not only before and during the game, but also in that period of time immediately following a match during which the players and substitutes are physically on the field but in the process of exiting.

A CONCERNED FATHER ASKS
Your question:
I have four questions regarding USSF Rules for U-13 to U-15 Soccer:
1) I would like to know the proper positioning of the referee and the assistance’s in a three man system, i.e. should the AR be on the field of play during the game or when the ball is in play?
2) This questions deals with the ethics of the game and/or team officials and referees. Do team officials and/or players have any right to have referee calls explained to them or do referees have any obligation to explain what they saw to make their particular call? If “no”, explain to me how kids at this age are going to learn the rules and the proper way to play the game or on a “shortsighted view” what the ref considers a penalty for their particular game since there are inconsistencies between refs?
3) If a coach or manager is expelled from the game due to the failure of conducting themselves in a responsible manner (nothing abusive), can they be present on the opposite sideline with the parents if they are no longer instructing their team or being disruptive?
4) Please explain what is “failure to conduct themselves in a responsible manner”?

I will anxiously be awaiting your comments to improve my knowledge of the game and to pass that on to my sons. Thank you for this opportunity to have the rules of the game clarified.

USSF answer (May 15, 2003):
There are no “USSF Rules for U-13 to U-15 Soccer.” These players play according to the Laws of the Game, possibly as modified by the competition within which they play.

On to your questions: 1) The assistant referee may enter the field to aid the referee, if so instructed or requested by the referee. However, in general, the assistant referee’s primary responsibilities would place him or her just outside the field along the touch line.

2) Let us examine this question carefully. What does explaining calls to players or team officials have to do with referee ethics? Nothing. The referee is under no obligation to explain anything to the teams, but most referees are willing to say that it was an unfair charge or tripping or whatever it might have been — if approached in a polite manner and not badgered by the player or the team official.

You also ask “how kids at this age are going to learn the rules and the proper way to play the game.” We can only respond with another question: What has the coach been doing all this time? Is the coach teaching the players how the game is played, or simply teaching them a way to win — or at least not lose? As to how to fix this, have the players take a refereeing course or do some reading on the matter. They do not have to become referees, but simply attending the course and LISTENING AND LEARNING would certainly make them better players — just as it makes referees better referees by becoming referee mentors or instructors or assessors.

Inconsistency? Most referees are more consistent during the game than are the players whom they referee. Otherwise the games would be either 0-0 or 100-100.

3) No. A team official who has been dismissed from the game must leave the entire environs of the field.

4) You also ask what is “failure to conduct themselves in a responsible manner”? It means that the coach or other team official has not stuck to what their part of the game is, issuing tactical instructions or praise to their players. If they go beyond those bounds, then their behavior is irresponsible.

AUTHORITY OF THE REFEREE
Your question:
Exactly where does a referee’s authority begin and end? I had an incident where a coach was bad-mouthing the officiating of a game to his team. Unfortunately, I was already in the parking lot and heading toward my car. I feel that he should have been dismissed and shown the red card. ([my high school association] rules allow the coaches to be shown the yellow or red cards.) Also, how far does the authority of the referee extend? For example a player/coach/spectator/referee on a nearby soccer field begins directing negative comments to a player/coach/spectator/referee on my soccer field. My I take action aganst that person? If not, how close to my field do they have to be before I may reprimand them?

USSF answer (May 15, 2003):
We cannot presume to answer questions dealing with the rules used by other organizations. This answer would apply to games played under the auspices of the U. S. Soccer Federation.

According to section 5.2 of the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”: The referee’s authority begins when he arrives at the area of the field of play and continues until he has left the area of the field after the game has been completed. The referee’s authority extends to time when the ball is not in play, to temporary suspensions, to the half-time break, and to additional periods of play or kicks from the penalty mark required by the rules of the competition. While the referee has no direct authority over players, coaches, or spectators from neighboring fields, nor over spectators at his own field, there are things that can be done.

One of the things the referee can do is include a full description of the matter in the game report. In addition, if the referee decides that the activity by the spectator constitutes “grave disorder” (which could be defined to include anything which adversely affects the referee’s control of the game and/or undermines his authority), the referee can suspend the match while others handle the problem. The referee can also terminate the match if appropriate action (e. g., the person is forced by someone to leave the area of the field) is not taken.

The authority of the referee over persons other than players and team officials is limited by the Law, because the Law assumes that the game is played in a facility with security staff in attendance. Those referees whose matches are watched by parents, etc., right at the touch lines, need to understand that they are not totally at the mercy of the spectators and other non-playing or coaching personnel.

OFFENSIVE, INSULTING, OR ABUSE LANGUAGE
Your question:
1) If a player directs unsporting, foul, or abusive comments towards the AR and the AR cannot get the referee’s attention at the next stoppage, is it still within the laws of the game to try and signal the referee at the next possible stoppage, even though play has been restarted since the comments were made? //example of language deleted//

2) While the ball and referee’s attention are directed away from the trail assistant referee, a player, wearing a jacket shielding his number, walks side-by-side with the trail assistant referee using profanities and complaining about an offside call that went against his team. After the trail AR asks the player to return to his bench, the player continues the rude comments and abusive language. When the AR raises his flag to get the referee’s attention, the player runs for a dark parking lot. By the time, the referee sees the mirrored signal from the lead AR, the player is nowhere to be found. About 10 minutes later, the player reappears on his team’s bench.

My question is, is it still within the laws of the game to bring this player’s attention to the referee and the referee either caution or send off the player (note, the player reference in this question actually refers to a substitute).

USSF answer (May 15, 2003):
These situations should drive home to even the dullest of minds that the referee and the assistant referees (and fourth official, if available) must maintain constant communication throughout the game. At a minimum, the referee should look to the lead AR at every stoppage and every through ball. The ARs should be checking with one another at least at every stoppage and mirroring signals. There is no excuse for missing signals.

The actions you cite in both cases may be punished whenever the AR can finally get the referee’s attention. The referee must protect his officiating teammates from such attacks and abuse.

Yes, the example of language you cited — deleted in the posted answer — would be punished as offensive or insulting or abusive language.

SMOKE OUT THOSE SPECTATORS!
Your question:
I attended a soccer game recently in [my state’s] Youth Soccer Association area and a referee stopped play and had some of the fans leave the park for smoking. Is this a rule? I have never heard of it and also should the referee direct his questions to the fans or to the coach for the coach to handle the problem if there is one?

USSF answer (May 15, 2003):
A check with authorities in [your association] reveals that there is no league or other competition rule that forbids spectators from smoking. It may be a local park rule, but that is not something the referee should have to enforce, as the referee has no authority over spectators. Such a rule can be enforced only by the park authority.

No, the referee should not speak with anyone about smoking among the spectators. That is NOT the business of the referee.

_NO CAUTION_ FOR PLAYERS OFF THE FIELD TO FETCH THE BALL
Your question:
I was observing the referees at a competitive U14G match on behalf of my referee association (not as a USSF Assessor but in an observation capacity only). The goalkeeper was late getting off her line and arrived at the ball later than the attacker, the result being an injured keeper. The referee stopped play and beckoned assistance from the bench. The coach came onto the field and spent three minutes with the keeper before deciding she could continue. The referee had gone over to the touchline and continued to observe all the players while discussing the situation with his AR. During the break in play, one player left the field of play and grabbed and put on a keeper jersey, anticipating that she would take the keeper’s place. When she saw that the keeper would continue, she removed the jersey, threw it back on the bench and stepped back onto the field. The coach exited the field and play was ready to resume when the referee approached this young lady and showed her a yellow card for leaving the field without permission. Or entering the filed without permission. He and the AR informed me it was one of those and they thought they needed to get her for at least one of them. I realize that you had to be there and that the final decision is in the opinion of the referee. But they asked me what I thought. I thought technically correct — yes. Perhaps a bit anal retentive too.

Arriving home I checked ATR 12.29.6 “Players who leave the field with the referee’s permission require the referee’s permission to return to the field. Examples of this include a player who attempts to come onto the field:
After being instructed to leave the field to correct equipment (mandatory caution)
After leaving to receive treatment for an injury
After leaving to receive treatment for bleeding or to replace a blood-soaked uniform
After being substituted (except under youth substitution rules)
Before receiving permission to enter as a substitute

and 12.29.7 “This category of misconduct normally refers to a situation in which an opponent leaves the field in an attempt, in the opinion of the referee, to place an attacker in an apparent offside position.

I didn’t see that either category fit. In an otherwise “easy” game in which cards were not needed to manage the game, I thought this was one where a card COULD have been issued but SHOULD have it? I didn’t think so. What say you?

USSF answer (May 14, 2003):
The longer you live, the more foolish things you will see. The referee’s action in cautioning this player was incorrect, as well as ridiculous in the extreme. The cautionable offense of leaving the field without the referee’s permission does NOT include actions in the normal course of play. No referee should declare that the player’s action in this case was not in the normal course of play — someone has to fetch ball, for goodness’ sake! We have said it before and will surely say it again: Referees should not go out of their way to aggravate players who have done nothing wrong. It will only harm their game management in the long run by revealing how petty they are.

ACCIDENTAL HANDLING IS NOT A FOUL — UNDERSTOOD???
Your question:
The rule describing a” hand ball”foul states that the player “handles the ball deliberately”. However I have seen numerous games where a referee has called a foul for an unintentional hand ball. After the game, the referee will explain that even though he knew that the offending player did not intentionally handle the ball, the fact that the ball rebounded off the hand in such a way to give advantage to the offending player’s team, he was obligated to call an offense. My way of thinking is that once you decide that a player did not handle the ball deliberately, then it does not matter how the ball bounced afterwards.

An example: my player was marking opponent #2 inside the penalty area. Opponent #1 takes a shot on goal but hits my player in the hand. My player is turned sideways and did not see the shot taken, did not move her hand in any way. The ball stops in front of my player and she clears it away. The referee calls for a penalty kick. After the game he told me that my player did not deliberately handle the ball, but since it affected the play to our team’s advantage,then he was obligated to call for a direct free kick.

USSF answer (May 14, 2003):
This is the sort of cowardly and ill-informed referee who gives the rest of us a bad name. He has obviously either not read or decided to pay no attention to this information from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:
QUOTE
12.9 DELIBERATE HANDLING
The offense known as “handling the ball” involves deliberate contact with the ball by a player’s hand or arm (including fingertips, upper arm, or outer shoulder). “Deliberate contact” means that the player could have avoided the touch but chose not to, that the player’s arms were not in a normal playing position at the time, or that the player deliberately continued an initially accidental contact for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage. Moving hands or arms instinctively to protect the body when suddenly faced with a fast approaching ball does not constitute deliberate contact unless there is subsequent action to direct the ball once contact is made. Likewise, placing hands or arms to protect the body at a free kick or similar restart is not likely to produce an infringement unless there is subsequent action to direct or control the ball. The fact that a player may benefit from the ball contacting the hand does not transform the otherwise accidental event into an infringement. A player infringes the Law regarding handling the ball even if direct contact is avoided by holding something in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.).
END OF QUOTE

To put it slightly differently, if the handling is unintentional, it makes no difference if the ball drops in a fortunate position for the player whose hand it hit. That is NOT A FOUL and should NOT BE PUNISHED!

JUMPING WALL?
Your question:
When doing a ceremonial free kick, the “Wall” was moved the required 10 yards. The players in the “Wall” then began to jump up and down. Is this allowed or would it be considered unsporting behavior?

USSF answer (May 14, 2003):
Prior to 1997, the Law required that if “any of the players dance about or gesticulate in a way calculated to distract their opponents” at a free kick they should be cautioned and shown the yellow card for unsporting behavior (then called “ungentlemanly conduct).” This is no longer true. Jumping by members of the wall is common practice throughout the world. The referee should allow this activity unless it goes to extremes. Examples of extremes would be members of the wall jumping forward and back — and thus failing to respect the required distance from the ball — or doing handstands or other acts designed to bring the game into disrepute.

TELEPHONE 1
Your question:
In any league, and especially MLS, WUSA, and A-League, are the Technical Personnel allowed to use cell phones, headsets, or any such devices to communicate with people around the pitch to exchange information during the game and thus gain advantage over an opponent? Something similar to what an American Football Coach is allowed to do…

If not, is there a Memorandum, International Board Decision, or is it in the Laws of the Game?

USSF answer (May 13, 2003):
While players may be cautioned for unsporting behavior for using a cell phone or similar devices during a game, there is no prohibition in the Laws of the Game against team technical personnel using phones. However, such use may be prohibited by the rules of the competition, e. g., NCAA and high school.

TELEPHONE 2
Your question:
What if the player is on the bench? Does he/she get cautioned for UC if using a phone to communicate with technical personnel? What stops a coach that has been Ejected from the game to keep contact with the team then?

USSF answer (May 14, 2003):
It makes no difference where the player is. He will be cautioned and shown the yellow card for unsporting behavior, no matter whom he is calling. And the only thing that would stop a disqualified coach from communicating with the team would be the rules of the competition — or a sense of honor.

OH, THAT NASTY REFEREE!
Your question:
I am a coach in a minor league in [my state]. Last week-end I ran into a small problem. The referee decided to ref the game without the help of linesmen (he had them from the stands “only to call ball out of bounds” – off sides galore as you can imagine, and, it being an U-18 game with the kids running a little too much for the referee to follow from closer distances, ten minutes from the end of the game a play develops …

An apparent off side of four attacking players, not called but acceptable error since there were a lot of players bunched; a defender runs from behind to catch up on the edge of the box, slides and touches the ball back towards the goal keeper; the attacking player that was conducting the ball when trying to kick the ball into the net kicked instead the defender that slid by; both players fell and got up, the attacking player looking for a foul; the ball would go in if the goal keeper did not parry it, so he did, he dove, he grabed it, got up and put it in play; when the ball was already back in play, the referee who had been at about midfield, stopped the game and called for a penalty shot for “tripping”.

My problem? The score was 1-2 and we were the away team.

The ref (home refs are the norm in these parts of the woods) appeared to try to appease everybody and most of the second half appeared to look for a “draw” to make things happy !!!

How can these situations be corrected?

USSF answer (May 14, 2003):
It is, unfortunately, sometimes the case that referee assignors cannot always get the requisite number of registered officials for the games they must cover. Regarding the number and kind of officials, the USSF Referee Administrative Handbook says this:
QUOTE
POLICY:

Systems of Officiating Soccer Games

The officials in your game appear to fit the description under number 4. The “assistant referees” described in number 4 are actually called “club linesmen,” who may not be asked to indicate anything other than when the ball is entirely over the goal line or touch-line. Thus, in this sort of game the referee must make all the decisions on fouls and misconduct without any help from anyone else.

How to solve the problem? Encourage more people to go into refereeing, so that more officials are available.

I FEEL FEINT
Your question:
USSF has officially stated that feints at PKs are allowed, as long as they do not constitute unsporting behavior. The reason given is that PKs are punitive, and therefore some allowance for creativity should be made for the attacking team, much like at a direct free kick outside the penalty area. However, this logic doesn’t seem to hold up for kicks taken from the penalty mark to decide the game. They are not punitive.

Is feinting during kicks from the penalty mark to decide the game allowed? If yes, why, since they are not punitive?

USSF answer (May 13, 2003):
Let us first point out that the position on feinting is not based on the fact that penalty kicks are punitive. That is simply one aspect of the matter that the referee should consider — and we have not said anything different. Guidance from the International Board notes that referees should not consider various deceptive maneuvers to be a violation of Law 14 or of the guidelines on kicks from the penalty mark in the Additional Instructions. They should ensure that the run to the ball is initiated from behind the ball and the kicker is not using deception to delay unnecessarily the taking of the kick.

Yes, feinting at kicks from the penalty mark is permitted, provided the same guideline is followed as for feinting at the penalty kick: no unsporting behavior. The judgment of unsporting behavior is at the discretion of the referee.

One example of unsporting behavior would be to step over the ball, hesitate, and then bring the foot back again to kick the ball. The kicker’s behavior must not, in the opinion of the referee, unduly delay the taking of the kick.

While the referee might allow a player to get away with a trick once, such as deliberately missing the ball, it would be very unprofessional to allow a kicker or a series of kickers to pull the same trick again. If the referee believed the player deliberately missed the ball early to shake the ‘keeper’s concentration, then a caution/yellow card for unsporting behavior would be in order. If the referee believed that it had been merely the kicker’s enthusiasm or an honest mistake, the referee would warn the first kicker to await his signal for the retake and make certain that all other potential kickers are aware of the warning. If the player then took his kick early, he would be cautioned. Given the “shoot-out” situation of kicks from the penalty mark, all other kickers would have received the warning and would also be liable for caution if they kicked early.

Any instance of unsporting behavior must be in the opinion of the referee, based on that particular act in that particular game at that particular moment of the game. Although there are certain actions that will always be unsporting behavior, we cannot arbitrarily set a list of actions that must be called as unsporting behavior in the case of feinting at a penalty kick. The referee has to take responsibility for some of his own decisions.

O, THOSE CRAFTY COACHES!
Your question:
In a U-14 boys game, one team was playing an offside trap while the other was positioning 2-3 players along the halfway line to look for break-out possibilities. I have done the center in about 80 youth games and feel comfortable with my position on the field and reliance on my AR’s, both teen-agers with extensive soccer travel experience. However, one situation arose late in the game which caused some confusion:
Team A intercepted a cross from Team B close to A’s goal. A Team A defender then send a long ball toward the halfway line. A’s own striker, on his own side of the field, received the ball, beat the Team B sweeper (who had moved all the way up), then proceeded to dribble over the halfway line toward Team B’s goal. As he dribbled, he noticed one of his teammates sprinting ahead and to his right. Remember that both of these Team A players are now behind Team B’s defense with only the goal-keeper ahead of them. The player dribbling the ball then unselfishly played the ball FORWARD and to his right, where his teammate received the ball. My AR put up his flag, judging that the ball was played forward, and not flat, with 1, not 2, defenders between the last offensive player and the goal. I accepted the flag and whistled for offside. The opposing coaches at game’s end challenged the call on the following basis: their center forward had already beaten the last defender and as a result, no offside could take place even if the ball was played to another one of their players located ahead of the dribbler.

Offside or not? And if so, why — or why not?

USSF answer (May 13, 2003):
Ah, those crafty coaches, at it again! Well, this time, as usual, they are wrong.

A player is in an offside position if he is ahead of the ball and nearer to the opposing goal than at least two opponents. Even if all opponents have been beaten, he must still remain behind the ball. So, if the player “sprinting ahead and to his right” was ahead of the passer and the ball when the ball was played, then he was offside. If he was level with or behind the ball, then he was not offside, no matter where he receives the ball.

HOW ABOUT THEM LOGO’D SOCKS?
Your question:
It has been noticed that the referee socks for the Professional Soccer matches (MLS/WUSA) have changed from the 3 strips to the USSF logo. Is this going to trickle down to all referees eventually will have to wear this style?

USSF answer (May 13, 2003):
The referee socks worn in the professional matches are an alternative sock, suitable for wear by any referee. Either the black socks with three-stripe white top or the new logo¹d sock may be worn. Just remember that all members of an officiating team should strive to wear the same uniform color and sock style.

The officiating team may wear the official uniform jersey, gold with black pin stripes, black collar, black cuffs (long sleeve), or no cuff (short sleeve); or any of the three alternative jerseys, black with white pin stripes, black collar, black cuffs (long sleeve) or no cuffs (short sleeve); red with black pin stripes, black collar, black cuffs (long sleeve), or no cuffs (short sleeve); or blue with black pin stripes, black collar, black cuffs (long sleeve), or no cuffs (short sleeve). All should be worn with the black shorts, and black socks with three-stripe white top or the new logo¹d sock, and black shoes.

NOTE: See the full article on new uniform items in the upcoming issue of Fair Play.

GET THE LOCATION RIGHT, PLEASE!
Your question:
We had a player in the process of going for a goal, a defending player fouled him on the penalty box line deliberately to prevent the goal. The player tripped on the ball falling into the penalty box. The referee red carded the defender saying it was deliberate to prevent the goal. The players started to line up for a penalty kick, but the ref said it was going to be a direct kick. The player started to line up for that and then the ref said the game had ended, time had run out and he wasn’t allowed to take the kick. Should he have been able to take the kick? How can the game end on a penalty? When someone is red carded, isn’t time added on for whatever time it took to do that? And even if time had ended at that moment, shouldn’t the kick still be allowed? I asked the ref, he said only if it was a penalty kick would he be allowed to take the kick. In reading the laws of the game, we couldn’t find a definitive answer, especially if it was a direct kick.

Is this one of those “at the discretion of the ref calls”? We actually thought it really should have been a penalty kick, the player upon falling was quite a ways into the box. The ref said he was tripped right on the line of the box though, and that’s why just a direct kick was awarded. Shouldn’t he still have been given the chance to take it?

USSF answer (May 13, 2003):
There are actually two questions to answer here: (1) Did the referee end the game correctly and (2) How about the free kick/penalty kick?

(1) There is no set or particular moment or method to end a game. Law 5 empowers the referee to act as timekeeper and to keep a record of the match. Law 7 instructs the referee to add time (at his discretion) for time lost in either half of a game or in any overtime period for the reasons listed in Law 7 (Allowance for Time Lost). Referees allow additional time in all periods for all time lost through substitution(s), assessment of injury to players, removal of injured players from the field of play for treatment,wasting time, as well as ³other causes² that consume time, such as kick-offs, throw-ins, dropped balls, free kicks, and replacement of lost or defective balls. Some referees will end the playing period while the ball is in play and there is no threat to either goal, such as allowing a team to take a goal kick and then ending the period. Others will end the playing period at a stoppage. Our advice is to do what is both comfortable for the referee and fair to the players. There is no need to extend time for any free kick other than a penalty kick. And that brings us to your second question.

(2) Only the referee is able to judge where the foul occurred. If the referee did indeed state that the foul occurred “right on the line of the box,” then he should have awarded a penalty kick, as the lines belong to the areas they demarcate. If you have stated his words correctly, this was a major error for the referee. Our apologies to your team.

NO DUPLICATE NUMBERS
Your question:
I recently had an onfield discussion about the legality of two field players wearing the same number, while on the field at the same time. I am a USSF referee, but I also coach a U-12 team. The head coach of the opposing team declared that it was totally legal. I believe that he was in the wrong. To me as a referee, I would consider this to be unsporting behavior. Could I get your opinion in this matter?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
This April 2, 2003, answer from the archives should take care of most of your question:
“The Laws of the Game neither require numbers nor set standards for them. Numbers are governed by the rules of the competition in which the player’s team is participating, i. e., the league, cup, or tournament in which the team competes. The referee should worry only about any requirements regarding numbers in the rules of the competition in which he or she is officiating.”

The only addition might be that most rules of competition forbid duplication of numbers by players of the same team. In other words, two players on the same team may not wear the same number.

RESTART AFTER OFFSIDE
Your question:
After an offside where is the the free kick taken from, where the person was offside, or where a player last touched the ball?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
Offside is punished where the infringement occurred. In other words, the indirect free kick should be taken from the place where the offside player was when his teammate played the ball. The kick should NOT be taken from the place where the second-to-last defender was NOR where the player was at the moment the offside was called NOR where the ball was NOR where the referee was standing NOR where the teammate was when he touched the ball NOR anywhere other than where the infringement occurred.

SMOKE GETS IN YOUR EYES
Your question:
I am a coach for a 3rd grade youth soccer team. Can you please help me as I have tried to find the answer to my question in the FIFA Rule book but I haven’t had any luck.

Towards the end of the half the opposition takes a shot at our goalie. Our goalie gets into position to catch it and the referee blows the whistle while to ball is travelling towards the goalie. The goalie hesitate or gets distracted by the whistle and the ball hits him and trickles into the goal. Is this a Goal? The Referee said it was a Goal and I questioned it and he insisted this was the rule and that he had this incident on a previous occation. I told him I have never heard about this rule and if he is so sure then I do accept the goal been scored. I when on to tell him why he didn’t let the ball be played by the goalie and then whistle the play. He said the kids (8 year olds) should know the rule and should not stop playing. I went on to tell him this is a contradition to what we tell thekids to do, keepplaying at all times UNTIL THEY HEAR THE WHISLTE BLOW.

Is there such a rule?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
Your referee was not only blowing the whistle, he was also blowing smoke. Once the referee blows the whistle, play has stopped. In fact, play has actually stopped when the referee makes the decision to stop play. Final answer? No such rule and no goal in this case.

REFEREE MISTAKES
Your question:
If a referee makes a mistake and he stops play. should play be restarted with a dropped ball?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
It depends. Specifically, it depends on what kind of mistake the referee has made.

If the mistake was in stopping play in the first place (what is sometimes called an “inadvertent whistle” — and one of the reasons we recommend that referees in this country not run around the field with the whistle in their mouth), then you are correct, play restarts with a dropped ball.

If the mistake was in announcing the restart, then the referee can simply correct the error by quickly calling the ball back and letting everyone know what the correct restart is supposed to be. For example, the referee might mistakenly announce a throw-in for Blue when he meant to say (and/or meant to point in favor of) Red. There is no problem with calling the throw-in back and giving the ball to Red (consider also a simple admission of having goofed and vow to do better next time).

If the mistake is in awarding a goal which was invalid, the kick-off restart sets the goal into the record books and nothing more can be done except explain the error in the game report. Likewise, if a card is mistakenly shown to the wrong player and play has restarted, the card must stand and the referee must explain the circumstances in his game report.

In short, not always.

OFFSIDE
Your question:
I have a queston about offsides. I understand the offsides rule but say a player of an attacking team is even with the last defender. An a defensive player lobs the ball back to the last defender who heads the ball in favor of the attacking player which puts him in an offsides postion. Is this still offsides even though it was headed toward the attaking teams goal which put the attaker in that postion?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
It would seem that perhaps you do not understand offside quite as well as you thought. If the ball is last played to a player in an offside position by an opponent who was fully in control of the ball (as in this case), there can be NO OFFSIDE. For offside to be called, the player in the offside position must be actively involved in play and must receive the ball from a teammate (with the exception of a ball played by a teammate deflecting off an opponent, which does not apply here).

If the attacking player was even with the last defender he would be in an offside position anyway — unless you meant to include the goalkeeper. A player must be no nearer the opposing goal than the last two opposing players to avoid being in an offside position.

COACHES ARE _NOT_ ALLOWED TO COACH THE REFEREE
Your question:
I centered a U14B game during which one of the coaches continually called out comments and instructions to me. None were abusive but ranged from telling me which way a throw in should go to whether I should have called a foul to informing me I shouldn’t add time for an injured player. While this problem is not directly addressed in the Laws of the Game, the Advice to Referees says that coaches are limited to technical coaching of their team.

While I don’t think my calling of the game or my ability to control the game, it did become clear that the coach was getting “into the heads” of the other team’s coach, its players and fans – if my call was in line with what this coach was yelling they thought I had been influenced.

This experience has led me to believe that, while I can sympathize with a coach being emotional and wanting to comment on the referee’s calls (much as is done in basketball, American football, and baseball) I will have to clamp down on coaches like this for the good of the game.

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
You have given your own answer to the question: “. . . coaches are limited to technical coaching of their team.” They are not allowed to coach the referee as well. That is irresponsible behavior and, unless the referee stamps it out immediately with a firm warning, can lead to major problems. And because it is irresponsible behavior, the referee could exercise the rights granted in Law 5 to dismiss the coach for such behavior.

PASSING THE BALL TO THE ‘KEEPER
Your question:
Could you please clarify the pass back rule to the keeper. I thought a pass back could only come from the head of a defender.

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
A goalkeeper infringes Law 12 if he touches the ball with his hands directly after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a teammate. The requirement that the ball be kicked means only that it has been played with the foot. The requirement that the ball be “kicked to” the goalkeeper means only that the play is to or toward a place where the keeper can legally handle the ball. The requirement that the ball be “deliberately kicked” means that the play on the ball is deliberate and does not include situations in which the ball has been, in the opinion of the referee, accidentally deflected or misdirected. The goalkeeper has infringed the Law if he handles the ball after initially playing the ball in some other way (e.g., with his feet).

You are incorrect in suggesting that “a pass back could only come from the head of a defender.” As the above description of the infringement indicates, the only limitation is that the “pass back” can’t come from the foot of the defender. Furthermore, it is incorrect to focus on the “pass back” element of this violation because the “pass back” by itself is not illegal, no matter how it is done. What is illegal is the goalkeeper handling the ball under certain conditions.

PLAYER EQUIPMENT
Your question:
I recently saw a 15 year old girl playing goalie get kicked in the face by another player. Neither player was out of line or playing dirty, etc. I have since heard stories of cleats being literally buried in a goalie’s skull, noses broken, throat kicks and all of this is because the goalie is doing what they are coached to do and the players are doing what they are coached to do. Has anyone ever proposed a face mask for the goalie? It used to be that you never saw anyone where a helmet on a bike, now, you rarely see anyone without. Skiing is definitely going he same way. The helmet material would have to be designed to minimize risk to the striker’s foot, etc. I cannot see how it would interfere with play, or alter the game, just save some young person’s face some day.

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
Yes, face masks have been proposed and they have been rejected by the world governing body of soccer. For further information, please read this memorandum from the U. S. Soccer Federation:
From the U.S. Soccer Communications Center — March 12, 2003

Memorandum

To: State Referee Administrators cc: State Presidents
State Youth Referee Administrators Affiliated Members
State Directors of Referee Instruction
State Directors of Referee Assessment
National Assessors
National Instructors
National Referees

From: Julie Ilacqua
Managing Director of Federation Services

Re: Player’s Equipment

Date: March 7, 2003

_________________________________________________________

USSF has received a number of inquiries recently about how officials should handle situations where players wish to wear equipment that is not included in the list of basic compulsory equipment in FIFA Laws of the Game. Referees are facing increased requests from players for permission to wear kneepads, elbowpads, headbands, soft casts, goggles, etc.

The only concrete guidance in the Laws of the Game is found in Law 4:

This is followed by a list of required uniform items: jersey, shorts, socks, shoes, and shinguards. Obviously, this language is quite general. USSF suggests the following approach to issues involving player equipment and uniforms:

1. Look to the applicable rules of the competition authority.
Some leagues, tournaments, and soccer organizations have specific local rules covering player uniforms and what other items may or may not be worn on the field during play. Referees who accept match assignments governed by these rules are obligated to enforce them. Note, however, that local rules cannot restrict the referee’s fundamental duty to ensure the safety of players.

2. Inspect the equipment.
All items of player equipment and uniforms must be inspected. However, anything outside the basic compulsory items must draw the particular attention of the referee and be inspected with special regard to safety. USSF does not “pre-approve” any item of player equipment by type or brand — each item must be evaluated individually.

3. Focus on the equipment itself — not how it might be improperly used, or whether it actually protects the player.
Generally, the referee’s safety inspection should focus on whether the equipment has such dangerous characteristics as: sharp edges, hard surfaces, pointed corners, dangling straps or loops, or dangerous protrusions. The referee should determine whether the equipment, by its nature, presents a safety risk to the player wearing it or to other players. If the equipment does not present such a safety risk, the referee should permit the player to wear it.

The referee should not forbid the equipment simply because it creates a possibility that a player could use it to foul another player or otherwise violate the Laws of the Game. However, as the game progresses, an item that the referee allowed may become dangerous, depending on changes in its condition (wear and tear) or on how the player uses it. Referees must be particularly sensitive to unfair or dangerous uses of player equipment and must be prepared to order a correction of the problem whenever they become aware of it.

The referee also should not forbid the equipment because of doubts about whether it actually protects the player. There are many new types of equipment on the market that claim to protect players. A referee’s decision to allow a player to use equipment is not an endorsement of the equipment and does not signify that the referee believes the player will be safer while wearing the equipment.

4. Remember that the referee is the final word on whether equipment is dangerous.
Players, coaches, and others may argue that certain equipment is safe. They may contend that the equipment has been permitted in previous matches, or that the equipment actually increases the player’s safety. These arguments may be accompanied by manufacturer’s information, doctor’s notes, etc. However, as with all referee decisions, determining what players may wear within the framework of the Laws of the Game and applicable local rules depends on the judgment of the referee. The referee must strive to be fair, objective, and consistent – but the final decision belongs to the referee.

REVIEW OF SEND-OFFS/DISMISSALS
Your question:
I am new to soccer refereeing. I recently visited a home page for a local (AYSO) tournament and I read: “Tournament director may review all send-offs and ejections!”

Is this customary? I was under the impression that the referee was the final arbiter and his decision is final, at least under AYSO policies….. Am I (again) confused?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
What is probably meant here is nothing more than that the tournament director will review all send-offs to determine what additional penalties might be imposed. We cannot speak for AYSO, but a full review of send-offs or dismissals with the result of changing them to allow a player (or team official) back in the next game would not be allowed for games played under the auspices of the U. S. Soccer Federation, where the referee’s decision is indeed final. FIFA has recently reiterated its position that no such review can change what must now be considered the equivalent of a new international regulation mandating the one subsequent match suspension for any send-off or dismissal.

GOALKEEPER OUT OF THE PLAY
Your question:
Situation: During an attack the goalkeeper is incapacitated. This occurred because of a collision with his teammate. At our last referee meeting a referee presented the following thought to the group – if the goalkeeper is incapacitated as noted above (not a foul) play should be stopped because the team no longer has a goalkeeper. The stoppage of play would not be because of a foul, or because of injury, but because the team no longer has a participating goalkeeper. Safety issue aside, I am wondering about the fairness of stopping an attack for this reason.

In October 1999 you gave a detailed answer that said play continues, the goalkeeper is still the goalkeeper, assuming no foul, and not, in the opinion of the referee, a serious injury. Question? Has there been a change in thinking regarding this issue?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
No, there has been no change in the thinking regarding this issue. The earlier answer is still valid. It is restated in slightly different words below:

Question:
A goalkeeper appears incapacitated without any infringement of the law and play continues near him. What criterion should the referee use to stop play and attend to the goalkeeper’s injury? How is this criterion fair when the goalkeeper is faking? When he is seriously injured? When he is unconscious? If a goal is scored and the referee decides that he should have stopped play sooner, can he reverse the goal? If he does reverse the goal, what/where would be the restart?

Answer:
The only criterion to use is common sense. Law 3 tells us that a match is played by two teams, each consisting of not more than eleven players, one of whom is the goalkeeper. It does not say that the goalkeeper must always be on his feet and moving, nor even on the field if his momentum has carried him off. Law 5 tells us that the referee stops the match if, in his opinion, a player is seriously injured and ensures that he is removed from the field of play, allows play to continue until the ball is out of play if a player is, in his opinion, only slightly injured, and ensures that any player bleeding from a wound leaves the field of play. The referee also acts on the advice of assistant referees regarding incidents which he has not seen. If the goalkeeper is faking and the referee falls for it, then the goalkeeper must be cautioned and shown the yellow card for unsporting behavior (and, upon repetition, etc., etc.).

If a goal is scored while the goalkeeper is on the ground, a goal is scored. Full stop. The referee is not obliged to hold the players’ hands in the game. He can only act when he is aware that something is amiss. Neither can the referee change the Law to suit his purpose, i. e., taking away a legitimate goal because the goalkeeper was out of the play. The Latin phrase has it correctly: Lex dura, sed lex. (The law is hard, but it is the law.)

If the goalkeeper was taken out by one of the opponents, the referee does have cause to revoke the goal, but he cannot do it without just cause — and sympathy is not just cause. If the referee does revoke the goal for a legitimate foul, the restart would be for whatever the foul was. The lack of consciousness is not a foul and not a ground for revocation.

In the question asked earlier, there was no foul. Life is hard, just like the law, but both are immutable by mere humans.

A CHORUS LINE?
Your question:
At a recent match we had some girls that when they kicked their leg went up past their head. i thought this would be considered dangerous play, due to the fact they were kicking at the heads of the other kids. luckly no one was hit but there was several very close calls. i asked the ref. and he didn’t even acknowage me.

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
It is too bad that the referee didn’t acknowledge you, but players and coaches are not supposed to question the referee at all, so you will have to forgive him.

This is what we teach referees about “playing dangerously,” as written in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” section 12.13:
QUOTE
12.13 PLAYING IN A DANGEROUS MANNER
Playing “in a dangerous manner” can be called only if the act, in the opinion of the referee, meets three criteria: the action must be dangerous to someone (including the player himself), it was committed with an opponent close by, and the dangerous nature of the action caused this opponent to cease his active play for the ball or to be otherwise disadvantaged by his attempt not to participate in the dangerous play. Merely committing a dangerous act is not, by itself, an offense (e.g., kicking high enough that the cleats show or attempting to play the ball while on the ground). Committing a dangerous act while an opponent is near by is not, by itself, an offense. The act becomes an offense only when an opponent is adversely and unfairly affected, usually by the opponent ceasing to challenge for the ball in order to avoid receiving or causing injury as a direct result of the player’s act. Playing in a manner considered to be dangerous when only a teammate is nearby is not a foul. Remember that fouls may be committed only against opponents or the opposing team.

In judging a dangerous play offense, the referee must take into account the experience and skill level of the players. Opponents who are experienced and skilled may be more likely to accept the danger and play through. Younger players have neither the experience nor skill to judge the danger adequately and, in such cases, the referee should intervene on behalf of their safety. For example, playing with cleats up in a threatening or intimidating manner is more likely to be judged a dangerous play offense in youth matches, without regard to the reaction of opponents.
END OF QUOTE

DELIBERATE HANDLING
Your question:
Isn’t a hand ball a hand ball when was this unintentional law incorporated

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
Law 12 (Fouls and Misconduct) tells us: “A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player . . . handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area).” Please note the word “deliberately.”

Two sections from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” follow. They should give you all the information you need to understand deliberate handling.

QUOTE
12.9 DELIBERATE HANDLING
The offense known as “handling the ball” involves deliberate contact with the ball by a player’s hand or arm (including fingertips, upper arm, or outer shoulder). “Deliberate contact” means that the player could have avoided the touch but chose not to, that the player’s arms were not in a normal playing position at the time, or that the player deliberately continued an initially accidental contact for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage. Moving hands or arms instinctively to protect the body when suddenly faced with a fast approaching ball does not constitute deliberate contact unless there is subsequent action to direct the ball once contact is made. Likewise, placing hands or arms to protect the body at a free kick or similar restart is not likely to produce an infringement unless there is subsequent action to direct or control the ball. The fact that a player may benefit from the ball contacting the hand does not transform the otherwise accidental event into an infringement. A player infringes the Law regarding handling the ball even if direct contact is avoided by holding something in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.).

12.10 RULE OF THUMB FOR “HANDLING”
The rule of thumb for referees is that it is handling if the player plays the ball, but not handling if the ball plays the player. The referee should punish only deliberate handling of the ball, meaning only those actions when the player (and not the goalkeeper within his own penalty area) strikes or propels the ball with his hand or arm (shoulder to tip of fingers).
END OF QUOTE

PLAYER CAPS
Your question:
What does CAPS stand for and what does it mean?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
“Player caps” refers to a tradition established in England many years ago. Wearing caps as part of soccer uniform, to distinguish teams by cap colors, goes back to 1654. The custom continued, as shown in many photos of famous mid-19th century amateur teams with all-capped players. Pro clubs also wore caps. A special England “cap” was introduced by FA in 1886 with the citation “For players who have gained full international honours for England.”

Today, recognized categories are decided by FIFA. In addition to the usual categories of games at A, B, Under-23, Amateur, Youth and other levels, the list is growing with the introduction of Women’s Under-19, handicapped players etc.

Nowadays caps are usually awarded only for matches against full international teams in the same category.

RESTART FOR DELIBERATE HANDLING
Your question:
Are all hand balls direct kicks ?

USSF answer (May 12, 2003):
IF the handling is deemed by the referee to be deliberate, then, yes, all cases of deliberate handling are punished by direct free kicks (or penalty kicks, depending on where the handling was committed and by whom). If the referee deems the handling to be not deliberate, then there is no foul at all and thus no free kick.

In addition, a handling offense could also merit a caution or a send-off as misconduct.

THE ‘KEEPER _CANNOT_ BE SENT OFF FOR HANDING THE BALL IN HIS OWN PENALTY AREA!!!!
Your question:
I have been reading the questions and answers to the obvious goal scoring opportunity denied and I need some clarification about the answers given with respect to a passback to the keeper.

Here is a typical example seen in a game: A defender with the ball passes the ball to his keeper. The keeper tries to trap the ball and misses. The keeper then turns and runs after the ball and stops it with their hands. From the referees position, he determines that the ball would have continued into the goal if the keeper did not stop it.

Now let’s put two common situations onto the above.

#1 There are no opposing team players pressuring the ball (let’s say for argument’s sake, no attackers within twenty yards of the ball) when the keeper misses the ball and chases it down and handles the ball.

#2 An opposing team player is pressureing the defender and chases after the ball. The attacker is five yards from the ball when the keeper misses the ball. The attacker continues to chase the ball and would have reached the ball first if not for the keeper diving to handle the ball.

If we read the position paper on the Obvious goal-scoring opportunity denied (the 4 Ds), it states that all four elements MUST be present and must be obvious for a send off to happen. In both #1 & #2 above we can say that element #1 (number of defenders) & element #2 (distance to goal) have been met. Now we get to element #3 (distance to ball) & element #4 (direction of play). If we look at element #3, it states that “the attacker must have been close enough to the ball at the time of the foul to have continued playing the ball.” This statement leads me to believe that an attacker must be making a play for the ball and if an attacker is not within twenty yards of the ball (as in #1 above) then the attacker is not “close enough to the ball to have continued playing the ball”. Therefore, it seems that the correct call for the referee to make for #1 above is a simple handling by the keeper from a pass back.

If we now look at #2 above and element #3 of the 4 Ds, we have an attacker chasing the ball to within five yards of the keeper and then chasing the ball after the keeper misses the ball. This seems to meet element #3 of the 4 Ds. Element #4 of the 4 Ds is also meet due to the referee determining that the ball would have gone into the goal if not touched by the keeper and the attacking player chasing the ball would be moving toward the goal. In this situation, it seems that the correct call would be a send off for the keeper.

Do you agree with this interpretation of the 4 Ds or has the referee community changed their thinking to, any ball kicked to the keeper from his teammates and the keeper handles the ball, and from the keepers position when he handles the ball, the ball would have ended up in the goal that this is now a send off?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
There has been no change of thinking anywhere. The reason the goalkeeper cannot be punished for using his hands in the penalty area is because he is specifically exempted from punishment under Send-Off reason 4: “this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area.” That applies not only to reason 4, but to reason 5 as well.

Higher up in Law 12 it also states: A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following four offenses: – tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball
– holds an opponent
– spits at an opponent
– handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)

The goalkeeper’s JOB is to handle the ball. Why would we punish him/her for doing what is supposed to be done?

And, finally, this answer is clearly grounded in the “4 Ds” memorandum. Indeed, the “4 Ds” memorandum requires this answer.

CALL SORTING: THE WAY TO GO
Your question:
I am a grade 8 referee upgrading to 7, and hopefully to 6 next year. I am looking for helpful ideas on applying the rule that says a foul is committed if when tackling for the ball the player makes contact with the opposing player before making contact with the ball. What are the playing conditions when this constitutes a foul?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
This foul occurs when a player attempts to tackle for the ball but, instead of taking the ball directly, makes contact first with the opponent’s foot or leg and then takes the ball. This often occurs when the tackler has not settled him- or herself before attempting the tackle. The International F. A. Board’s intent with this foul is part of their general campaign against fouls committed while tackling from behind and/or which endanger the safety of an opponent.

Both referees and players must remember that stating the rule this way doesn’t mean that contact with the opponent AFTER making contact with the ball is therefore legal. It all depends on how the player does it.

“SWEARING”
Your question:
In soccer can you get a yellow card for swearing in the game?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
“Swearing” unconnected with completing an affidavit is red card misconduct if the referee determines that the language or gestures are offensive, insulting, or abusive. The referee might decide to caution for the language if he decides that it doesn’t fit into one of these categories but it is instead unsporting behavior (bringing the game into disrepute) or was committed to express dissent with an official’s decision.

KICKING THE BALL IN THE ‘KEEPER’S POSSESSION
Your question:
In a recent U-10 game, there was a scramble for the ball in front of the goal. The keeper, while lying on the ground, reached out to the side and put one hand on top of the ball so that the ball was sandwiched between the ground and the keepers hand. A split second later, an opposing player arrived and kicked the ball from this position into the net. Is this a goal?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
The goalkeeper establishes possession of the ball if he holds it down with only one finger. From that moment he has approximately six seconds to release the ball into play. Any player who attempts to play the ball while it is in the goalkeeper’s decision is preventing the ‘keeper from releasing the ball and thus infringes Law 12. If the player kicks at the goalkeeper’s hand to gain the ball, the player has committed a direct free kick foul and could possibly be cautioned for unsporting behavior and shown the yellow card. It the kicker makes contact with the goalkeeper’s hand, he could be sent off for serious foul play and shown the red card.

UNUSUAL INFRINGEMENT OF LAW 14
Your question:
At the taking of a penalty kick, a teammate of the kicker encroaches and the kicker plays the ball forward to that teammate. Does this result in an indirect free kick to the defense?

The LOTG and the advice to referees only reference an indirect free kick for the defense if the ball rebounds from the goalposts or the GK and goes to a encroaching teammate of the kicker.

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
There is no concrete direction on this from the International F. A. Board or FIFA. Nevertheless, it seems clear that their intent is that play be stopped, the teammate of the kicker admonished or cautioned as appropriate, and play restarted with an indirect free kick.

GOALKEEPER “HANDLING”; PLAYER RE-ENTERS WITHOUT PERMISSION
Your question:
1. The Player intentional passes the ball back to his own goalkeeper who fumbles the ball with his feet and to prevent a goal the goalkeeper uses his hands to stop the ball from entering his own goal. What do you do? (Is it unsporting behaviour…caution….re-start with IDK?)

2. The Player (#12) is sent off to adjust his equipment. #12 then returns WITHOUT THE REFEREE’S PREMISSION, and is immediately given a goal scoring opportunity. #12 is then violently tackled from behind by his opponent while in the penalty area. WHAT DO YOU DO??

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
1. Indirect free kick. Why would one look for misconduct here? It is a simple violation of Law 12.

2. Caution #12 for re-entering the field without the referee’s permission and show him the yellow card. As the referee was unable to stop play for the caution before the violent tackle from behind, the opponent who tackled #12 violently, and thus endangered #12’s safety, must be sent off for serious foul play (if they were competing for the ball) or violent conduct (if they were not) and shown the red card.

OFFSIDE
Your question:
The attacking team is advancing towards the goal and have crossed the midfield line. Attacking Midfielder has the ball and passes to a forward clearly in an off sides position just forward of the sweeper. The sweeper intercepts the ball and in doing so kicks the ball out of bounds. The referee awarded the ball to the attacking team ruling that there was no offsides. The defending team believed that as the attacking team benefited from the off sides position should of been awarded the ball.

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
And just how did the attacking team benefit? Did they score a goal?

The referee must weigh a number of things in deciding to call offside. First is offside position. Then comes who last played the ball, whether teammate or opponent. Then comes involvement in play, meaning whether or not the player was interfering with play, interfering with an opponent, or gained an advantage by being in the offside position. The opinion of the defending team does not appear anywhere in the equation. In this situation, the referee clearly decided there was no involvement in play by the attacking midfielder. Therefore, there was no offside.

On the other hand, the referee (despite what he actually did) COULD also have decided that the attacker in question was involved in active play and given offside. What we need to avoid here is the assumption on the part of anyone that, just because a defender happened to kick the ball, offside cannot be given in a situation like this (i.e., attacker clearly in offside position, ball clearly played to him but intercepted and then possession lost immediately thereafter).

KICKS FROM THE PENALTY MARK
Your question:
In this procedure, the goalkeeper being an eligible player, must he take a penalty kick before any player can take a second kick. I suggest that he does but I am confused with the last paragraph in the Laws of The Game.

Before the start of kicks from the penalty mark the referee shall ensure that only an equal number of players from each team remain within the centre circle and they shall take the kicks.

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
Yes, all players eligible for kicks from the penalty mark must kick before any member of this group kicks a second time.

‘KEEPER DOWN, TOO BAD; INTERFERING WITH AN OPPONENT OR PLAY
Your question:
Situation 1: A blue team player attempts to kick the ball into the goal, and kicks the ball directly to the goal keeper. As the keeper attempts to catch the ball, another blue team player jumps up and attempts to head the ball into the goal (missing the ball completely) knocking the keeper to ground. The keeper manages to deflect the ball, but while on the ground, a goal is scored by another blue player. Is this a goal?

Situation 2: Can a player in an offside position interfere with play if he is just standing still on the weak side of the goal keeper? For example, the keeper is trying to maintain a defensive position to defend the goal from the strong side of the field. However, an opponent, in an offside position, is standing within 10 yards on the opposite side of the keeper. The keeper is well aware of the opponent, is distracted by the offside player, and moves out of position to defend against the offside opponent. Is this an offside offense?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
The goalkeeper has no more rights than any other player — other than to be able to play the ball with his hands within his own penalty area.

1. If, in the opinion of the referee, the goalkeeper was knocked down in the course of play through no fault of an opponent, then no foul has been committed. That would appear to be the case in the situation you describe. Yes, this is a goal.

2. Goalkeepers should know better than to mark any player. The important element in scoring is the opponent with the ball, not an opponent without the ball in an offside position. The referee should only decide that a player is interfering with play or with an opponent if that player ‹ in the opinion of the referee, not in the opinion of the opponents ‹ truly interferes with play or with an opponent in the area of active play. If so, then he should be called offside. Mere presence anywhere on the field should not be considered a distraction for the opponents.

REFEREE CODE OF ETHICS
Your question:
I may be totally imagining a rule, but isn’t there a rule about not being the Center or the A/R at your own child’s game or is it just an unwritten code of ethics?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
In the Referee Administrative Handbook, p. 33, it suggests that assistant referees should not be related in any way to either team participating in the game unless it is impossible to get other affiliated officials assigned. Unfortunately, sometimes the referee game assignors do not have enough bodies to go around and ask parents or siblings to referee games in which their kin will be playing.

PUSHING/HOLDING; IMPEDING; URL FOR “ADVICE”
Your question:
1. Player A has possession of the ball and Player B is attempting to regain possession. Player A keeps the ball on the far side of player B and has an extended locked arm towards Player B so as to maximize space and maintain possession. Can this be considered a foul as long as the arm is fully extended and no pushing (a little leaning but no bending of the arm as in a push) on Player A’s part is observed?

2. In my many years coaching I have seen obstruction calls for some questionable scenarios. Can you please describe the proper use of an obstruction call. My concern is that I have seen referees call a player whom I would term “shielding the ball” as obstructing play. So I’m a bit confused as to what is and is not acceptable.

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
1. If we were playing the football with the pointy-ended ball, this would be fine. Unfortunately for player A, we are dealing with soccer, and his action in this situation is not permitted. The referee should stop play for pushing (or, depending on the circumstances, possibly holding) by player A and restart with a direct free kick for the opponents from the place where the infringement occurred.

2. “Obstruction” is now known as “impeding.” An excellent answer to your question will be found in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” section 12.14, IMPEDING AN OPPONENT:
QUOTE
“Impeding the progress of an opponent” means moving on the field so as to obstruct, interfere with, or block the path of an opponent. Impeding can include crossing directly in front of the opponent or running between him and the ball so as to form an obstacle with the aim of delaying his advance. There will be many occasions during a game when a player will come between an opponent and the ball, but in the majority of such instances, this is quite natural and fair. It is often possible for a player not playing the ball to be in the path of an opponent and still not be guilty of impeding.

The offense requires that the ball not be within playing distance or not capable of being played, and physical contact between the player and the opponent is normally absent. If physical contact occurs, the referee should, depending on the circumstances, consider instead the possibility that a charging infringement has been committed (direct free kick) or that the opponent has been fairly charged off the ball (indirect free kick). However, nonviolent physical contact may occur while impeding the progress of an opponent if, in the opinion of the referee, this contact was an unavoidable consequence of the impeding (due, for example, to momentum).
END OF QUOTE

The Advice to Referees may be downloaded from this URL:
http://www.ussoccer.com/referees/default.sps?iType=220&icustompageid=122.
It’s the Laws of the Game page with a link to the following page:
http://www.ussoccer.com/templates/includes/services/referees/pdfs/Advice2001.pdf

BALL PRESSURE
Your question:
What is the correct pressure for Size 5, 4 & 3 Soccer balls?

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
All balls used in games played under the Laws of the Game must be of a pressure equal to 0.6 – 1.1 atmosphere (600 – 1100 g/cm 2 ) at sea level (8.5 lbs/sq in 15.6 lbs/sq in).

For those who have forgotten, U-13s and older play with a number 5 ball, which has a circumference of 27-28 inches and must weigh 14-16 ounces at the beginning of the game. U-10s-12s play with a number 4 ball, which has a circumference of 25-26 inches and must weigh between 11 and 13 ounces at the beginning of the game. U-9s and younger play with a number 3 ball, which has a circumference of 23-24 inches and must weigh between 11 and 12 ounces at the beginning of the game.

JUGGLING ‘KEEPER ASKS . . .
Your question:
In a recent adult game, I, the keeper, came out on an on rushing opponent as the ball was bouncing above our heads. I reached up and knocked the ball away from my opponent, without touching him, and then caught the ball on the next touch. Is this legal by FIFA standards and if not what type of foul is awarded to my opponent??? Please help—-Juggling Keeper!!!!!

USSF answer (May 9, 2003):
The answer is clearly and specifically stated in the Laws of the Game. Law 12, International F. A. Board Decision 2 tells us: “The goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball by touching it with any part of his hand or arms. Possession of the ball includes the goalkeeper deliberately parrying the ball, but does not include the circumstances where, in the opinion of the referee, the ball rebounds accidentally from the goalkeeper, for example after he has made a save.”

So, if you did not deliberately play the ball to this particular place — and the referee agrees that this was not deliberate — you should not be punished. If the referee believes that you deliberately played the ball to a particular spot, then you have “sinned” and the referee will award an indirect free kick to your opponents.

WHY DO WE CAUTION UNANNOUNCED ‘KEEPER CHANGE?
Your question:
My question is regarding the need to caution players involved in a goalie change where the referee is not notified (especially when this takes place at half time). I don’t understand the severity of this and have a difficult time explaining to the players “why” they are being carded.

Although I do my best to officiate games in accordance with not only the rules of the game, but also the spirit in which they are written, this is one ruling that I “disagree with.”

Can you offer me some further guidance as to why this rule is in place? I want to be able to pass this on to the players and coaches, should the need arise again. I am a veteran referee of 18 years and have been playing soccer since 1972. Thank you for your assistance!

USSF answer (May 7, 2003):
This is a complex question. The rationale for the rule is based in part on the fact that the goalkeeper is the only player allowed to play the ball with his hands. The referee needs to know who this player is to manage the game properly.

The authority for the caution of both the former and current goalkeepers is Law 3: Anytime the goalkeeper is replaced without the required conditions being met (stoppage of play AND notification to referee), the Law demands that the players involved be cautioned, but only after waiting for the next stoppage. This establishes that whoever wears the funny shirt IS the goalkeeper, even if they got that way illegally and getting that way illegally is cautionable.

This authority is further emphasized in the Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game, written by the International Football Association Board (FIFA) and published for the IFAB by FIFA. it can be found under Law 3, Q&A 17:
“17. A player changes places with the goalkeeper during half-time without informing the referee. The new goalkeeper then touches the ball with his hand during the second half. What action does the referee take?
“He allows play to continue and cautions both players for unsporting behavior when the ball goes next out of play.”

The Q&A emphasizes that, even when this occurs during an obvious stoppage, notification of the referee remains a critical element.

See also the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” section 8.3 PLAYER COUNT:
“Count the number of players in both teams before the beginning of each half and after any substitution. The intelligent referee’s signal to start the second half is a tacit acknowledgment that the persons on the field are players and the persons wearing a goalkeeper jersey are the goalkeepers — so long as the persons themselves are not illegal and the team is fielding the proper number of players. This may not be possible during a match played strictly in accordance with the requirements of Law 3 ‹ in other words, most matches other than youth games. During such a match, if the referee discovers that a player has changed places with the goalkeeper during the halftime break without informing the referee, under the letter of the Law the referee should allow play to continue and then caution both players for unsporting behavior when the ball next goes out of play.”

We might add that the referee, by accepting the game assignment and coming to the field, also accepts the rules under which the game is played. There can be no selection of which rule will be enforced and which will not.

PLEASE KEEP UP WITH THE LAWS . . . PLEASE!
Your question:
I am a referee, player, ands coach. My questions involve refereeing, however. First of all, I would like to know what are the new responsibilities of the Assistant referees that were just added for this year. Also, I would like to know why a specific reference to time was removed from the six-second rule for keepers.

USSF answer (May 7, 2003):
There has been no change in the duties of the assistant referee for several years now, nor has there been any change in the six-second rule. The goalkeeper is still punished if he takes more than six seconds while controlling the ball with his hands before releasing it from his possession. Is it possible that you are thinking of the rules for another competition?

WHEN MAY THE ‘KEEPER NOT HANDLE THE BALL?
Your question:
When can a goalie not use his/her hands in the keeper’s box?

USSF answer (May 7, 2003):
The goalkeeper may not use his/her hands in the penalty area — is that what you mean by “keeper’s box”? — when the ball has been deliberately kicked to him/her or thrown in by a teammate, or directly after releasing the ball into play from his/her hands.

TEAMMATE KICKS THE BALL TOWARD ‘KEEPER
Your question:
If a Defender Kicks the Ball away from the attacker over to the Keeper that is in front of the Goal, can the Keeper pick it up or does she have to Kick it. and is that considered a off sides ? U12

USSF answer (May 7, 2003):
If the teammate deliberately kicked the ball to a place where the goalkeeper could play it, then the goalkeeper will infringe the Law by playing it with her hands. However, she may play the ball in any way that does not involve handling (e.g., show could kick it, head it, etc.). If the teammate miskicks the ball and it goes to the ‘keeper, she may play it in any way she wishes.

I am a bit befuddled that you think to connect this with offside. There is no way in which a teammate deliberately kicking the ball to her goalkeeper can make another teammate — and certainly not an opponent — offside.

GAME REPORT FORMS
Your question:
The current Referee Report form provided at ussoccer.com is a piece of garbage. It is intended to be completed on a computer and then printed. How many referees carry a laptop to games? A printer?

I run a youth soccer tournament for 300 teams who play 600 games in 4 days. When is a form, suitable for completion by hand at the game site, going to be provided?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
You can order referee report forms from the National Program for Referee Development office and pay for them. Either that or print out the form on the website and copy it. Using either of those ways, the referees will be able to meet your needs.

REFEREES MUST ALLOW MEDICALERT BRACELETS!!!
Your question:
My son was made to take off his medic alert necklace during a soccer game, can they do that?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
No referee should refuse to allow a medicalert bracelet to be worn if it is properly taped.

Please accept the apology of the National Program for Referee Development. This is something that should not have happened. I have cc’ed the State Referee Administrator for [your state], who will take steps to ensure that it does not happen again.

HOW MUCH WIND IS TOO MUCH WIND?
Your question:
Is there a guideline as to what constitutes sufficient wind to warrant the postponement of a game?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
Use the old stand-by, referee common sense.

WHEN IS IT DISSENT?
Your question:
I maintain if I hear a negative comment, it is dissent, whether it was spoken directly to me or not,and the fact that “I was talking to him!!” doesn’t matter. What is your opinion? Thanks for the great service you provide. Chris Radus

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The intelligent referee will hear only what he or she needs to hear, not everything that is said on the field. If the referee “hears” a comment that could affect game control, then it must be dealt with. If it is not a matter for game control, then it didn’t happen.

You might wish to read through the recent memorandum on Misconduct Involving Language/Gestures, dated March 14, 2003. Although it is focused on abusive, insulting, and offensive language rather than dissent, many of the principles are the same. You will find the memo on this site.

SPECTATING AND REFEREE CODE OF ETHICS
Your question:
I am a referee, and a member of Sam’s Army. Is it permissible under the code of ethics to join in on some of the more colorful cheers that are directed at the referee when a call does not go ‘our way’? I stay quiet…. and just smile…. during them.

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
There is no way we can give you a good answer on this question.

CALL SORTING: THE WAY TO GO
Your question:
The culprit involved in the question entitled “WORLD’S OLDEST SOCCER TRICK REVISITED” of April 30, 2003 was a goalkeeper who caught the ball in his jersey in his own PA. As such he cannot be guilty of handling the ball illegally. But how about a field player? Would this action be a handling foul (simultaneous with the misconduct) if the culprit could be culpable of a handling foul at the location of the incident? If not, how does this case differ from a player who uses his shinguard to play the ball? IFAB says that the shinguard is considered an extension of the hand and using that extension is handling the ball. Why wouldn’t the jersey likewise be considered an extension of the hand?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The player could be considered to have used his hands to control the ball and thus the referee could choose to punish him for the foul as well as for the misconduct. But the intelligent referee would observe all the spectators and other players laughing their heads off and ponder the wisdom of punishing anything more than the unsporting behavior. The intelligent referee does not look for ways to put his neck into the noose.

GOALKEEPER POSSESSION
Your question:
I am confused about the rule covering the GK and bouncing the ball to himself (like dribbling a basketball). My interpretation of Law 12 leads me to believe that this is a violation of the law, and there should be an IDK for the opposing team. However, I have had coaches and other referees tell me this is called “parrying” the ball, and it is legal, according to decision 2 of the FIFA board. I believe the GKs in the MLS do bounce the ball while they are moving to the top of the PA.

I looked up “parrying” in the dictionary and it means “to ward off, evade or turn aside”, which to me clearly refers to the GK blocking or punching shots. Please advise. Thanks.

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The goalkeeper is considered to be in possession of the ball while bouncing it on the ground or while throwing it into the air. Possession is given up if, while throwing the ball into the air, it is allowed to strike the ground.

Parrying the ball — another form of possession — is what happens when the goalkeeper plays the ball with his hands to a place where he can safely play it again with his feet, but does not include the circumstances where, in the opinion of the referee, the ball rebounds accidentally from the goalkeeper, for example after he has made a save. [NOTE: See another answer below.]

TRIFLING OR NOT?
Your question:
I recently did U12 boys game. It was a well played game with little to no need for me to stop play for any reason. The following day, I received an Email from one of the coaches informing me that he thought I had done a good job. However, he felt that I was a bit lax when calling “bad throw-ins.” He thought that both teams were guilty of clearly lifting their back foot off of the ground when executing a throw-in. Actually, I made no calls for technical infringements on throw-ins. I wrote back to him enclosing the copied words from 15.5 Trifling Infringements of Law 15. Along with my own words shown here: “I feel that lax is an incorrect assessment of my performance. It is constantly impressed upon referees not to disrupt the flow of the game by making trifling or doubtful calls. None of the throw-ins were that poorly done to warrant being addressed nor was there any advantage gained by either team through lifting of the back foot. In the opinion of the referee, it was a well played and exciting game from the opening kick-off. Whistling for imperceptible trifling infractions would have detracted from the flow of this game.”

As far as the game goes, I feel as though I had done what was expected of me as a referee. But after sending the Email, I began thinking of how my reply might be interpreted. I began to wonder about not having made the calls. Suppose one on those “bad throw-ins” resulted in a clean break away and a subsequent goal then the technical infringement most certainly would not be trifling. Especially to the defensive team. In this made up scenario, had the lifting of the back foot been called then there would not have been a resulting goal. When is trifling truly trifling? It seems as though true judgment of trifling can only be made in hindsight.

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
You would seem to have called the throw-ins correctly. Trifling is trifling when the result of the action makes absolutely no difference to the game. Or, in other words, when the result is to get the ball back into play, the Law has been served and what comes after that is just part of the game. That said, please talk to the players about proper procedure. They are not permitted to lift their feet during the throw-in.

A word of advice: Never let coaches influence your decisions, before, during, or well after the game has concluded.

Law 13
Your question:
I just need a few clarifications about Law 13 since the books we get are the same ones posted on fifa.com, which are an abridged version. In the taking of a free kick inside the penalty area (such as a goal kick) the team taking the kick may stand in the penalty area, but the opposing team may not go in until the ball is in play. Now, let’s say that only the GK is in the penalty area to take the kick, but the kick is played softly and a player from both teams are running in to get the ball that is still in the penalty area. If player from the team that is taking the kick touches it, the kick is re-taken, but if the opposing team player touches it, is it an indirect kick from where the infringement occurred? Now let’s say that the GK miss-hit and ran after the ball to stop it before it went out of the PA, would he receive a yellow card for unsporting behavior since he is using trickery with an IFK restart, or would the goal kick just be re-taken? And finally, is there a more formal law book besides the basic laws of the game found at FIFA’s website?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The Laws of the Game posted on the FIFA website are not abridged, nor are they different from the Laws of the Game anywhere else. You may be thinking of the rules for various competitions unaffiliated with the world game of soccer, such as those for games played in high school or college, which are crammed with superfluous information.

As to your other questions, you will find the answers within Law 13. Please try reading it again. It is appended here for ease of access.
LAW 13 – Free Kicks
//The Law was quoted in full in the response to the questioner. No need for repetition here.//

OFFSIDE
Your question:
I have only been refereeing for a few years and have not come across this situation until yesterday. I was the AR at a U16 flight 1 match. The attacking team (white) had a player clearly in the offside position in front of the goal. The defending team (blue) had gotten possession of the ball and attempted to clear it out of the PA. The ball struck another defending player on the blue team and then went to the white player in the offside position. He then turned and put the ball in the goal. I thought the player was offside and raised the flag, as I had been taught that any time a player gains an unfair advantage by being in an offside position, it should called. The center ref explained to me that basically if a defending player initiates the play and the ball is either deflected off another defender, or accidentally played to the offside player, that they are not offside.

So, not that anyone would intentionally give the ball to the opposing team on purpose, but if a defender at any time passes the ball to a player on the attacking team in an offside position, they will never be offside?

Is this correct and how do you find this in the rule book? I was not the only person, or ref who did not know or understand this ruling. If this is indeed the correct ruling, it should be clearly written in the rule book and maybe even have an example or two for those of us who do not understand it. The center ref and both of the AR’s looked in the “Laws of the game” book after the match and there was nothing stating this kind of a situation.

Please help me better understand the law, so I can in turn be a better ref.

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
You need look no further than Law 11, Offside, which tells us that a player in an offside position is only penalized if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by ONE OF HIS TEAM, he is involved in play. If the ball is played by one or two opponents (who had full possession of the ball), then a player in an offside position can never be called offside.

CAN THE SUBBED IN PLAYER TAKE A PENALTY KICK?
Your question:
A player and a new referee who played in a State Cup (U13B?) game this past weekend asked me the following question? He was fouled and injured in the penalty area by a slide tackle. He left the field due to his injury and was replaced. His coach wanted the new player to take the penalty kick and the coach from the other team argued against it, stating that only players on the field at the time could take it. The CR did not allow the new player to take the kick. Another player took the kick and the ball hit the post and was cleared by the other team. I did not see anything in the LOTG other than rules about going to PKs after the game has ended to determine a winner. In which case only those on the field at that time can participate. It appears that the CR was incorrect in this ruling. If there anything in the LOTG or ATR that would clarify this?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The referee erred in two ways: First, he did not know the proper application of the Law. Second, he took the advice of a coach on the proper application of the Law. Any player on the kicking team may take the penalty kick.

It is likely that the coach was thinking of a high school game. High school rules state that a player entering the field due to an injury substitution at a penalty kick cannot take the kick.

STRIKING OR KICKING?
Your question:
What differentiates a kicking foul from a striking foul? In the thread entitled “KICKING THE BALL AT AN OPPONENT” of April 22, 2003, presuming that the referee decided that the offense was deliberate, is the foul a striking foul or a kicking foul? Where would the restart occur — at the location of the victim or culprit?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
Striking is the use of the hand or an object, such as the ball, to smite another player. Kicking is the use of the foot, and the foot alone, to kick another player. The offense in the item you cite is, as suggested there, striking. If such a foul is called, the restart would be a direct free kick (or penalty kick) from the point of contact or where the contact would have been had the aim been better or the victim less agile.

SHINGUARDS
Your question:
What is the interpretation of, or the USSF stance on shinguards. The Laws of the Game only state that they provide a “Reasonable amount of protection”. What does that mean? Some of the more skilled players always try to wear as little as possible. Is there any “official” standard to follow?

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The first and only standard available to referees is the admonition in Law 5 that the referee must ensure player safety. As both the IFAB and FIFA have stated, soccer is a tough, competitive, contact sport in which people can be hurt. The referee’s duty to ensure player safety safety cannot extend to making the sport harmless.

With regard to shinguards, the concept of safety suggests that the greatest portion possible of the player’s shin should be covered by the shinguard. In fact the shinguard is intended to be worn under the sock and there are various reasons for this — it ensures that the shinguard stays covered, cushions any contact between the leg and other players (where the hard material in the shinguard could scrape or abrade), and helps in keeping the shinguard on the leg. A sensible guideline for shinguards is that they must be worn properly, they must not have been altered, and they must be recognizably manufactured as shinguards. Alterations of the shinguard to make it more protective are acceptable, while alterations to make the shinguard less protective are not acceptable.

The U. S. Soccer Federation guideline on shinguards is precisely the same as that given by FIFA, who polices the enforcement of the Laws promulgated by the International F. A. Board (IFAB), the folks who write them: Law 5 instructs the referee to ensure that the players’ equipment meets the requirements of Law 4. Law 4 prescribes that a player must not use equipment or wear anything which is dangerous to himself or another player (including any kind of jewelry). In other words, it is up to the referee to ensure that the equipment used in the game he officiates meets these requirements. As soon as the IFAB and FIFA provide firmer guidelines, the U. S. Soccer Federation will ensure that they are implemented in the United States. There will most likely never be a black-and-white table of measurements and specifications for shinguards.

NO CHANGE DUE IN THE OFFSIDE LAW
Your question:
I have been hearing a lot about an anticipated adjustment in the definition of offside. Is it true, and if yes, when? My understanding is that the contemplated new requirement will include the definition that the second to last player must be clearly offside by at least one full body width with daylight showing between the attacker and the last defender. Please let me know if any of this is factual.

USSF answer (May 6, 2003):
The information is incorrect. You need to caution your informants about the possible psychological and physiological consequences of the illegal substances they have been using — or you need to acquire a better class of informants.

LOST SHOE/SUB AT HALF-TIME
Your question:
I had a referee tell my team that if they were playing and their shoe came off they had to immediately leave the field and not touch the ball again or they would recieve a yellow card???? Also the same referee gave our coach a yellow card for changing keepers at half-time and not telling her… what is the law on goalkeeper changes, I know you must inform the ref of a change in the flow of the game but….? Any clarification would be greatly appreciated (our team is a U11 boys team).

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Lost shoe: Normally the act of losing a shoe on the field of play is neither an unsafe nor an unfair action by the player who does this. The player need not leave the field to replace the shoe and should certainly not be punished by the referee unless he or she does not replace the shoe as quickly as possible.

Caution for not informing the referee of a substitution at half-time: First and most importantly, if the referee knew that there had been a substitution for the goalkeeper, then the intent of the Law has been satisfied. Should the referee have been “informed” ahead of time? Sure, but so what? Refereeing is not a game of “gotcha”! Second, even if the Law were to be applied strictly in this case, the referee’s only recourse for an illegal substitution of any sort (not just the goalkeeper) is to caution the players involved, not the coach (even though, ultimately, it was probably the fault of the coach that this happened). The Laws of the Game do not permit the showing of cards to coaches.

REFEREES ARE INFALLIBLE — NOT!
Your question:
I was at a game recently where a player on our team was attacking the opposition with the ball…..made his run into the penalty box…..but was fouled by the defender. The ref blew his whistle…..then signalled offside at first….how our kid could be offside and he is the one with the ball I have no idea. Then the ref gave us an indirect freekick inside the box….because he said our kid was fouled by the defender who charged him.

We scored….but correct me if I am wrong………if a player with the ball is fouled by the defender…in the penalty area…is that not a penalty or did the rules of the game changed during that moment.

The ref was not great…..but that call puzzled the heck out of me……care to explain that one.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
As we have admitted here in the past, not all referees are perfect. Indeed, as the old English saying has it, the perfect referee’s grandfather has not yet been born.

As you gave no clear indication of what happened we can only assume — always the possibility for error in such cases — that the players with the ball were attacking the opponents’ goal. In any case, the only answer possible is that the restart depends on what type of foul was committed. If the foul was one punishable by a direct free kick, then the restart is a direct free kick (penalty kick if committed by the defending team within their own penalty area). If the foul was one punishable by an indirect free kick, then the restart is an indirect free kick.

And, yes, it is possible for the player with the ball to be offside — if the player was in an offside position when the ball was played to him by a teammate. [NOTE: The questioner later stated that the player had dribbled the ball all the way from his team’s side of the halfway line.]

PLAYER RETURN TO FIELD
Your question:
I play for a youth team in a local league. Our team barely has enough players on its roster to put 11 players on the field. At one game, we only had 10 people show up so we played with all 10 on the field (the other team had more than enough players and they played with 11). My coach and I asked the referee what the procedures are if one of our players became too winded during the game and had to go off the field of play in order to catch his breath. The referee told us that the player is allowed to leave the field at any time during play provided that he received the referee’s permission. However, the referee then said that the player must wait until a stoppage of play to come back on the field.

I am also a referee. It has always been my understanding that if a player is simply requesting to come back on the field after temporarily leaving the field, then he can be allowed back on in the middle of play provided he has the referee’s permission. This referee said that the player must wait until a stoppage in order to come back on. I don’t believe this is true because it is not a substitution and there is no equipment correction or blood to inspect. Please let me know if I am correct in thinking that players who are temporarily off the field in these circumstances can come back on the field in the middle of play with the referee’s permission. Thanks

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Your understanding would appear to be without imperfection, young referee. And you described the options very nicely, too.

PLAYING THE BALL WHILE ON THE GROUND; INJURED PLAYER
Your question:
In my opinion the #1 job of the ref on the field during play is to prevent injury. These are kids playing a game.

Question #1
In the past it seemed that ANY play of the ball while a player was on the ground was called and a free kick was awarded. Now we are seeing it ignored. What should be the call?

Very often there are players in close enough proximity (1-3ft max) that the down player might trip or kick another player or get THEIR hands stepped on and possibly broken as players converge on the losse ball.

Dangerous play is a judgement call but…(remember the old saying that if a foul wasn’t called….it wasn’t a foul)…..a dangerous play might only be dangerous AFTER someone is seriously injured! If there is no injury it was’t dangerous….WRONG! If the referee lets the play go….the injured player pays for his/her error in judgement.

Question #2
Can you clearly describe the action that should/must be taken by a ref during play when a player is injured and down on the field. I’ve seen OBVIOUSLY, seriously injured players (you could hear bones crack) go down while a ref lets play continue waiting for a change of ball control. That is nuts!

Parents scream at them to stop play (when the injury is obvious to everyone and it could be for either team) and they frequently let play continue until change of control.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
1. Your first question was answered in March 2003 (and in 2001)
USSF answer (March 21, 2003):
[This answer is a repeat of an answer of October 10, 2001.]
There is nothing illegal, by itself, about playing the ball while on the ground. It becomes the technical foul known as playing dangerously (“dangerous play”) only if the action unfairly takes away an opponent’s otherwise legal play of the ball (for players at the youth level, this definition is simplified even more as “playing in a manner considered to be dangerous to an opponent”). At minimum, this means that an opponent must be within the area of danger which the player has created.

If this is not the case (for example, the player had no opponent nearby), then there is no violation of the Law. If the referee decides that a dangerous play violation has occurred, the restart must be an indirect free kick where the play occurred (subject to the special rules that apply to restarts in the goal area).

By the way, even if a dangerous play violation has been called, the referee should never verbalize it as “playing on the ground” since there is no such foul in the Laws of the Game.

2. And your second question was answered back in November 2002.
USSF answer (November 13, 2002):
The referee’s first concern in any game must be the safety of the players. This is especially important at the younger ages, as players must be taught to respect not only the Laws, but also their fellow players. There is no particular amount of time to be observed before stopping the game for a truly serious injury. The referee must exercise common sense in this, as in all other aspects of refereeing.

Stopping the game too quickly, especially at the urging of players, parents, and coaches, is a major problem in youth soccer — in trying to “play it safe” in the case of injuries (i.e., stopping play despite the likelihood that the injury is not serious), referees attempt to avoid the consequences of Law 5. Players and parents and coaches may yell as much as they like, but if they enter the field without the referee’s permission, they risk disciplinary proceedings and abandonment of the match. If the coach has already entered the field, the intelligent referee will take no immediate action on a first occurrence, but will simply remind the coach that he must have the referee’s permission to enter the field. Neither parents nor coaches are normally permitted on the field at any time, but the intelligent referee will often let such things go in youth games by understanding the motives which impel the coach or parent to rush onto the field if they think Johnny or Susie is hurt.)

If the referee believes that the goalkeeper is seriously injured, it is common practice to allow the examination and subsequent treatment of the goalkeeper to take place on the field of play. In other words, the goalkeeper does not have to leave the game. If play was stopped solely for the injury, it must be restarted by a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped — keeping in mind the special circumstances described in Law 8.

Under the strict interpretation of the Law and at higher levels of the game, when play is stopped for a serious injury, the referee authorizes only qualified persons (no more than one or two doctors or trainers, plus the stretcher crew, if available — but NO coaches) to enter the field to ascertain the type of injury and to arrange the player¹s safe and swift removal from the field. No one else is allowed on the field of play, but there is no restriction against players going to the touchline to discuss various matters with team officials, as long as the players do not leave the field. The players must be prepared to resume immediately when the referee has ensured that the injured player is safely off the field of play.

The only player who is normally not removed from the field for treatment of injury is the goalkeeper.

This is an excellent opportunity to mention one of the recent changes in the Law: a seriously injured player required to leave the field cannot return until after play resumes (if the player was not substituted in accordance with youth rules).

NOTE: For further information on dealing with serious injury, see the Additional Instructions for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials that follow Law 17 in the Laws of the Game.

FAILURE TO RETIRE
Your question:
If a team decides takes a free kick while the defenders are within 10 yards of the ball and the kick is intercepted by a defender, is it correct that no action is required by the referee, as it was the team’s decision to take the kick? This would differ if the referee had signaled the defenders to remain 10 yards from the ball but they subsequently encroached before the kick was taken. The restart would then be to retake the free kick after cautioning the defenders for failure to maintain the required distance from the free kick.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Much depends on what you mean by “intercepted” — if it means that the defender moved to take control of the ball from within 10 yards, then the defender did violate the Law and should be cautioned and shown the yellow card. If it means that the ball was kicked directly to the defender within 10 yards, then, “oh, well.”

EARLY SEND-OFF
Your question:
What adviCe do you give a referee who is put in a situation early in the match where his decision will mostly likely decide the eventual winner of the game. In a high school soccer match involving two of the top teams, one team’s star GK struck an opponent in his own penalty area in the games 5th minute. This is what happened again the games 5th minute. A shot was taken on goal, and a forward ran following the shot in the hopes the play would lead to a loose ball in front of goal. The GK cleanly caught the ball and quickly ran out from goal toward the onrushing forward. As the forward and the GK ran past each other the GK allowed his elbow to hit the forward in the ribs and due to the momentum it was a very hard blow. The forward appeared stunned but took the blow well and needed no stoppage in play. There was no doubt the GK purposely struck the forward and tried make it look like an accidental collision during hard fast play.

The way I see this play the Referee has about one or two seconds to decide to:
1. Send off the GK for serious foul play and award a PK
2. Award a PK and caution the GK for unsportsmanlike conduct.
3. Award a PK
4. Let play continue

No matter what the referee decides it’s a huge decision for the 5th minute and I would really appreciate any input.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Well, Jack Taylor, the former English FIFA Referee, had no problem sending off a player in the first minute of the 1974 World Cup final match. If only the rest of us had that kind of courage, the soccer world would be a better place.

The referee’s thought must not be what the effect of his or her decision will be, but what the effect of not dealing with violent conduct or serious foul play so early in the game will be. In most cases, it would be disastrous not to do something decisive.

The correct restart in this case would likely be a penalty kick, awarded before the other team even touched the ball.

PARRYING THE BALL — NO MORE QUESTIONS ON THIS, PLEASE
Your question:
The ball is sailing easily toward the goal where the goalkeeper is standing ready and waiting. An opponent is giving a half-hearted chase while a defender is off to one side in the clear. Instead of catching the ball, that’s just inches above his head, the goalkeeper shouts something and tries to push the ball over to his defender. The attempted push fails badly and merely pops the ball up and over the oncoming opponent’s head. The opponent turns to face the falling ball and shields the goalkeeper from getting to the descending ball – which seems to be playable again by the goalkeeper if it weren’t for the action of the opponent.

Question 1: Does the goalkeeper have the right to play the ball without interference because he parried the ball and thereby set the six-second count of possession – or is it deemed a released ball that’s open for all to play?

Question 2: The parry is successful and the ball is directed toward the defender (a distance that might or might not be beyond a second play by the goalkeeper before the ball would touch the teammate or the ground) but it’s intercepted by the opponent while still in the air. The six-second rule of possession applies or does not apply here?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
By parrying the ball, the goalkeeper has done two things: (1) established possession and (2) given up possession. The ball is now free for all to play. The six-second rule has no further application in this situation.

PLAYING DISTANCE
Your question:
My understanding: A player is not guilty of obstructing an opponent from getting to a loose ball when he cuts off the opponent’s path to the ball by going after the ball himself. As long as the ball is in ‘playing distance’ and the opponent is only shielded from reaching the ball first in a fair chase – even where the opponent is clearly a faster runner.

The issue: Playing Distance is generally considered to be an inexact short distance, often regarded to be about six feet. An advancing referee tells me that the 6 foot distance has been defined at clinics as the limit. I say this is because it naturally and most frequently occurs within that distance but ‘playing distance’ also applies to longer stretches as well. For example; the ball is 20 yards away and two opponents run for it, the player who leads the race may veer off a direct line to the ball to keep the opponent from passing as long this ‘shielding’ is not an unfair obstruction. The advancing referee disagrees and calls it obstruction because the ball is not in playing distance, not six feet or thereabouts.

The question: What is right?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
You and the “advancing referee” will find the answer in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:
QUOTE
12.15 PLAYING DISTANCE
The referee¹s judgment of ³playing distance² should be based on the player¹s ability to play the ball, not upon any arbitrary standard.
END OF QUOTE

Distances such as those you propose would not fit the definition.

COURAGE
Your question:
I’m confused about an apparent contradiction in how many referees in my area interpret a foul after the play. If I am at midfield and deliver a ball, then a defender clatters me from behind, there is a foul called almost without exception. However, in my experience refs are very hesitant to call it if the same foul is committed in the penalty area after a forward shoots the ball. How are these different? If I shoot and miss, and a second later a defender bowls me over, isn’t that just as much of a foul as if it took place after a pass at midfield?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
There should be no difference in the calls. Unfortunately, many referees lose courage in direct proportion to how close they are to the goal line.

DELIBERATE HANDLING; PENALTY KICK
Your question:
My son plays soccer and while inside the penalty box he had inadvertantly touched the ball with his fore arm (upright and against his chest). the referee called “hand ball” a penalty was awarded to the opposing team…

When a hand ball is called on the defending team within the penalty box. does that result in a penalty kick? are defenders allowed to defend the goal? or is it kicker vs. goalkeeper?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
If the contact between the hand and the ball had been truly inadvertent and your son made no effort to take advantage of this contact, then the “hand ball” (which is more properly termed “a handling offense”) should not be called. However, if it was a true handling offense, then the penalty kick decision was correct. A defender committed a direct free kick foul inside his own penalty area — that is the recipe for a penalty kick restart.

At the penalty kick the defending goalkeeper remains on his goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball has been kicked. The players other than the kicker are located inside the field of play, outside the penalty area, behind the penalty mark, and at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the penalty mark. So the only defender allowed to defend the goal is the goalkeeper.

GOALKEEPER POSITION AT PENALTY KICK
Your question:
If a goalkeeper lines up behind the goalline, in the goal, on a Penalty Kick can he move forward to the goalline before the ball is kicked?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
No. The defending goalkeeper remains on his goal line, facing the kicker, between the goalposts until the ball has been kicked.

In actual practice, however, the referee should not signal for the penalty kick to be taken if the GK is not on the line … so the issue of moving forward should never arise.

TWO OFFSIDE QUESTIONS
Your question:
1. Can a player be offsides if he receives the ball from a throw-in?

2. Can a player be offsides if the ball is delivered from the other half of the pitch (ie, from a goal kick or delivered from one of his defender teammates)?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
1. According to Law 11, Offside, no player should be called offside it he receives the ball directly from a throw-in.

2. Again according to Law 11, no player can be called offside if he receives the ball directly from a goal kick. However, if the player is in an offside position and receives the ball directly from one of his teammates AND he is involved in play, he should be called offside. It doesn’t make any difference where the ball was delivered from, only where the attacker was when the ball was delivered.

REFEREE GARB
Your question:
May a soccer referee wear a black ball cap when it is a sunny day and he is lining(ar) into the sun? It reduces eye strain and makes it easier to watch offsides. It is hard to hold a flag, and run with your off-hand held up like a visor. I have been told “no,” yet all of the companies seem to sell black referee caps. I have also been told “yes.” what’s the official answer?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
[originally published in February 2003]
THE REFEREE UNIFORM
Referees may wear only the gold primary jersey or the black/white-, red/black- or blue-striped alternate jerseys. No other colors will be worn without express permission of the USSF. If the uniform colors worn by a goalkeeper and the referee or by a team (or both teams) and the referee are similar enough to invite confusion, the referee must attempt to have the goalkeeper or the team(s) change to different colors. If there is no way to resolve the color similarity, then the referee (and the assistant referees) must wear the colors that conflict least with the players. Referees and assistant referees must wear the same color jerseys, and all must wear the same length sleeves. The referee uniform does not include a hat, cap, or other head covering, with the exception of religious head covering. Referees must wear the badge of the current registration year.

The paragraph above does not cover shorts, socks or shoes, but referees who want to get ahead will make every effort to present themselves neatly and professionally. Shorts should be made of the same materials as the jerseys. Shoes must be black and bear as little ornamentation as possible. Referees should dress as conservatively as possible, to avoid drawing undue attention to themselves.

The policy on hats was also published in the October 1999 issue of Fair Play:
Q. May referees wear caps and sunglasses?
A. With regard to caps, the policy of the United States Soccer Federation was stated in the Spring 1994 issue of Fair Play magazine: “Under normal circumstances, it is not acceptable for a game official to wear headgear, and it would never be seen on a high level regional, national or international competition. However, there may be rare circumstances in local competitions where head protection or sun visors might sensibly be tolerated for the good of the game, e.g. early morning or late afternoon games with sun in the officials’ line of sight causing vision difficulties; understaffed situations where an official with sensitive skin might be pressed into service for multiple games under strong sunlight or a referee who wears glasses needing shielding from rain.” Sunglasses would be subject to the same considerations. In addition, we ask referees to remember that sunglasses have the unfortunate side effect of suggesting that the referee or assistant referee is severely visually impaired and should not be working the game. They also limit communication between the officials and the players by providing a barrier against eye-to-eye contact. Sunglasses, if worn, should be removed prior to any verbal communication with players.

LYING DOWN TO HEAD THE BALL TO THE ‘KEEPER
Your question:
More proof that Murphy’s law rings oh so true and that high school aged boys will do anything imaginable to bend the rules to their liking, I present you a situation I encountered in a U-19 Boys game a few weeks ago:

Indirect kick is given to the defending team 5 yards outside their own penalty area. In a moment of sheer wisdom, the defender gets on the ground, stomach down, and heads the ball to the keeper, (think a worm slithering on the ground and you get the idea) who of course picks it up within his own penalty area and continues play. My question is, should this be seen as just another way to circumvent the laws of the game and the “inch-worm” cautioned…or was the kick ever properly taken? While Law 12 specifies what kind of free kick is to be given for a foul, and Law 13 defines and gives specifics as to the types of free kicks, nowhere in the laws does it specify HOW a kick must be taken.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Kicking implies that the ball is played with the foot, not the head or any other portion of the body.

This bit of trickery is unsporting behavior, for which the player should be cautioned and shown the yellow card. The restart remains the same.

If the ball had been in play, the caution/yellow card would be the same, but the restart would be an indirect free kick for the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.

DEFERENCE TO GOALKEEPERS?
Your question:
In all level play the goal keeper receives special treatment in regards to fouls. In upper level play why is it that goal keepers are allowed to climb the backs of attackers to receive the ball or hit it away? I seen a perfect example of this yesterday 5/3 in a state cup match at [a local] Park #1 U17B. The ball was played into the area with a attacker standing flat footed around the penalty spot, when the keeper climbed his back with a hand on his shoulder using it to elevate himself to fist the ball away. Why wouldn’t this type of call be made. I’ve seen it before and I’m sure I’ll see it again. I just don’t understand why officials don’t make that call. I believe this is probably one of the most miscalled situations in the game today, outside of the offside call.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
One person’s foul one way is often another person’s foul the other way. Many factors go into the decision to call a foul, including what both players are doing at the time.

Your view was not the same as that of the referee, who may have seen it this way: The goalkeeper was (apparently) trying to play the ball, while the attacker was simply standing there, (possibly) attempting to prevent the goalkeeper from getting to the ball. Because the goalkeeper was able to get to the ball and play it, the referee (probably) decided not to call the foul against the attacker.

OFFSIDE?
Your question:
If an attacking player gets the ball taken away in the attacking third of the field and the defending team all pushes up which leaves the attacking player in the offside position and the ball bounces off a teammate of the defending player back to the attacking player who is in the offside position (player was walking upfield) is this offsides?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Your scenario is unclear in one important aspect: Who played the ball that bounced off a player of the defending team? If it was one of his own team, then the attacking opponent in the offside position is not offside. If it was a teammate of the attacking opponent — and the attacking opponent is involved in play — then that opponent is offside.

DELIBERATE HANDLING
Your question:
In a recent match between my own [name removed] High Girls team and another local high school, there were several instances that appeard to me to be handballs and were not called. Our opponents were not quite a top-class team and was made up of many girls who had obviously had very little soccer experience. On many occasions, a player would go up for a head ball with her arms outspread. Not judging the ball properly, she would make contact with her hand or arm. After my constant questioning of the non-calls, I was given a yellow card and told to read my rule book. So, I did. The rule regarding handling of the ball states that to be called, a player must intentionally make contact with the ball with his/her arm or hand. However, handling is defined as playing the ball with the arm or hand or making any contact with the ball with your arm in an “unnatural” postion. Is the above described situation not an “unnatural” position. Also, I’ve been informed by some officials that covering the chest is legal for girls in any situation and by others that it is only legal while in the wall. Can you explain?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
One gentle reminder before we begin the lecture:
The rules promulgated by the National Federation of State High School Associations (wild and crazy folks that their makers are) do not allow the “hands up to protect” defense. If the hands were there BEFORE the ball was struck, it is OK but the player will be called if the hands come up AFTER the ball is struck.

That said, on to the main course

The key to calling deliberate handling is contained in this excerpt from the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:
12.9 DELIBERATE HANDLING
The offense known as “handling the ball” involves deliberate contact with the ball by a player’s hand or arm (including fingertips, upper arm, or outer shoulder). “Deliberate contact” means that the player could have avoided the touch but chose not to, that the player’s arms were not in a normal playing position at the time, or that the player deliberately continued an initially accidental contact for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage. Moving hands or arms instinctively to protect the body when suddenly faced with a fast approaching ball does not constitute deliberate contact unless there is subsequent action to direct the ball once contact is made. Likewise, placing hands or arms to protect the body at a free kick or similar restart is not likely to produce an infringement unless there is subsequent action to direct or control the ball. The fact that a player may benefit from the ball contacting the hand does not transform the otherwise accidental event into an infringement. A player infringes the Law regarding handling the ball even if direct contact is avoided by holding something in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.).

A lengthier discourse on the matter was recently written by Robert Evans, former USSF Director of Referee Instruction, a National Instructor and former FIFA Referee, and Edward Bellion, a National Instructor and former FIFA Referee, in their book, “For the Good of the Game”:
QUOTE
Handball

It was over the issue of handling the ball that two different versions of football developed. In the early games, some sets of rules allowed a player to knock the ball down with his hand or arm, but not to carry it or throw it forward. Then an over-enthusiastic young man named William Webb Ellis picked up the ball during a match at his school-Rugby-and ran with it. “Rugby Football” was born, and shortly after that, handling the ball in any way was banned in the other football-our football, “Association Football”, or soccer, as it came to be known. Rugby, as though unable to decide what it wanted to be, evolved into a variety of forms: Australian Rules Football, Gaelic Football, Rugby League Football, Rugby Union Football and ultimately, American and Canadian Football. All those corrupt versions of the original game involve some form of chucking the ball about with your hands, but the delightful game of soccer retained its simple purity. It is a game to be played with the feet, the body and (especially for referees) the head.

The law states quite simply that a player should be penalized if he “handles the ball deliberately.” The law once included the phrase “carries, strikes or propels the ball with his hand or arm” , but most people involved in the game don’t need to have all that spelled out. We understand that no part of the arm below the shoulder can be used, so our problem is simply to learn how to recognize deliberate handling, as opposed to accidental handling. Accidental handling is never penalized!

From our observations of officiating in youth soccer, we estimate that twice as many “handballs” are penalized as should be. Many inexperienced referees are over-zealous, but if you then add the problem that parents and spectators unfamiliar with the game shout every time the ball touches a hand or arm, the tendency for the official is a compulsion to blow his whistle in response. This only makes matters worse, because the lack of knowledge by the spectators is then reinforced by the action of someone who is in their eyes a (presumably) trained referee. He’s got a badge and a uniform; he must know what he’s doing. On top of that, the players, hearing all the appeals when they make hand or arm contact with the ball, react as though they are guilty of touching something sacred, a holy relic. In such a case, it takes a great deal of strength and conviction for an inexperienced referee to be deaf to hundreds of voices baying in unison, and to ignore the horrified expression of a player who acts as though guilty of a cardinal sin. What they need is knowledge and an understanding of clear methods of determining whether a player “handles the ball deliberately”. We are about to describe those methods, so stay with us.

The most evident handball is where the player reaches out to touch or control the ball, or moves his hand to intercept it and change its path. Examples might include: the defender who reaches up to knock a ball down that was going over his head; the player who while trying to deal with an awkwardly-bouncing ball, flicks out his hand to put the ball in front of him; and the really obvious ones, like stopping a shot going into the goal, or using a hand to stop a pass that might produce a scoring chance. These latter two are punished very severely in the latest versions of the laws, and are therefore becoming less common.

All these examples are covered in the first part of that familiar old refereeing question: “Was it hand to ball, or was it ball to hand?” You will still hear that question at training clinics and courses, and the answer supposedly will tell the new or inexperienced referee what to do. In many cases it will help you make a decision, and some of those decisions will be correct. But in an equal number of cases it will be wrong! Here’s whyŠ

In the cases we described, the player does deliberately move his hand towards the ball in an effort to touch it or move it. There is no doubt he moved “hand to ball”, as the old saying goes. If he succeeds in touching the ball with his hand, he should be penalized (assuming there is no advantage, or that the infraction is not trifling). But many times a player as part of a natural running or jumping motion appears to move his hand towards the ball. There may have been no intentional touching of the ball with the hand, yet still he will get penalized-incorrectly, we should add.

And then there are cases where the hand doesn’t move, and yet the handball is nevertheless intentional. Think about a wall at a free kick near goal. The kicker plays the ball hard towards the goal, aiming to curve the ball around the end of the wall. The player at the end of the wall has his hands down to his side, but sees that the ball is going to hit the arm on the outside of the wall. He leaves the arm in that position even though he knows the ball will strike it. He has time to move it, but chooses not to, and as a result, blocks the shot on goal. If we stick by the old saw “ball to hand”, the player has committed no infraction. And that is why this old piece of refereeing wisdom-like so many of them-is useful up to a point. Because it does not cover every situation, it should be used with care.

So in the case of supposed handball, ask yourself these questions:

1. Did the player move his hand with the purpose of touching (handling) the ball?
If the answer is “yes”, then you have witnessed an infringement of the laws, and you may penalize. If there is no advantage situation, or if the player gains some benefit from his handling, then give a free kick to his opponents.
If the answer is “no”, then allow play to proceed.
If the answer is “I can’t decide”, then look for something else to help you make the decision. If the handled ball goes straight to an opponent, then you don’t have to decide. You can just allow play to go on unabated.

2. Did the player have time to move his hand out of the way, but chose instead to leave it where it was?
If the answer is yes, then you have witnessed an infringement of the laws, and you may choose to penalize.
If the answer is “no”, because you can see that (for example) a shot was taken so close to the defender that he couldn’t possible have had time to get out of its way, then there is no breach of the law, and no matter how many people shout about it, you must let play go on.

3. Was the movement of the hand or arm an instinctive act of protection for the face, the groin or (in the case of young female players) the breast?
Young players especially deserve the benefit of the doubt in these cases. Their instinct is to protect vulnerable parts of their body, especially ones that hurt when struck hard. Older players learn to turn their head quickly, or deflect a ball with their shoulder, rather than take a hit in a place that would be painful.

4. Was there some other factor that could have caused the contact between the ball and the hand or arm?
On a lot of fields in youth soccer, the surface is not as smooth as we would like, and as a result the ball pops up unpredictably. When in such cases the ball makes contact with a young arm, could it have been the playing surface and not the action of the player that created the “handball”? We describe one such case in the sidebar.

One final point of great importance: In the case of accidental contact between the ball and the hand or arm, even if the ball drops to the benefit of the player who made contact with it, you must not penalize. Where there is no infraction, no infraction must be called!

SIDEBAR
WHY WOULD THE PLAYER HANDLE THE BALL?

During an invitational tournament in Dallas, Texas in the fall of the year, when the fields are as hard as a rock, and have only a straw-colored mat of vegetation that passes as grass, two under-16 teams of skillful boys were going at each other with great enthusiasm. The ball was thumped out of one defence, deep into the opponents’ half, bouncing down into the penalty-area. The last defender chased back for it and tried to bring it under control off to one side of his own penalty-area. He was not under pressure, because there was no opponent within thirty yards of him. On the rough surface the ball popped up after a bounce, struck him on the arm and dropped in front of him. The whistle blew, and the referee-from forty yards away-awarded a penalty-kick.

On too many occasions for us to remember, we have advised referees who get into trouble frequently during games, to try to put themselves in the position of the player. It is a way of trying to understand why a player acts or behaves the way he does, why he gets hot or why he chases after an opponent for no apparent reason. Thinking like a player can be a useful tool for a referee.

In this case, let’s pretend we are the player penalized for handball. We know no opponent is nearby, which means we have a lot of time to get the ball under control, to pass it back to the goalkeeper, or to thump it back upfield. We have no need to handle the ball in order to accomplish what we are trying to do, especially so in our own penalty-area. Handling the ball in an open space where everyone can see you would be the ultimate act of stupidity. What good can possibly come of it? Despite all that, and without thinking (and that is the real problem here) the referee saw the hand and ball come together, and chose to award a penalty-kick. A moment’s reflection, as we recommend in item number 4 above, would have told the referee that this was a classic case of accidental handling brought about because of a rough playing-surface.
END OF QUOTE

COLOR OF THE AR’S FLAGS
Your question:
My flags recently needed replacement so my wife made some new ones — triangles (upper/lower) of blue and yellow (quite close to the uniform colors). I used them at a tournament and had no problems (either visually or ‘officially’). At a recent men’s game, however, I was told by the CR that they couldn’t be used — they might be ok for an in-house game but we had to use the real ones (i.e., red/yellow) for this game. The CR is relatively high up in the state’s administration so we did what he requested. My question is: Although the LOTG used to specify red/yellow flags, is this one of those “no longer in the words but still to be followed” requirements?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
The “relatively high” referee needs to rethink his instructions to you. While it is certainly traditional that flags be yellow or red, that is no longer a requirement at any level of the game. The only requirement is the use of common sense: The flags must be visible to the referee and the assistant referee on the far side of the field against the background of the players, the spectators, and the field itself. That said, it is common practice to use yellow and/or red flags and the practice is encouraged.

FIELD CONDITIONS
Your question:
As a referee what do USSF rules obligate me to with regard to field conditions?? As example…..lets say we show up at the field to refereee and:
1. The grass is 10″ tall…..and the field is in my opinion …..is not playable. Under USSF rules can I as a referee declare the field unsafe / not playable.
2. Standing water…..lets say it rained y-day….and there are low areas on the field …where there is 2-4″ of standing water……the home teams says we play like this all the time…..the visiting team says you got to be kidding.

Net….I am looking what options I might have as a referee when the field is not in the condition I think it should be in for play…..the home team is saying it is….and the visiting team really does not want to play.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
The USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” should give you all the information you need on this question. An excerpt from section 1.2: “No part of the field surface or the goals and flagposts may be dangerous to the players. If the field conditions are dangerous or unsuitable for play, the referee must refuse to officiate the game and, unless there is a possibility that the problem can be corrected, should leave immediately after announcing his decision to both sides. Unresolved problems with the field that do not involve safety should be reported to the competition authority, even if the game is played.”

NO REPLACEMENT FOR PLAYER SENT OFF
Your question:
I’m embarrassed to have to ask this. I’ve been a referee for 13 years. I’ve been an instructor for 2 or 3 years. It’s gotta’ be there somewhere…

I cannot find, in my 2002/2003 “Laws of the Game” where it tells me – and anyone else who wants to know – that a player who has been Sent Off cannot be replaced. I went to an online copy of the Laws (at the FIFA website) and let the computer search for relevant words and phrases. No help…

As recently as 1997 the LOTG contained the instruction I seek as an IFAB Decision pertaining to Law 3. In the 2002/2003 copy the only IFAB Decisions for Law 3 are (1) guideline for minimum number of players and (2) bench behavior.

Because the rewrite of the Laws moved many of the IFAB Decisions into the text of the relevant Law, I examined Law Three more closely. Turns out that it discusses (a) players Sent Off before the match starts and (b) named substitutes Sent Off before or after the game starts. No mention is made regarding the fate of players who are Sent Off after the game has started.

Or is this a part of the Laws that “everybody knows so we don’t have to write it down”?

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
Simplification is everything, or so the IFAB thought back in 1997. Believing that everyone “knew” this to be so, they eliminated the phrase from the Laws. And that is why USSF issued this position paper back in 1999:

No Replacement for Player Sent Off after the Game Has Started

International Football Association Board (IFAB) Decision (3), on Law III, formerly stated: “A player who has been ordered off after play has started may not be replaced,” containing this prohibition was omitted by the IFAB in the extensive revision of the Laws that took place in 1997. The rewrite was extensive and included both new language and revisions of existing language: numerous provisions in the 1996 edition of the Laws of the Game were removed and have not reappeared in subsequent revisions. Nevertheless, the provisions of IFAB Decision 3 on Law III (and numerous other decisions) remain valid to this day.

The intention of IFAB was to clarify and simplify concepts, to replace older terminology, to present concepts which are more easily translated into languages other than English and to shorten the Laws of the Game overall. The excised IFAB decisions should not be considered a rejection of the requirement, but an affirmation that a separate, additional statement of the concept involved was unnecessary. In other words, the IFAB believed that the basic principle that a player sent off after the game has started may not replaced was unnecessary. In other words, the IFAB believed that the basic principle that a player sent off after the game has started may not be replaced was so well understood by the entire soccer community that it did not need to be mentioned in the Laws.

In applying the rewritten Laws of the Game, affiliated leagues, associations, officials and competitions are accordingly reminded that, except as described in “Memorandum 1997” or in subsequent memorandum amendments of the Laws, there should be no change in either the understanding of the Laws or in their substantive application to game situations. In other words, unless noted otherwise, the absence in subsequent versions of the Laws of the Game of any language from the 1996 version is not to be interpreted as an indication IFAB intended that matches would no longer be governed by that language.

Law 3 currently states that “A player who has been sent off before the kick-off may be replaced only by one of the named substitutes.” Implied in that statement is a reiteration of the former IFAB Decision 3 on Law III “A player who has been ordered off after play has started may not be replaced.”

14 May 1999 In other words, if the grass is too long, spots on the field too wet, or other conditions not satisfactory, the referee has the power and the duty to declare the field unplayable. All that is required after this declaration is a complete report to the proper authorities.

NO ONE LOVES AN OFFENSIVE PLAYER
Your question:
I have a few stupid, soccer questions: Can an offensive player be offsides in his/her half of the field? Also, can you be offsides on a indirect kick? Thanks for the info! Love, [name deleted to protect the innocent]

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
No. Yes. A pleasure to be of service, ma’am.

THE DELIBERATE PASS TO THE GOALKEEPER
Your question:
Player throws the ball back to the goalie. An opponent trots after the ball. The goalie bends over the ball and waits. At about 6 feet away the goalie picks up the ball and play continues.

The pass-back ruling seems to have sprung some loop holes. Locker room lawyering will be with us for a long time yet.

USSF answer (May 5, 2003):
We acknowledge the possible error in assuming anything, but this answer assumes two things: the thrower was a teammate of the goalkeeper, and the opponent was about six feet away when the goalkeeper picked up the ball. See section 12.21 of the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game,” which would seem to apply here:
12.21 BALL THROWN TO THE GOALKEEPER
A goalkeeper infringes Law 12 if he touches the ball with his hands after he receives it directly from a throw-in taken by a teammate. The goalkeeper is considered to have received the ball directly even if he plays it in any way (for example, by dribbling the ball with his feet) before touching it with his hands. Referees should take care not to consider as trickery any sequence of play that offers a fair chance for opponents to challenge for the ball before it is handled by the goalkeeper from a throw-in.

VIOLENT CONDUCT
Your question:
Recently, I had a GK pick up the ball in his own penalty area, as the forward ran past him , the GK grunted loudly and motioned to strike the forward, although he never did. I cautioned the GK with a yellow card for unsporting behavior. My question is I began the restart as an indirect free kick against the goalkeeper (at the top of the 18 yard box from the point of the infraction), is this correct?

USSF answer (May 1, 2003):
Given that the stoppage was solely for misconduct (caution for unsporting behavior), then, yes, an indirect free kick where the misconduct occurred would be correct.

A lot would depend on what the “temperature” of the game was and what had gone before. An overly ardent referee might consider that the goalkeeper committed an infringement deserving send-off and red card, attempting to strike an opponent (violent conduct, as they were not contesting for the ball). The referee could use his or her discretion and consider the offense to be unsporting behavior, but would need to measure that against the likelihood of losing control of the game by not dealing with a possible game-critical event.

SHOWING THE CARD
Your question:
What is the official ruling on the showing of cards (yellow and/or red) to coaches? Do you show the coach a card to signal for caution or send off? Since the coach is not on the field how can he be sent off?

USSF answer (May 1, 2003):
A USSF position paper of August 26, 2002, on “Misconduct and Display of Cards” contains this information:
“Law 5 is very clear that “team officials” (coaches, trainers, etc.) must behave responsibly and, if they fail to do so, the referee has two primary courses of action. First, the referee may warn the team official that the irresponsible behavior puts him or her at risk. Second, the referee may expel the team official from the field and its immediate area. It is not necessary for a warning to be given in cases of extreme provocation.

“As with a player or named substitute who fails to depart the field if sent off, the referee has the power under Law 5 to suspend or terminate a match if an expelled team official refuses to leave. Disciplinary action against a team official must also be included in the referee’s match report.”

In short, the coach may not be shown a card of any color. Nor may the coach be cautioned or sent off. The coach may only be dismissed for irresponsible behavior.

Only players and substitutes may be cautioned or sent off and shown the yellow or red cards.

“ROUGHING THE ‘KEEPER”
Your question:
My daughter plays keeper on a u14 select team. Last weekend during her game she was faced with a break away. She came out of the goal box but stayed within the penalty box. When the opposing player reached her she put her hand on my daughter’s shoulder and shoved her out of her way.

Can you please define roughing the keeper?

Does she have the right to calmly talk to the ref. and ask them to watch a particular player?

Is it legal for a keeper to go for a ball and clip the legs out from under an opponent?

USSF answer (May 1, 2003):
There is no such foul as “roughing the ‘keeper.” The act you describe would be categorized as pushing the opponent and should be punished with a direct free kick for the goalkeeper’s team.

No, the player has no “right” to speak with referee under any circumstances, other than when the referee poses a question. However, the player could ask her team captain to have a word with the referee.

No, it is not legal for the ‘keeper to take out the opponent’s legs under any circumstances — unless the opponent happens to fall over the ‘keeper’s hand/arm or leg after the ‘keeper has made a brilliant save. Otherwise that is tripping, at a minimum, and might be considered serious foul play, resulting in the ‘keeper being sent off and shown the red card.

UNSUBBED PLAYER RE-ENTERS THE GAME
Your question:
My question involves a player entering the field without permission. This instance occurred in a youth game where unlimited substitution is permitted.

During a stoppage Team A had three players at the line. I beckoned on the substitutes and waited for the AR to signal that the substituted players had left the field. Four players left the field and only three substitutes entered. The AR saw this and assumed the team had decided to play short. The coach then sent the fourth player back on the player because he had not meant for that player to come out. Four minutes later the player scored a goal. The AR called the matter to my attention. The goal was disallowed, the player was shown the yellow card, and play was restarted with an IFK for the opposing team.

My question is twofold: first, should play have been stopped as soon as the center or AR saw the player return to the field (as opposed to waiting for a stoppage), and, assuming play has continued, is it proper to disallow a goal if the player in question was actively involved in the scoring play? Also, what is the correct restart?

USSF answer (May 1, 2003):
The player left the field with the referee’s permission. The fact that he re-entered without the referee’s permission when he found that he had left in error could be considered an infringement, but it should be considered trifling and disregarded in most cases.

SLEEVES ROLLED UP
Your question:
I have received conflicting information regarding the sleeves rolled up during play in womens matches. I was under the impression of sleeves worn unrolled was the posisiton to take. A referee friend of mine who is much more experienced and usually a “go to ” guy when I have questions stated that the sleeves could be worn rolled up. This is always a bone of contention and usually one of the first things I am aksed when I show up for a match….so is it sleeves unrolled or can the players roll them up?

USSF answer (May 1, 2003):
While rolled-up shirt sleeves are not prohibited, they are certainly not professional in appearance. Despite the appearance, the intelligent referee should not make a fuss about rolled -up sleeves unless there is a local league/tournament rule on the subject (in which case it must be enforced) or if something that might be dangerous is used to hike the sleeve up.

PLAYING DANGEROUSLY?
Your question:
I have been refereeing for about a year, mostly U-12’s and 14’s. This last weekend, I did a U-10 Boys Competitive League game. It was perhaps a little rougher than most U-10’s and I had to call a few fouls which appeared to be due mostly to them misjudging their distance or timing, but it wasn’t terribly rough. There was one play where I’m wondering if I made the appropriate call, though.

One of the Blue team players fell down while attempting to play the ball; I don’t remember if he slipped on his own, or if he tripped over one of his teammates, but there was definitely no foul involved. He ended up on the ground about 1 yard from the ball, with several players from _both_ teams around him swinging at the ball (typical 10-year old clumsiness). He wasn’t trying to play it, but didn’t appear to be trying to get up either; I think he was waiting for play to move away from him. After a second or two of this, I became concerned for his safety with the crowd around him, and whistled play stopped. He got up and I restarted with a dropped ball at that point. To me, this seemed to be a “Law 18” call, since I couldn’t come up with a specific LOTG reason for that call: I considered it to be a dangerous play, but both teams were doing the same thing and nobody was unfairly disadvantaged by it, so I didn’t feel I could award the IFK to one of them.

Keeping in mind the age group involved, in your opinion, was that an appropriate call, and if so is there justification in the LOTG for it? Or was it just one of those common-sense things you do to keep the kids safe? BTW, I know that based on my reason for stopping play the dropped ball would be the correct restart, because IAW Law 8 I stopped play for a reason “not mentioned elsewhere in the Laws of the Game”, but it’s the reasoning behind the initial call I am curious about.

USSF answer (May 1, 2003):
Age group makes no difference here. It is all in the opinion of the referee. If the referee believes it was dangerous play, then the restart is an indirect free kick. If not, then your call was correct under the terms of Law 8 and in keeping with the Spirit of the Game.

Published by admin

Leave a Reply