‘KEEPER POSSESSION/CHARGING FROM BEHIND

September 17, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
In our game this past weekend an attacker takes a high shot on goal which our keeper deflects into the air and to her right next to the goal post.

In an effort to prevent the rebound from going into the net, our keeper turns around (she is standing upright and her back is now towards the field of play) and proceeds to catch the ball over her head in her outstretched arms preventing the ball from entering the goal. It is at this moment, arms still outstretched over her head, when an attacker collides with our keeper from behind forcing the keeper into the goal post causing her to lose possession, go down injured as her mid section was driven into the goal post, at which time the ball enters the goal.

The referee awarded the attacking team a goal stating as the goalie did not have the ball tucked into her body she did not have possession. A point in which we argued as the goalkeeper is considered to be in control (= possession) of the ball when the ball is held with both hands, held by trapping the ball between one hand and any surface (e.g., the ground, a goalpost, the goalkeeper’s body), or holding the ball in the outstretched open palm.

Even if you agree with the referee’s definition of possession, shouldn’t a charge at minimal have been called against the attacker (another point we argued) with the potential of a send-off for serious foul play?

Is there any plausible reason the goal should have been allowed?

Please clarify.

USSF answer (September 17, 2010):
Let us lay out the facts and our perceptions of the incident. No blame assessed; make your own decision.

It makes no difference from whom the list of times when the goalkeeper is in possession of the ball came, but we would clarify that if the goalkeeper has the ball firmly gripped in her hand (i. e., the hand is not open), that would also qualify. If she had the ball in both hands (as your description seems to suggest) before she was charged from behind by the attacker (of which more later), then she was certainly in possession.

As to the charge from behind: A player may charge an opponent from behind, but only in the area of the shoulder and only if the opponent is shielding a ball that is within playing distance. This can include a certain portion of the shoulder blade. The charge may not be done with excessive force (a sending-off offense), as suggested by your description.

As the deflection by your ‘keeper would seem to have been purely defensive in nature (rather than a parry, which she could not play again with her hands …

"Inventive" Refs

PARRYING THE BALL; DIFFERENT RULES IN THE UNITED STATES

September 7, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
First question:
I’ve been taught that referees, for good management of a game, for players and spectators will enjoy the game, have to “sell their calls.” (For example, don’t lightly blow your whistle for a penalty kick. Blow the whistle like you know for sure!) My question is, what is the best way to “sell” the second touch call by a keeper after parrying a ball? Its a rule that many (or I should say EVERY) senior referees and assignors have advised I don’t call, a rule players are not aware of because it is never called. I am not afraid to have the conviction to call tough calls, but I need advice on this one. Would a pregame warning to keepers help? Maybe I can get petition for the rule to change to make it so that it applies to the spirit of why the rule was made (prevention of time wasting)? A wink and a nod to use discretion and to think that every shot, no matter how soft, will knuckle and might need to be knocked down?

Second question:
This is about the politics of FIFA, NFHS, and NISOA. Why don’t they have the same rules? Is any party trying to unify with the other?

USSF answer (September 7, 2010):
First question:
a) Never, NEVER lecture the players before the game. Why? Because they will then expect you to live up to every word, something you cannot possibly do.
b) Don’t call a foul because the players don’t know that this is a violation? Please! That is the most idiotic bit of sophistry we have ever heard! If no one ever calls the foul, how will the players ever learn? Pay no attention to such “old referees’ tales.”

We might add that this is one of those calls that you need to be sure about and, particularly, that it made a difference in the run of play (i. e., the keeper took second possession in order to prevent an opponent from challenging for the ball).

Second question:
There are no politics involved here. The NFHS and the NCAA (not NISOA, which is simply a referee organization) do not belong to the U. S. Soccer Federation and are thus not bound by the Laws of the Game, the rules the rest of the world plays by.…

"Inventive" Refs

FLAG ON REFEREE UNIFORM

September 1, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
I met a USSF Grade 8 referee this weekend who was on a field next to the one was refereeing on. I noticed that he had a flag sewn to the sleeve of his uniform. Two part question:

Is this legal, and if so, how would we know (where in the documentation does this exist)?

This particular referee is English and the flag on his uniform was the Union Jack. Is this legal? Why/why not?

Thank you,

USSF answer (September 1, 2010):
If the referee chooses to wear it, the USA flag patch is to be worn on the left sleeve, between elbow and shoulder.

The wearing of the USA flag path was originally permitted as a reminder of 9/11 and is still allowed. There is no basis for a person registered with the U. S. Soccer Federation to be wearing the Union Jack on his uniform, no matter what his nationality.…

"Inventive" Refs

“LAST DEFENDER!”

September 1, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
I am currently a coach, parent, and member of our local soccer club board of directors. I have been around soccer most of my life. Our local youth premier league had their opening weekend recently, and I saw 4 occasions of what I would I thought was a strange call. This happened in U11 girls, U13 girls, U11 boys, and U12 boys.

The call as stated by the referee in all occasions was simply “last defender” One coach asked the referee what this meant, and was not answered beyond those words. The call incurred a yellow card in each case.

The first instance was in U11 boys. One of our defenders was playing catch up with a break away, and was just about to gain the goal side on the other player. The other player tried to take a quick shot, and kicked the turf and went tumbling. No contact happened, but I chalked it up to a center ref not leaving the center circle.

The second instance was in the U12 boys game. This time our player was making a run on the goal, and the opposing defender made a perfect tackle on the ball. Surprisingly there was no body contact, or slide involved. It was just a good solid tackle of the ball. The kind of defensive save that makes you cheer even when it prevented your team from scoring. The referee was at a very good vantage point to make this call.

The third was in U11 girls game. This time the defender was containing the girl nicely. Had per pressed to the outside, making a shot difficult at best. The girl took a sweeping kick, and the defender made her tackle on the ball at this time. The ball shoots out along the goal line.

The fourth instance was in the U13 girls game, and the offensive player came from the corner into the penalty area, and tried to make a move past the defender. Her move took her straight into the stationary defender, and she fell.

In all these case the ruling of the referee was “last defender”, and a yellow card was issued. It appears that in our league this year, it is illegal to be the last defender, but I was wondering if there were a better explanation for these calls.

USSF answer (September 1, 2010):
We see two possibilities here for the totally non-standard term “last defender.”

1.It could possibly have been the referee’s way of saying that the player who was cautioned had committed what used to be called a “professional foul,” usually committed as a last resort to stop a promising attack.

2. Or, rhis was a foul committed by a defender against an attacker under circumstances in which all the elements (the “4 Ds”) of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity have been met, in particular including the number of defenders where the referee has judged that there was only one or no defender between the location of the foul and the goal, not counting the defender who committed the offense. Of course, given this, the card should have been red, not yellow.

We are aware of no possibilities beyond these and can only say that some referees, just like some coaches, are very inventive.…

"Inventive" Refs

SPITTING

August 24, 2010August 24, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
In the send off offenses – Spitting is listed separately as it’s own offense. Is it appropriate for it to be written up as Spitting or should it be written up as Fighting.

Also – If a Red Card is being issued for spitting and subsequent to that 2 other players followed it up with pushing would these players then be subject to Red Cards as well for the continuation of a Fight.

USSF answer (August 24, 2010):
When in doubt, follow the rules: A player may be sent off for only seven reasons (see Law 12), none of which is “fighting.” If a player is sent off for spitting at an opponent or any other person, that is the reason given in the match report.

Any illegal action that follows a sending-off offense is punished on its own “merits.” If the pushing is reckless, the player is cautioned and shown the yellow card for unsporting behavior. If the pushing involves the use of excessive force, the player is sent off and shown the red card for violent conduct. There is no misconduct named “continuation of a fight.”…

"Inventive" Refs

DEALING WITH THE ADVANTAGE

August 23, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
I am an assignor for club soccer in our area and have been officiating for 4 years after 12 as a coach and playing many years ago. I am always trying to improve myself as a referee. My question concerns application of the advantage clause. Question – One of the referees I assign is quite good and has been a referee for many years.

He takes a bit of free time to help with more inexperienced referees, however, I am a bit concerned about his application of advantage. It seems to me he waits quite long at times to determine if advantage has truly occurred. An actual situation occurred in a high level match I observed him working as follows: Player A1 is dribbling the ball and from approximately 25 yards away from team B’s goal takes a shot toward B’s goal. Defender B1 outside his own penalty area handles the ball and the ball immediately rebounds to same player A1 directly almost at spot of original shot.

As player A1 dribbles forward, referee correctly signals and calls advantage. Player A1 then dribbles to his left, feints and goes around defender B1. Player A1 passes to player A2 who attempts a shot which rebounds off of crossbar to defender B1 who is now just inside the penalty area. Defender B1 controls turns and kicks the ball up-field.

Referee stops play and calls original handling the ball foul on B1 which was the source of the advantage. While I cannot be sure of the actual elapsed time, it seems to me team A received their advantage, had opportunity to play to another team A player who took a chance at a reasonable scoring opportunity. My personal feeling is the handling foul should have been “waived” as team A was able to get quite a bit of action as well as a scoring opportunity out of the advantage. I almost felt like the referee was giving team A two chances at scoring a goal. This is not the first time I’ve seen him call back the advantage with such a large amount of time elapsed from the original foul. Am I wrong here? I cannot discuss this with the referee in question as he does not like to be challenged on his decisions.

USSF answer (August 23, 2010):
The USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” tells us in Advice 5.6:
“The referee may return to and penalize the original foul if the advantage situation does not develop as anticipated after a short while (2-3 seconds). Referees should note that the “advantage” is not defined solely in terms of scoring a goal.”

The situation you describe obviously went on for more than the 2-3 seconds outlined in the Law. If that was all that was involved, the referee should not have called play back in this situation.

However, looked at a bit differently, one could also argue that the referee had the opportunity to decide that the advantage did not apply if, at the time the ball rebounds from the handling (although, if it “rebounds,” was it really a handling offense because rebounds would not normally meet the requirement of Law 12 that the ball was deliberately propelled) to the original attacker, the number and skills of the defenders now arrayed against further play by the attacking team was more advantageous for the defense than it would have been without the handling “foul.” In short, depending on the circumstances (and the application of the “Four Ps”), either the foul (if it truly was a foul) should have been called back about the time the ball reached the original attacker OR it should have not been called back at all if the referee has allowed play to continue for so long.…

"Inventive" Refs

SEND OFF — SHORT OR FULL STRENGTH?

August 7, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
The referee sends a player from the field for illegal equipment, blood, etc. While off the field correcting the situation and before signaled to re-enter by the referee, the player a.) clothes lines a player on the field as the player runs down the touchline with the ball. b.) strikes a player on the bench. c.) uses foul/abusive language towards the referee. The question is whether the team will be playing short from that point on in the match? Several “senior referees” respond that because the player is not on the field, the referee cannot make the team play short handed from the send-off for the misconduct.

USSF answer (August 7, 2010):
The “senior referees” should consider packing it in — or start taking memory pills. A player sent from the field to correct equipment problems (or to receive medical attention) is still a player and counted as being part of the team on the field.

Law 3 (in the Interpretations of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees) tells us:

Player outside the field of play
If, after leaving the field of play to correct equipment or kit, to be treated for an injury or bleeding, because he has blood on his kit or for any other reason with the referee’s permission, a player re-enters the field of play without the referee’s permission, the referee must:
– stop play (although not immediately if the player does not not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
– caution the player for entering the field of play without permission
– order the player to leave the field of play if necessary (infringement of Law 4)

If the referee stops play, it must be restarted
– with an indirect free kick for the opposing team from the position of the ball when play was stopped (see Law 13 — Position of Free Kick) if there is no other infringement
– in accordance with Law 12 if the player infringes this Law

Scenario (a) only: The referee must punish the more serious of the two simultaneous acts of foul/misconduct and send off the player who was off the field with the referee’s permission for violent conduct or serious foul play (see below). Because this player re-entered the field to clothesline the opponent, Law 12 governs the restart, which will be a direct free kick from the place where the player struck his opponent. This player’s team must play short for the remainder of the game.

In short: In scenario (a), send off for serious foul play if competing for the ball or for violent conduct if not competing for the ball and restart with a direct free kick where the “clothesline” occurred; scenario (b), send off for violent conduct and restart with dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped; and, in scenario (c), send off for abusive language and restart with a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped. In all three scenarios, the team plays down.…

"Inventive" Refs

GOALS AND INJURED ‘KEEPER

July 29, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
In order to play there are X number of players and a specifically appointed goalkeeper. This is a two part question. If the goalkeeper is injured does play stop? If the keeper is injured for a period of time and play is continuing does the goal count if it crosses the goal line?

USSF answer (July 29, 2010):
A two-part question gets a two-part answer.

1. Play is stopped only if, in the opinion of the referee, the player is seriously injured. That includes all players, whether field player or goalkeeper.

2. If the goalkeeper is not, in the opinion of the referee, seriously injured and play continues, a goal would be counted if the whole of the ball completely crosses the entire goal line between the goalposts and beneath the crossbar.…

"Inventive Assessors"

NO GOAL FOR DENYING A GOAL BY DELIBERATELY HANDLING THE BALL?

July 6, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
hi my question is this if the player is on the line and puts his hands up to stop the ball from crossing the line in what happen.

I thought it was called a goal and a red card is given .

USSF answer (July 6, 2010):
You are not alone in your wish that this was true, but not in soccer, or at least not yet. There is a rule in both forms of rugby that allows the referee to award what is called a “penalty try” when an opponent commits misconduct, and thus prevents a try — the equivalent of a goal or touchdown in rugby — being scored. However, there is no such rule in soccer. The referee sends off the player who prevented the goal or the obvious goalscoring opportunity and restarts in accordance with the nature of the foul that led to the misconduct. In the situation you describe, that would be a penalty kick.…

"Inventive" Refs

POSITION OF HANDS FOR THE THROW-IN

June 7, 2010 by Jim Allen

Question:
Law 15: What constitutes “from behind” the head? All of the ball behind all of head? center of the ball behind all of the head? center of the ball behind center of the head?

Thanks

USSF answer (June 7, 2010):
While some particularly limber people may be able to position the entire ball behind their head, the rest of us are not that well enabled. The “from behind and over the head” refers to the hands, the means of delivering the ball. The hands must be positioned behind some portion of the back and top of the head before the ball is delivered.

A gentle reminder to all referees (and coaches and players and spectators) who read this: The referee should not go looking for offenses to call. Let the game flow if there is no clear — let us emphasize that, CLEAR — infringement that somehow affects the game.…