Category: Law 12 – Fouls & Misconduct

Law 12 – Fouls & Misconduct

Impeding

SHIELDING VS IMPEDING

Posted on by

Question:
Corner Kick-shielding. During a recent U12 Girls game I was officiating, the blue team was awarded a corner kick. Blue player took the kick but miss hit the ball. The ball traveled forward about 6 feet towards the goal. The kicker, realizing that she could not kick the ball again since it would constitute a two touch violation, yelled at her teammate to come in and get the ball. The red team defender who was next to the blue teammate also ran towards the ball to try and gain control of it.

Question: Would it have been OK if the blue team player who kicked the ball ran between the red team player and ball to shield her from getting the ball (with the understanding that the ball would have been within playing distance of the blue team player who kicked it) and give the blue teammate of the kicker a better opportunity of getting the ball by swinging behind the two players?

If the kicker was not allowed to legally play the ball again immediately due to the two touch rule, can she still be involved in the play and shield the opposing player from getting the ball?

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
Shielding the ball does not establish or continue “possession” of the ball. The Blue player is technically unable to actually play the ball, because to do so would constitute the “second touch.” Being within “playing distance” should not be considered sufficient to allow the kicker to shield the ball – the ball must in fact also be playable by that player. In other words, the concept of “playing distance” must include being able to play the ball legally.

If the player can legally play the ball and the ball is within playing distance, the player may shield as a tactic to prevent an opponent from getting to the ball (provided, of course, that the shielding does not involve holding).  If the player cannot legally play the ball or if the ball is not within playing distance, such shielding becomes “impeding the progress of an opponent” and should be penalized by an indirect free kick.…

"Inventive" Refs

THE REFEREE DID WHAT?! (CORRECTED)

Posted on by

Question:
In a high school varsity game played under USSF rules (as opposed to NHSF) the attacking team plays a ball that rolls into the penalty area and is picked up by the goalie. After the goalie has possession, a defender running with the attacker chasing the ball plays the body and bumps the attacker in a significant manner. The referee (I was the AR) gave the defender a caution for UB, and then allowed the goalie to punt to continue play.

We discussed after the game as to whether, after the caution, he should have awarded the attacking team a penalty kick, an indirect free kick from the spot of the contact, or whether letting the goalie punt was appropriate.

We’d appreciate your feedback.

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
The correct course of action would have been to stop play for the foul by the defender, to caution the defender for unsporting behavior and restart with a penalty kick. However, in this case, the referee did not stop play and appears to have cautioned the defender “on the fly,” not something that is in accordance with the Laws of the Game. This shows either ignorance of the Law or willful disregard of the Law by the referee.…

"Inventive" Refs

DEFINITION OF “RELEASING THE BALL INTO PLAY”

Posted on by

Question:
The following event occurred in an under 17 boys classic game:
The keeper of Team A caught shot from team B and proceeded to jog to the top of the penalty area where he bounced the ball once before the impending punt. The bounce hit a sand spot and died in place, wherupon in a continuous motion the keeper scooped it up and punted it. The referee whistled and awarded and indirect free kick to Team B for “touching the ball a second time violation” which resulted in a goal being scored by Team B.

After the game, I questioned the referee about that call, and he stated that once the keeper lost possession of the ball, he could not pick it up again. I stated that the rule requires the keeper to release the ball from his possession which implies intent (except for dropping an air dribble), and that a bad bounce from a field defect does not end possession as long as the keeper’s play is continuous. I have seen the same with a mud spot or water puddle in the goal area and also a divot in the pitch that causes the ball to bounce badly.

USSF answer (September 20, 2011):
While the goalkeeper’s choice of a spot to bounce the ball was unfortunate, he did NOT relinquish possession of the ball by doing it and was perfectly within his rights to reclaim the ball in his hands. The goalkeeper is allowed to throw the ball in the air or bounce it on the ground and still retain possession of the ball. The referee was wrong to call the “second touch.” Naughty, naughty referee!…

"Inventive" Refs

A PROPER SHOULDER CHARGE

Posted on by

Question:
I’ve read your comments on the shoulder tackle and they agree with what I was taught. However, I find that we have fouls called on us for what appear to be legal shoulder tackles about 75% of the time in youth soccer within our league and at tournaments. Most referees don’t call 75% of the trips or pushes. Reasons given are 1) excessive force (other player fell down), 2) arm was bent (and close to body), 3) arm was straight (and close to body), not playing the ball (but playing the player with the ball). Players on some teams we play flop on the ground as soon as anyone tries to shoulder tackle and that is rewarded with the foul call. Please help the referees come to some consensus on how to referee this type of tackle. I’ve given up teaching players to shoulder tackle. Too bad they won’t learn how to play soccer.

USSF answer (September 8, 2011):
Strange and mysterious are the ways of referees. It would appear that there is a vast difference between what you see happening on the field and what some of the referees who work your games have been taught.

Although you will have to search very hard to find it written anywhere, the world accepts a fair charge of the opponent if the players make contact shoulder to shoulder, with the charging player’s arms in at his side, while both players have at least one foot on the ground. The charging player may not charge carelessly, recklessly, or use excessive force. At the youth level, particularly in the early teenage brackets, where players of the same age may experience growth spurts differently, a “best effort” at a should-to-shoulder charge is accepted.

A player charging “for the ball” need not _play_ the ball at all, but he or she must be challenging for the ball. Referees must make the distinction necessary to apply the Law correctly. We must also admit the answer on the degree of force involved can vary, depending on player skill level. Players at higher skill levels will accept a bit more force than those at lower skill levels. (And the same applies to the referees who call these games.) However, anything that appears to done recklessly or with excessive force MUST be punished.

The Federation has defined the fair charge quite clearly in its publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:

12.5 CHARGING
The act of charging an opponent can be performed without it being called as a foul. Although the fair charge is commonly defined as “shoulder to shoulder” and without the use of arms or elbows, this is not a requirement and, at certain age levels where heights may vary greatly, may not even be possible. Furthermore, under many circumstances, a charge may often result in the player against whom it is placed falling to the ground (a consequence, as before, of players differing in weight or strength). The Law does require that the charge be directed toward the area of the shoulder and not toward the center of the opponent’s back (the spinal area): in such a case, the referee should recognize that such a charge is at minimum reckless and potentially even violent.

…
"Inventive" Refs

QUESTIONS INVOLVING UNLIKELY SITUATIONS

Posted on by

Question:
1) The penalty taker slips while taking a penalty kicks the ball into the net with both feet.
a. if the kick with both feet is instantaneous, does the goal stand?
b. if the kick with both feet is perceivable seconds apart, does the
goal stand?
2) The player claims that a piece of jewelry he is wearing ( like a bracelet ) is important part of his religious belief. How can I as a referee decide whether that piece of jewelry is dangerous? What decision should I take as the player is protected by ‘ The race relations act’?
3) A striker a attempts ‘Hand of God’ and fails to connect but ends up distracting his marker and the goalkeeper. The ball hits the marker and rebounds of the striker (the wannabe maradona) past the distracted goal keeper into the goal. Should the goal stand?

USSF answer (August 28, 2011):
We hope this is not a question regarding high school rules, as we are not permitted to answer questions involving the rules of the NFSHSA.

1a. Yes, but only if the referee is certain that that the touch with both feet was indeed simultaneous.
1b. No, the player has committed a “double-touch” offense.
2. You make the decision on this piece of jewelry as you would with any other piece of equipment. Is it dangerous to the player or to any other participant? If it is dangerous and cannot be made safe, then the player cannot wear it. No ifs, ands, or buts.
3. Yes, the goal stands. There is no such infringement as “attempting to handle the ball.”…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

SUBSTITUTE ATTEMPTS TO PREVENT GOAL (REDUX)

Posted on by

Question:
Follow-up to August 23 question about a substitute trying to prevent a goal by entering the pitch without permission. You answered what to do if the goal is made, but . . .
(1) What if the goal is NOT made?
(2) What if it was definitely an OGSO?
(3) What if it was an OGSO and NO foul was committed, but the ball was “fairly” taken/played from the attacker by the substitute (who is an illegal player at this point)?
(4) do any answers change if the scene happens outside the penalty area versus inside the penalty area?

I understand at a minimum a yellow is coming, and a red if denying the goal with a foul.

Mainly, my question is what is the restart to each scenario above?

USSF answer (August 28, 2011):
The original question and answer:

Question: A substitute, warming up behind his own goal, enters the field of play, touches the ball and tries to prevent the ball entering the goal with his foot. The ball, however, enters the goal.

What action does the referee take?

Answer of August 23: The referee should play the advantage and award the goal. The referee should then caution the substitute for unsporting behavior for entering the field of play without the referee’s permission, including all details in the match report. (The referee could also consider a second caution for unsporting behavior for interfering with play and thus send off the substitute for the second caution in a match.) Finally, the referee should prevent substitutes from warming up behind the goals. However, in some stadiums warm-ups are allowed behind the goal (because there is no space along the touchlines).

Answer to current question:

(1) Indirect free kick for the attacking team from the place where the ball was when the referee stopped play for the misconduct.
(2) and (3) A foul or misconduct, regardless of the circumstances, which is not committed against an opponent and which is not handling is not a sending-off offense under Law 12 (at least not under reasons #4 or #5). If it was a tactical foul (which this was not) and was the offender’s second caution, then there would be a send-off, just not under sending-off reasons #4 or #5. Restart as in (1).
(4) No, but it is even less likely to have been an obvious goalscoring opportunity. …

"Inventive Coaches"

SOMERSAULTING INTO THE GOAL

Posted on by

Question:
A player catches the ball between his knees and then does a somersault into the goal. The goalkeeper has no clear way to defend the goal. Is this legal?

USSF answer (August 24, 2011):
Players are not allowed to perform dangerous acts that deny other players a chance at the ball. (But similar acts that do not endanger other players (or officials) would seem to be legitimate.) If the act in question is reckless and places other players in danger, then the referee should stop play, caution for unsporting behavior, and restart with an indirect free kick for the goalkeeper’s team.…

Advantage

SUBSTITUTE ATTEMPTS TO PREVENT GOAL

Posted on by

Question:
A substitute, warming up behind his own goal, enters the field of play, touches the ball and tries to prevent the ball entering the goal with his foot. The ball, however, enters the goal.

What action does the referee take?

USSF answer (August 23, 2011):
The referee should play the advantage and award the goal. The referee should then caution the substitute for unsporting behavior for entering the field of play without the referee’s permission, including all details in the match report. (The referee could also consider a second caution for unsporting behavior for interfering with play and thus send off the substitute for the second caution in a match.) Finally, the referee should prevent substitutes from warming up behind the goals. However, in some stadiums warm-ups are allowed behind the goal (because there is no space along the touchlines).…

"Inventive" Refs

VIOLENT CONDUCT

Posted on by

Question:
What is the rules for talking to a referee? Does a player have a right to ask a referee what he was penalized for or is there a strict ‘no talking to the referee’ policy?

My main question is about two incidents I was involved in the following two incidents at a recent game and I disagree with both of the refs decisions. In the first half while I was in an offside position, the oppositions defender turned to pass the ball back to his goalkeeper without realizing I was behind him. I intercepted his pass and scored but the referee said I was offside, surely I’m not offside if I didn’t receive the ball from a team mate?

The second incident happened with ten minutes left and the game all but over as we were leading 4-0. A team mate played the ball up the line too far ahead of me and left the oppositions defender with plenty of time to deal with it. He controlled the ball, took 3 small touches and brought the ball to the sideline where he deliberately hit the ball with force into a group of spectators on the sideline who were having a picnic and drinking from glasses. It was lucky nobody was hurt. He stood about 5 meters away from me as I took the throw in and I directed the ball straight at his face. The red sent me off for this. Should I have received a red throwing the ball at his face (I threw the ball correctly) and should he have been punished for almost injuring spectators?

USSF answer (August 23, 2011):
A player is certainly permitted to ask about the reason for an infringement being called, but the referee is under no obligation to respond with more than a general comment. Some competitions do have a no-talking-to-the-referee policy, simply to prevent problems on the field.

1. No, the referee should not have called you offside in this situation — if all is as you describe it.

2. in the first instance the opposing player should have been sent off for violent conduct for kicking the ball at the spectators. However that does not give you the right to take revenge on him for his act. Yes, you should have been sent off for violent conduct for throwing the ball in your opponent’s face.…

Interpretations/IFAB

EXCESSIVE CELEBRATION?

Posted on by

Question:
Is this an example of excessive celebration:
http://www.mlssoccer.com/matchcenter/2011-08-18-chicago-fire-vs-dc-united/highlights?videoID=18334

I believe I read something that was from FIFA that said jumping over barrier, or in crowd is excessive celebration and warrents a caution.

USSF answer (August 20, 2011):
Scoring a goal is an emotional moment in soccer and appropriate expressions of joy are to be expected. However, the Laws of the Game make clear that such celebrations must not unduly delay the restart of play, nor must they involve actions which are derisory, calculated to demean the opponents, or be offensive to participants and spectators. Although there was mention in the past that leaving the field, jumping over barriers, and entering the crowd was unacceptable, that no longer exists. The referee’s primary concern remains ensuring that the celebrations not delay the restart of play.

Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees (2011/2012 Law 12):

Celebration of a goal
While it is permissible for a player to demonstrate his joy when a goal has been scored, the celebration must not be excessive.

Reasonable celebrations are allowed, but the practice of choreographed celebrations is not to be encouraged when it results in excessive time-wasting and referees are instructed to intervene in such
cases.

A player must be cautioned if:
* in the opinion of the referee, he makes gestures which are provocative, derisory or inflammatory
* he climbs on to a perimeter fence to celebrate a goal being scored
* he removes his shirt or covers his head with his shirt.
* he covers his head or face with a mask or other similar item

Leaving the field of play to celebrate a goal is not a cautionable offense in itself but it is essential that players return to the field of play as soon as possible.

Referees are expected to act in a preventive manner and to exercise common sense in dealing with the celebration of a goal.

…