Question:
Boys U18 league game. I am the coach (also a referee and referee instructor). My forward beats the 2nd to last defender about 8-10 yds from the penalty area line.. Now 1 v 1 with the GK. GK advances to just beyond the penalty mark. Within the penalty arc heading toward the goal with the ball at his feet is taken down from behind by the defender he just beat. No attempt to play the ball, foul was not hard but enough to trip the attacker and cause the ball to go over the goal line outside the goal.

The center official was following the play approximately 15 yds behind. Immediately blows his whistle, displays a YELLOW CARD??? and restarts with a DK in our favor.

Obviously in my opinion this really looks like a DGSO and a red card. I address my comments to the AR2 who was following the play, even with ball, expressing my opinion that this is a DGSO and that I hope you address this with the center at half time. His reply? “Well, you know there are a lot of referee’s who wouldn’t even award a yellow card for that.”

Am I missing something here or what? Of course I am partially venting but more importantly in my recert classes the video’s provided to me by our state organization seem to clearly show that this is an area that we all should be clear on. Mandatory red card.

USSF answer (May 6, 2009):
We join you in regretting that there are indeed referees such as the assistant referee describes. No courage equals poor referee. However, in this case, the referee may have exercised his opinion, certainly his right, and decided that there was no obvious goalscoring opportunity. But that would be the only possible excuse for not sending the defender off in this situation.

Nor does the AR escape unscathed. His comment was as unprofessional as the referee’s handling of the situation.…

Question:
there was keeper change during the game. he did sub in during a throw in but did not acknowledge me about the goalie change.

During the game the opposing team scores 2 goals on this goalie where the this goalie never touched the ball with his hands. finally this goalie touched the ball with his hands, I called a hand ball and penalty kick because he had not told me offically about the goalie change. What is the correct call? Or was I correct?

USSF answer (April 30, 2009):
Let us ponder this: You were fully aware of the change when it happened and did nothing about it. Now you want to punish the new goalkeeper for handling the ball. You allowed the new goalkeeper to play for much of the game and did nothing.

Would you have punished the goalkeeper if he had touched the ball on its way into the goal for the two scores that occurred before you took action? If so, that would have denied the opposing team whichever of those goals you took away.

What you should have done was to be proactive and ask the captain or the new goalkeeper if he wanted to tell you about a substitution. And you should have done that right away. We do not play power games with the players. It is their game, not ours. Help them play correctly.

The failure to notify the referee — if indeed there was a failure — is clearly a minor issue and you should only have reminded the new goalkeeper about the requirement.  But all referees need to understand that under NO circumstances can this goalkeeper be penalized for handling the ball illegally.  The strongest action the referee can take is to caution the ‘keeper at the next stoppage of play (but only the stoppage that occurs directly following the goalkeeper’s appearance on the field) — if the referee allows this opportunity to pass then he can’t even do that!

Our feeling is that this was a simple substitution during which someone forgot to say the magic words to you.  When you allowed the substitution and whistled for the restart of play with player X now wearing a distinctive goalkeeper jersey, due notice was given to and acknowledged by you.…

Question:
Situation inside six yard box, forward driving towards goal was cut off by defense and attempted to turn out and back , a defender CHARGED into her from behind then in a continuous motion and gave a 2-handed shove,straight out with enough force to knock her down. She was struck from behind at shoulder blade height and with enough force to send her flying over the ball and to the ground! No foul was called and Ref said it was Legal.??? I say Law 12 was broke?

USSF answer (April 30, 2009):
Coach, provided that the situation was precisely as you describe it, the defender should have been sent off for violent conduct — or for serious foul play if the referee believed that the defender was challenging for the ball, which doesn’t sound likely in this case. Penalty kick restart.…

Question:
High level U15 girls national championship series preliminary match. To set the scene – Game is tied 0-0 in the second half. White goalie comes out to near 18 and makes a save. Ball comes loose and blue forward hits ball off goalie. Goalie jumps on ball outside the 18 and is called for handling. Goalie then proceeds to argue with CR for 30-45 seconds (I believe stating that she had control when the blue player hit the ball which is not what I saw or what the CR saw). CR does not issue caution and says after the game that “this was a high level state cup game and emotions were high” so she did not issue a caution (AR stated during game that he would have cautioned keeper).

With 4 minutes left in game and white winning 1-0, white keeper makes another save and trips blue player just inside the 18. CR blows whistle and issues keeper (who is still holding the ball) a caution.

After a short discussion with keeper, CR backs off and allows keeper to punt. After the game, CR states that caution was for dissent and that she would have just dropped the ball to the keeper and allowed her to punt and since there was not much time left, she just allowed the keeper to punt.

How should this have been handled?

USSF answer (April 21, 2009):
While we might agree with the referee’s initial decision not to caution the goalkeeper for dissent because of the high emotional level of the game, we do not recommend allowing protracted sessions of “discussion” with any player. The referee should state her decision, take care of business (if any), and get on with the game. (And the AR should have kept his mouth shut unless speaking directly to the referee.)

The second decision raises three areas of concern.
– First, the caution for dissent may or may not have been correct, but if the referee saw it that way, then it was correct. We wonder if it should not have been for unsporting behavior (reckless play in tripping the opponent).
– The second area of concern is the possibility that there was an obvious goalscoring opportunity — we don’t have any details to determine one way or another.
– The third area of concern is the way the game was restarted — or “continued,” as a punt is definitely not a way to restart the game. A dropped ball is not possible. A punt is clearly an abomination. If the caution was for dissent, the only legal restart is an indirect free kick (not a dropped ball) for the opposing team where the goalkeeper committed the dissent.  However, if the caution was for the goalkeeper tripping the opponent, then the correct restart is a direct free kick or, in this case, a penalty kick.…

Question:
A game with older teenage boys. There is a breakaway of two attackers, running at full speed. At the 18 yard line the striker gives a glancing kick. The keeper kneels on the six and easily collects the ball. The other striker continues running at top speed, leaps into the air & lunges at the keeper, who is still kneeling & still holding the ball. The attacker’s leg is extended, his cleats are up, and he is aimed at the keeper’s head. The keeper ducks, & the attacker misses. In the opinion of the referee, if full contact had been made, as the referee believes was the attacker’s intention, it would have excited the interest of the E-911 emergency ambulance, and indeed possibly the Grand Jury.

The referee is aware that the IFAB writes that any lunge at an opponent that endangers the opponent’s safety should be sanctioned as serious foul play, but until now these examples have always been for cases where the tackle or lunge did in fact make contact.

As the attempt to endanger an opponent missed, and no contact was made, the referee is unclear how the Laws should be applied. In particular, do the Laws regard this instance as Serious Foul Play?

USSF answer (April 20, 2009):
Nowhere does the Law (including the Interpretations and Guidelines for Referees you refer to) say that there must be contact in the situation you describe. Look at the four violations of the Law that embody this view:
– kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
– trips or attempts to trip an opponent
– jumps at an opponent
– strikes or attempts to strike an opponent

In such a case the referee should have no doubt, no fear, no hesitance. Players who behave like the striker you describe MUST be sent off immediately for serious foul play. No debate, no dithering. Just do it!…