Category: Interpretations/IFAB

Interpretations/IFAB

"Inventive" Refs

DEFENDER LEAVING THE FIELD (A TWIST)

Posted on by

Question:
A very interesting answer on Aug 20 re offside off the field of play.

I wondered at the wording IFAB put into the ILGGR this year to cover the ITA-NED game in 2008. (To cover something that IFAB thought “everybody knew”, but evidently was only found in documentation from USSF and the Austrian FA.) Specifically, that the player would be considered to be off the field until the next stoppage of play.

Would the Aug 20 answer change any if the defender who went over the touchline off the field went *closer* to his goal line? He could thereby entice an attacking player to go closer to the goal into an offside position (which remains at the fixed point of his departure).

There has been a question on AR mechanics – does he stay in position at the departure point? I suspect yes. But then another question if the defender is on the far side of the field from the AR, how does the AR know that the defender left the field? Also, how far “off” is “off”? – is it like other offside positions, that the arms and hands don’t count, but head torso and legs do, so if the toe is still on the line the defender is still on the field?

I guess all the above really isn’t a question per se, but I do have one question though; neither the Law Change memo nor the Aug 20 answer specifically states. Is it presumed that the defender who goes off the field stays off the field until the next stoppage? And if so and he returns, what happens then.

USSF answer (August 21, 2009):
The sense of the IFAB’s new wording in the Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidance for Referees (ILGGR) is that, for offside purposes, the player shall be considered to be on the touchline or goal line until the next stoppage in play. If the defending player returns to the field of play without the referee’s permission before the next stoppage of play and, in the opinion of the referee, thereby influences play, the defending player must be cautioned for unsporting behavior. If the referee stops play to administer the caution, the restart is an indirect free kick for the attacking team at the place where the ball was when play was stopped.

During this action, the AR stays with the second-to-last defender (taking into account the defender off the field), NOT level with where the defender left the field.  These places may turn out to be one and the same place if the defender left across a touch line but would NOT be the same if the defender went off the field across the goal line (unless TWO defenders went off the field!).…

"Only in America!"

GOLDEN GOAL

Posted on by

Question:
I recall in one of your past posts your comments on the “golden goal.” How do clubs get away with this at USSF Sanctioned Tournaments? Not only that, but in the Competition Rules it reads “OVERTIME: There is no overtime in preliminary round games. There is no overtime in consolation games. In playoff games, overtime shall be two 10-minute periods for U11-18 and two 5-minute periods for U10. The FIFA Golden Goal Rule shall apply.” Just like you said, there is no such rule.

Many tournaments I’ve worked this summer have used this method. Is this something that can be amended by each state’s youth rules (such as the unlimited substitution rule?) and still be sanctioned by USSF?

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
You raise a complicated question. Under the Laws of the Game, the only allowable method of determining a winner of a game or a home-and-away series is through kicks from the penalty mark. In some competitions, the kicks from the penalty mark may be preceded by two equal periods of extra time. The IFAB, the people who write the Laws of the Game, removed the “Golden Goal,” also known as “sudden death” or “sudden victory,” from the methods for determining the winner of a game in the Laws of the Game 2004/2005. We suspect that the cited rule is a hold-over from the days when this WAS permissible and the competitions have neither the interest nor the inclination to bring their rules up to date (inertia is so much easier than work). Competitions in the United States and affiliated with the U. S. Soccer Federation — including all state associations and youth soccer — are NOT PERMITTED to use this method of determining the winner of a game.

The club or tournament is affiliated with the state association and the state association is affiliated with USSF and USSF is affiliated with FIFA. If the match “counts” for the referee, then it should also follow the Laws of the Game, with the only exceptions being those permitted by the IFAB itself (as described in the Lawbook). Referees should always review the rules of the competition before accepting an assignment and remember that they could jeopardize their standing by working games that are not run in accordance with the Laws of the Game.…

"Inventive" Refs

REFEREE CANNOT ORDER SUBSTITUTIONS

Posted on by

Question: Hi!
great website.

I was a coach of a u12 boys team. In a league game, one of my players was injured, and I was beckoned onto the field by the referee to attend to my player.

By the time I reached the player, he felt better, and wanted to continue to play. The referee stated that since I had entered the field, I was required to substitute for the (briefly) injured player, and that he could re-enter the game at the next appropriate substitution opportunity.

I know that once a player leaves the field for an injury, he must wait for approval from the referee to re-enter the playing field, but I was puzzled that I was made to substitute for the injured player who had never left the field, for the sole reason that I had come on to the field to tend to him.

Was the substitution correctly required? Thanks!

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
Under the Laws of the Game a player must leave the field if the referee has allowed someone to enter the field to assess or treat an injury. Under the Laws of the Game, that player may not return to the field at all if a substitute replaces him (or her), but many rules of competition do allow such substitutions.

In addition, the referee had no authority to require a substitution. His only authority is to require the injured player to leave the field — whether that player is substituted for or not is a decision of the player/coach/team and is subject to any limiting rules of competition.…

"Inventive" Refs

COACH QUESTIONS STRANGE SUBSTITUTION RULE

Posted on by

Question:
I have a question regarding substitutions and whether anyone has ever encountered something like this before. I was coaching a U11 boys/girls team (full field 11 vs 11 games). We’re behind in the game but manage to score a goal. The ref is walking the ball back to half and I call for a sub. He denies me the change. I question why? He says “its the other teams advantage”. Now I am somewhat confused and ask if we scored because I thought perhaps I missed something. He became annoyed and chastised me for questioning his authority. And fyi, there was a good 15 mins remaining in the half so its not like the halftime was upon us. And I was neither yelling or being out of control. I was more confused then anything.

At halftime, I raised my hand up almost like a schoolboy and asked the ref if I could speak to him and clarify the rule (and I did so privately so as not to embarrass him). He proceeded to get very defensive, telling me I was wrong with the rules and that I can only sub on a goalkick or when its my advantage (like when the other team scores against me). He then tells me that I cant sub when its not my advantage nor can I sub when its a free kick or corner kick (which I already knew). Then he goes off on a tangent about having refereed soccer for over 8 yrs and I smiled and just walked away…realizing it was useless asking him about it (and not bother informing him I have been playing the game for over 32 yrs). Just curious if a rule like that could possibly ever be in place. I keep asking the local committee to clarify but no one will get back to me. Personally, I was just trying to be kind to the guy refereeing as I didnt want him making the same mistake in a game that truly meant something but he took it as if I was questioning his authority I think. And no other ref in this same age group has ever called the same no-sub after a goal rule.

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
Mysterious are the ways of referees — there is no rule under the Laws of the Game that a team may substitute only when it is to their “advantage.” Mysterious also are the ways of the people who “craft” the rules for various competitions.

Are you certain of the rules for substitution in your league? We ask solely because many competitions do not follow the Laws of the Game and allow substitutions only on certain occasions. They thus operate counter to the Laws of the Game, which allow substitution at any stoppage of play. The Federation has no direct control over these leagues, which are affiliated with the state association to which they or their club belong, but these affiliation links carry certain obligations, one of which is to maintain local rules of competition which are consistent with the Laws of the Game (including having local variations which are consistent with the areas in which the Laws of the Game permit variations). If any affiliated team, club, or state association were to pose a question to the Federation, as you are doing here, our obligation is to answer based on the presumption that this obligation is being honored.…

Guide to Procedures

WHISTLE FOR RESTART?

Posted on by

Question:
My question pertains to a proper re-start, specifically who the referee is suppose to respond to when determining whether or not to utilize a second whistle.

I’m confused on this point and apparently there are 2 different interpretations, according to the Guide to Procedures and USSF classroom instruction provided last month. The 2009-10 Laws of the Game does not address this specific question, but simply states (p.29), “If, when a free kick is taken, an opponent is closer to the ball than the required distance: the kick is retaken.” According to the 2009-10 Guide to Procedures (p.28), the referee should “allow a quick free kick, without the necessity of a second signal, except where the kicker indicates a need.” During my USSF refresher, I asked this question to the instructor and he indicated that anyone from the kicking team can ask for the required distance and as a referee you are obligated to provide a second whistle at that point (if the defenders are indeed clearly less than the required distance to the ball).

In being in and around the game for over 35 years, as a fan, player, coach, and the last 10 years, as a referee, my understanding and according to the Guide to Procedures, that only the kicker can create the need for a second whistle. Is it basically being up the referees’ discretion? Or is it that anyone can ask for the required distance (a teammate on and/or off the field, coaching staff, or spectators) and be granted with a second whistle?

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
We see no conflict here; provided the referee is satisfied the request is in the best interests of the kicking team, it makes no difference who on that team requests it. There is often confusion in any case as to who will take the kick, so the specific reference to “the kicker” can include any member of that team. However, the referee pays no attention to anyone OTHER than a player of the attacking team (no coaches, substitutes, spectators, color commentators, etc.).…

Interpretations/IFAB

RESTART ON IMPROPER THROW-IN

Posted on by

Question:
Player A1 takes a throw in from the spot designated by the Referee/AR.  A foul throw in is observed by the referee but the ball did not enter the field of play, that is, the ball did not break the plane of the touchline.

The throw in was not executed properly and the opponents (team B) argued they should be entitled to the throw in.  But the ball never entered the field of play so the side originally entitled to the throw in (team A) argued they should still be entitled to the throw in because the ball did not enter the field.

What is the proper restart?

USSF answer (July 14, 2009):
The other team was correct; they get the throw-in.

This from the Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guide to Referees (2009/2010):
If the ball touches the ground before entering the field of play, the throw-in is retaken by the same team from the same position provided that it was taken in line with the correct procedure. If the throw-in is not taken in line with the correct procedure, it is retaken by the opposing team.…

Interpretations/IFAB

INTERFERING WITH PLAY (THE FINAL ANSWER)

Posted on by

Question:
I’m sure you’ve seen this and I’m sure someone somewhere has said something to the Federation, but in Interpretations it absolutely positively says you don’t have to wait for contact with the ball to put up the flag for interfering with play if you think no onside player has a chance to play the ball. This, of course, is in direct contradiction to the 3/29 memo which is just as clear that you DO have to wait until contact is made with the ball.

So we seem to have a clear case of USSF policy contradicting LOTG. Do you have any idea what is going on?

USSF answer (July 8, 2009):
The intent of the language associated with diagram 4 under the interpretations for Law 11 —

A player in an offside position (A) may be penalized before playing or touching the ball, if, in the opinion of the referee, no other team-mate in an onside position has the opportunity to play the ball.

— is the IFAB’s typically roundabout way of saying precisely what we have always said in this regard; namely, that the race between an attacker in an offside position and one or more attackers in an onside position can only be resolved by seeing which one gets to the ball first and touches it. In the absence of any onside position attacker who is judged clearly unable to get to the ball before any of his onside position teammates, the offside offense may be called. This is NOT the same situation as when a ball is played toward an attacker in an offside position attacker and the only way to tell if that attacker will interfere with play is to see if that attacker touches the ball. In the absence of touching the ball, we cannot make any inference that the attacker could or might interfere with play because he or she could, right on up to the last moment, not touch the ball.

NOTE: In other words, there is no contradiction of the March 29, 2009, position paper.

Further, even if this is taken as a digression from the IFAB interpretation, this would not be either the first nor the only place where such a divergence has occurred. We remain, for example, at odds with the interpretations on such other matters as the AR’s signal for blatant goalkeeper movement at a penalty kick and whether a player who is off the field to correct an equipment problem can return to the field while the ball is in play (assuming the referee has given permission and the responsibility for checking if the correction has been made was delegated to the AR or 4th official).…

Interpretations/IFAB

SIGNALING A PENALTY KICK

Posted on by

Question:
What is the proper procedure for a referee to signal that it is OK for a player to take a penalty kick? The Laws of the Game say, “After the players have taken positions in accordance with this Law, the referee signals for the penalty kick to be taken,” but they don’t specify how the referee is to signal. It has always been my understanding that the referee is use his/her whistle to signal that it  is OK for a player to take the penalty kick. However, in a game earlier this month, no referee’s whistle preceded the a penalty kick. When I subsequently asked the referee, he said that a recent FIFA (or maybe US Soccer) referee advisory indicated that no whistle was required. He said that after ascertaining that all players were in the proper position, he told the player who was taking the penalty kick to proceed when he (the player) was ready. I was unaware of that rule, and I thought that the goalkeeper was somewhat taken by surprise – although it probably wouldn’t have mattered because the penalty kick was very well struck. In any event, what is the rule?

USSF answer (June 29, 2009):
Some referees like to make up their own rules as they go along. Others are quite inventive and also make up their own sources of information. Such is the case with your referee.

Here is what it says in the Laws of the Game, under Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidance for Referees (back of the book):

REFEREE SIGNALS
//snipped; not applicable here//

Use of whistle
The whistle is needed to:
* start play (1st, 2nd half), after a goal
* stop play
– for a free kick or penalty kick
– if match is suspended or abandoned
– when a period of play has ended due to the expiration of time
* restart play at
– free kicks when the wall is ordered back the appropriate distance
– penalty kicks
* restart play after it has been stopped due to:
– the issue of a yellow or red card for misconduct
– injury
– substitution

The whistle is NOT needed
* to stop play for:
– a goal kick, corner kick or throw-in
– a goal
* to restart play from
– a free kick, goal kick, corner kick, throw-in

The referee should NEVER advise a player at a restart to “Take the kick (or throw) when you are ready'”! What a can of worms that would open up.…

Interpretations/IFAB

LEAVING THE FIELD OF PLAY AND OFFSIDE

Posted on by

Question:
Two players (attacker and defender) momentum take them both out off the field of play by the goal line about 5 yards from the goal. Just prior to going off the pitch, the attacker saves the ball from going out and passes it back to a teammate just inside the box.

The attacker that saves the ball and passes it back goes off the pitch and then comes back on the field in a matter of 1-2 seconds. In the process the teammate that received the pass shots wide and to the feet of the first attacker that just came back on the field. When the ball is struck, he is in front of the keeper and the defender that followed him off the pitch (the defender is still off the pitch when the ball is struck and also received by the attacker). The defending team claim it is offside because the defender was not on the field of play. Then they complained that the attacker didn’t get permission to enter the field of play. What should the call had been? Was I correct by not calling offside and that there was no need to ask to re-enter the field when your momentum takes you off the pitch. Thank you for your help.

USSF answer (June 25, 2009):
If a player accidentally crosses one of the boundary lines of the field of play, he is not deemed to have committed an infringement. Going off the field of play may be considered to be part of playing movement. Players who leave the field during the course of play are permitted to return without the permission of the referee and play the ball.

A recent change to the Laws of the Game (see Interpretations and Guidance for Referees, Laws 2008/2009) makes it clear that “Any defending player leaving the field of play for any reason without the referee’s permission shall be construed to be on his own goal line or touch line for the purposes of offside until the next stoppage of play. If the player leaves the field of play deliberately, he must be cautioned when the ball is next out of play.” You will also find this change in the Memorandum 2008, available through the referee page at the ussoccer.com website:

“USSF Advice to Referees: The new text more explicitly describes how referees are to consider the location of a defender off the field when deciding if an attacker is or is not in an offside position. A defender who is off the field with the referee’s permission (and thus cannot freely return to the field) is not included in determining where the last and second to last defenders are located. A defender whose position off the field was not with the permission of or at the direction of the referee is deemed to be on the goal line or touch line closest to where the defender left the field and must therefore be considered as though still on the field. Furthermore, if the departure from the field is “deliberate,” (i.e., other than during the normal course of play), the defender is to be cautioned for the misconduct.”

So, yes, your decision was correct. Well done!…

Advantage

ADVANTAGE VS. MISCONDUCT AND “NATURAL” STOPPAGES REDUX

Posted on by

Question:
In the UEFA championship match, there was a situation where the referee applied advantage to a reckless foul (deserving of a caution) and allowed play to continue.  Over the course of the next several seconds, the advantage was fully realized but, in the end, the ball ended up in the hands of the opposing team’s goalkeeper.  At that time, the referee stopped play and showed a yellow card for the reckless foul.  Is this proper?  I thought you had to wait for the ball to leave the field before giving the card?  Was the restart correct?

USSF answer (June 2, 2009):
Several questions have come in regarding this incident, a few referring directly to the UEFA match and others raising the issue generally.  Although we have answered these questions individually, there has been some misunderstanding of what is truly at issue here.  Accordingly, we are using this latest question to offer some general advice for handling such situations.

Several referees felt that the referee, having decided not to stop play immediately for misconduct based on the application of the advantage concept, cannot thereafter stop play solely because the advantage, which lasted long enough to erase the foul, has ended. Our position is not only yes, he can do that, but we would ask in return, why not? The Law requires only that the card be given at the next stoppage of play and, per the Law, that can occur by the ball leaving the field (which is often the ONLY type of stoppage considered here) or by the referee stopping play. Why do referees stop play? Well, there are hundreds of reasons, including (see Advice to Referees) simply wanting to talk to a player as well as such more obvious things as injuries, weather, another foul, etc., or simply for the good of the game”!

We recommend for everyone’s reading the Interpretations/Guidelines (on p. 90 of the 2008/2009 Laws) regarding the referee missing the AR’s flag for severe misconduct and reiterated in the USSF Memorandum Supplement 2008:

Law 6
Both last year and again this year, the International Board has created an exception to the general rule that, if advantage is applied to misconduct, the appropriate card must be shown and the proper action taken (e.g., the player sent off) at the next stoppage; otherwise, the opportunity to card has been lost. The Interpretations provide that, if an AR signals for violent conduct but the signal is not seen until after play is restarted after the next stoppage, the referee may still display a red card and send the player off the field. If this should occur, the restart is based on the current stoppage of play rather than on the violent conduct that occurred previously.

USSF advises that:
– this exception is not limited to “violent conduct” in its official sense as a form of misconduct but applies as well to serious foul play (where violence or excessive force is involved) and other acts of misconduct,
– the AR must have signaled for the misconduct at the time it occurred and maintained the signal until it is seen by the referee, and
– if play is stopped solely in response to the signal by the AR, play is restarted with a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped (except for the special circumstances involving restarts in the goal area) but otherwise the restart is in accordance with the Law.

Referees are strongly urged to cover this type of situation in their pregame discussion and to make clear what sorts of misconduct are serious enough to warrant maintaining the AR’s signal past the next stoppage of play. If a player has received a second yellow card in the same match but was not at that time shown a red card and sent off, the referee remains able to correct the error at any time it is brought to his or her attention by a member of the officiating team.

This information from the Interpretations/Guidelines is not directly related to the question at hand and some will argue that it is also “not specifically authorized” in the Laws of the Game. However, there are many things we do that are “not specifically authorized” and fall under the words used in the Laws themselves, “If, in the opinion of the referee.” In this case the solution is indeed part and parcel of the Laws and it prepares the way for a more proactive role for the referee after applying the advantage. If the referee has to stop the game because no “natural” stoppage seems imminent, then he can do so. Referees are expected to do what is needed to meet the demands of the Spirit of the Game, to give the players a fair game. Waiting for a “natural” stoppage in this game would have left open a path for more infringements. Better to stop them now, before they occur, rather than wait and hope.

As we read it, the International Board was so concerned about violent conduct going unpunished that it carved out this exception to the general rule that a card not given at the next stoppage (natural or “unnatural”) is lost forever. With this in mind, why should the referee be prevented from implementing the same spirit by stopping play himself after the advantage has been realized and the opposing team (the one that committed the violent conduct in the first place!) now has control of the ball? This does not mean that the referee should in every case do as was done in this situation, stopping play without waiting for a “natural” stoppage. However, it does mean that the referee must keep his or her finger on the pulse of the game, applying, as we suggest in Advice 13.5, his or her feeling for the game in what FIFA calls “Fingerspitzengefühl” (literally: “sensing with one’s fingertips”). Only by exercising common sense can the referee do what is correct in such cases.…