Question:
An offensive player, with control of the ball, runs hard into a defensive player – literally taking the player off his feet and on his back. The player maintained control of the ball. If in the view of the referee it was unsportsman like conduct – essentially targeting the player – what and how would the call be handled? The confusion was since the player maintained control of the ball, you could not call it then since the ball would change teams. Another person said, a hit is a hit…the defensive player should have moved.

Any ideas.

USSF answer (November 4, 2008):
You need to stop talking about the Laws of the Game and their proper interpretation and application with people who clearly use illegal substances.

Let’s see if we have this right: A player violently runs over an opponent who refuses to relinquish his space on the field. Despite committing this premeditated mayhem, the player manages to maintain control of the ball. We wouldn’t want to call this a foul and serious misconduct, because then possession of the ball would change from the assassin’s team to that of the innocent victim, who clearly should have moved out of the killer’s way. Hmmm.

We hope the answer is now clear to you: No player is allowed to use violence while playing the ball or attempting to play the ball and/or the opponent. No player is required to give up space which he or she has taken legally simply because someone else wants it; rather, other players are required to go around a player in such a position. The fact that a player has committed violent conduct does not mean that his act is okay because he retained possession of the ball. Send off the attacker for violent conduct; restart with a direct free kick for the opponent’s team at the place where the foul and the violent conduct took place.

And please encourage your colleagues to read the Laws a bit more carefully.…

Question:
I had this in a game I did the other night. The keeper stops a shot and gets ready to release it but I told her to hold on for one second because a player on the other team seemed to be injured. The player said she was fine so I told the goalie to play on without blowing my whistle. The goalie ran to the line and carried the ball past the penalty area before she released the ball. I then blew my whistle for the first time and awarded the other team an Indirect Free Kick for improper clearing of the ball by the keeper. I was in a two-man system and the other official (who is my father) felt the call should have been a hand ball and a direct free kick to restart. We settled on my interpretation of the rules and the kick taken was an IFK. The kick actually went off the goalie’s fingertips and went in the goal. Since it went off the goalie’s fingers the indirect free kick was satisfied, so I got lucky with the call since both direct and indirect kicks were satisfied. However, what would the correct call be so I can make the right call next time? Thanks

USSF answer (September 22, 2008):
Our opinion is that your father was technically correct: The restart, if you stopped the game for this extremely trifling infringement, should have been a direct free kick. (There is, by the way, no such infringement as “improperly clearing the ball.”) You can already see where this answer is going. You interfered with the goalkeeper’s release of the ball and then, when she committed a TRIFLING infringement of the Law, you punished her and even allowed a goal to be scored against her team.

Lesson to be learned from this: If you cannot tell immediately that a player is truly injured, there is no need to delay play. Instead, you should let the goalkeeper clear the ball from the penalty area and only then stop play, if you must, to check the possibly injured player. If you do otherwise, you have then already determined that the player is injured and should stop play immediately. And that means that the restart will be inside the penalty area through no fault of the defending team. It’s a matter of good management and common sense for referees to try not to disadvantage unfairly the team that has not committed any infringement.

Then, of course, there is always the fact that you were officiating in a two-referee game, something to be avoided by referees registered with the U. S. Soccer Federation, as the dual system of control is not in accordance with the Laws of the Game or the policies of the Federation.…

Question:
I ran across a situation last night while I was doing a U10 game. During goal kicks some of the players were having difficulty kicking the ball directly beyond the penalty area. Meaning the ball would sometimes bounce or roll out of the penalty area from a kick. I had them retake the kick again so that they understood what they needed to do and because they are U10 if, after the second kick the ball still rolled or bounced out of the penalty area I let them play it.

Anyway one of the coaches (who is also a referee) and one of his parents approached me at the half and asked why I made that call. I explained to them that according to Law 16 the ball is in play when it is kicked directly beyond the penalty area. Their interpretation of what directly means was different than mine. I explained to them that when I was coaching, referees would make my players re kick the ball if it touched the ground before leaving the penalty area.

Is my interpretation correct? I’m going to be doing a lot of U10 games this season and the information will come in quite handy.

USSF answer (October 15, 2008):
The use of the word “directly” in Law 16 does not mean that the ball magically flew from the foot of the kicker to a point just outside the penalty area. It means that the ball left the foot of the kicker and somehow it left the penalty area without being touched by a human being. (In this case, referees and assistant referees do not count as human beings; instead they are regarded as part of the field.) The ball may leave the penalty area in the air or on the ground, but it must leave the area to be in play.

We are sorry that you learned the wrong techniques from what we call “inventive” referees, those who make up their own rules as they go along.…

Question:
I have a question regarding the rights a keeper has to attempt to collect or parry a ball within his own penalty area.

I have been a referee for many years and have been told many conflicting thoughts on a keeper’s “rights” within his own penalty area. I have always worked games under the thought that a keeper has no “special” rights within their area, other than to use their hands to collect the ball.

I was watching a high school boy’s game this week where a situation occurred between the keeper and an attacker that I thought was mishandled and would like your thoughts so that I better understand the “Laws”.

The situation was:

The attacking team had a free kick from outside the defending team’s penalty area. When play restarted, the attacking team put the play in play by kicking the ball into the penalty area where many players, both attacking and defending players, were waiting to try to play the ball. The keeper came out of his goal area and jumped into (through) the mass of players and successfully parried the ball away before the ball reached the head of an attacker. The attacking player had already established his position and had jumped straight up to try to head the ball towards the goal. The keeper, however, went “through” the attacker while trying to parry the ball causing injury to the attacking player (the attacking player left the field and did not return). I believed that the keeper had committed a penal foul for which a penalty kick should be awarded. At a minimum, I believed the keeper’s conduct should be considered a dangerous play for which an indirect free kick should have been awarded.

After the game had concluded, I questioned the center as to why no foul was called. His reasoning was that a keeper had a right to the ball within his own penalty area and cannot be penalized in his own area. I know there are a number of infractions whereby the penalty or restart are different if committed by a keeper in his own penalty area… but I have never heard of such a rule that protects a keeper in this way.

Can you please comment on what “rights” a keeper has within in his penalty area and whether or not a keeper can receive a penal foul (for which a penalty kick is awarded) or a caution within their own area? Also, I would like your thoughts on the proper call given the scenario described above.

USSF answer (October 15, 2008):
On October 2, 2008, we included this information on a ‘keeper’s rights in an answer: “All players are entitled to the same protection under the Laws of the Game. The goalkeeper has no right to special protection. The goalkeeper’s role is, by the very requirements of that role, inherently dangerous. Goalkeepers know this going in and most operate accordingly.” The goalkeeper does have the right to be able to release the ball back into general play without interference. That and the right to wear some special protective equipment not permitted to other players is about it.

We would suggest that your referee was operating under a misapprehension. If the goalkeeper commits an infringement of the Laws, he or she must be punished just like any other player.…

Question:
I have been refereeing for about 4 years now. I now referee using both high school and FIFA laws of the game, and came upon a difficult call the other day. Basically what I would like to know is whether the defender’s arms and hands can be counted in the offside call. Here is the situation explained the best I can without a drawing.

While I was refereeing a game, there was a corner kick, which was passed back to the kicker, who I thought was in an offside position, standing just inside the goal line. I called the player offside, and then I thought about the call after the game. The issue was that there were two defenders standing about a foot and a half from the goal line with their arms fully extended and resting on the goal post. I was (and still am) under the impression that the defender’s arms and hands should not be used in determining whether the attacker is offside or not. If the attacker’s arms and hands are not a contributing factor in the decision, I believe that the defender’s arms and hands should not be either.

After this game, and reviewing the laws of the game and advice to referees a few times, I emailed the interpreter for the high school association that I referee through. (This was a high school game.) He replied to me and said that the player that I called offside was in fact onside. I did not agree with that, so I started asking other officials that I worked with. I asked another official that I officiate with at the high school level and he agreed with me. I also asked the head referee for the recreational league that I officiate through, and he agreed with me as well. (The recreational league follows FIFA LOTG)

I would simple like some clarification as to whether I made the correct call or not. I am aware that the game was a high school game, and the rules are slightly different, but the offside call is very similar.
If this were a game using FIFA LOTG, would that have been a correct call?

USSF answer (October 1, 2008):
The Law is quite clear about this. Any part of the body that can LEGALLY play the ball is considered when the referee looks for offside. That excludes the hands and arms, as they cannot legally play the ball. The same is true of the hands and arms of the opposing players.…