Category: Law 12 – Fouls & Misconduct

Law 12 – Fouls & Misconduct

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

NO TEMPORARY EXPULSION! NO TEMPORARY EXPULSION!

Posted on by

Question:
In the league I referee in, a yellow card sends the player off the field temporarily. Then the coach can sub him in at the next substitution opportunity. My question is, if the goal keeper commits a cautionable foul and is sent off with a yellow card while the other team is awarded a penalty kick, can there be anyone defending the net for the kick?

USSF answer (September 19, 2008):
We are less concerned about your question than about the reasons that occasion it. Before answering your question directly, please allow us to state that the league in which you referee may be operating in contravention of a FIFA directive forbidding such “temporary expulsion.” This may also put the league in contravention of the stated policies of the U. S. Soccer Federation. As we mention often, if the referee accepts an assignment in a competition that uses rules that contravene the Laws of the Game, he or she must follow those rules; however, we recommend against taking such assignments.

In 2002, a directive from the International F. A. Board stated:

TEMPORARY EXPULSIONS
The Board strongly supports FIFA’s concern that some national associations continue to use temporary expulsions in lower leagues. The Board confirmed in the strongest terms that this procedure must cease immediately, otherwise disciplinary sanctions will be applied against the offending federation.

In 2002 we informed all USSF referees: The referee must be aware that leagues or other competitions which use the “hothead” rule, temporarily expelling players for whatever reason, are not operating with the authorization of the United States Soccer Federation. The U. S. Soccer Federation has no power to authorize modifications to the Laws that are not permitted by FIFA. This is a FIFA directive that must be followed by members of FIFA. There is less concern over this issue in recreational-level youth and amateur leagues, but it can certainly not be permitted in competitive-level youth and amateur competition. A referee who takes assignments in higher-level competitions that require temporary expulsions does so knowing that he will not be following the guidance of the Federation and may jeopardize his standing within the Federation.

The International F. A. Board reaffirmed in 2003 its instructions that no rules permitting temporary expulsion (being forced to play short for an infringement of the Laws) may be used. Here is an excerpt from USSF Memorandum 2003:

TEMPORARY EXPULSIONS
The Board re-affirmed the decision taken at its last meeting that the temporary expulsion of players is not permitted at any level of football.
USSF Advice to Referees: This instruction, which was first discussed in Memorandum 2002, is not subject to implementation by the referee: it is a matter for the competition authority. “Temporary expulsion” in this context refers to a rule purporting to require that a player leave the field temporarily under certain conditions (e.g., having received a caution – a so-called “cooling off” period) and does not include situations in which a player must correct illegal equipment or bleeding.

The USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game” tells referees (in Advice 5.17):
//deleted//

There can be no “temporary expulsion” of players who have been cautioned, nor may teams be forced to substitute for a player who has been cautioned.

//deleted//

And the answer to your question: If a goalkeeper has been termporarily removed from the field in compliance with the rules of the competition, there must still be a goalkeeper on the team. Another player must assume that role temporarily, but must first don the correct equipment. When the goalkeeper is ready to return to the field, he or she must have the referee’s permission to do so and must be in full uniform.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

PERSONAL, PUBLIC, PROVOCATIVE = MISCONDUCT

Posted on by

Question:
I have two different variations of the same question that occurred this weekend in a U16 boys match:

1. My AR was standing near the center line and heard a player on the bench farther away from him say “[CENSORED]” after his team scored a goal. Is the proper response that he brings it to my (center) attention before restart and if he knows which player it is I red card the player for Violent Conduct or offensive language?
2. Same as above but it is the opposing coach who hears the same words and reports to the AR closest to him what was said and by whom?

USSF answer (September 15, 2008):
1. When deciding what to do about either dissent or the use of offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures, the referee must analyze the situation and apply The Three Ps. Was the language Personal? (I. e., directed at someone in particular.) Was the language Public? (I. e., was it loud enough to be heard by others on the field and in its vicinity?) Was the language Provocative? (I. e., could it have led to player management problems involving the other team.) If the answer to these questions is yes, then the matter must be dealt with by the referee and the nearest official to the referee must make sure that he or she learns of it as quickly as possible. (Violent conduct would not apply to either of your situations.)

In this particular case, if the AR can reliably identify the “player” in the bench area who would have to be sent off for using offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures and shown the red card, with full details included in the referee’s match report.

2. The referee cannot take any action (except perhaps a general “talking to” in the direction of the bench) based solely on the word of anyone other than a member of the officiating team.…

Illegal Gamesmanship

PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE?

Posted on by

Question:
This past weekend I ref’d a U19G D2 game. Two girls from the home team had either a number or symbols painted on their face on the cheek under the eye. I asked the coach if they were tatoos. He said they were not. I told them that although anti-glare paint or strips under the eye would be OK, face painting for merely ornamental reasons would be considered adornment and would not be allowed. He became somewhat indignant and stated that he would get a clarification on the rules before he told them not to paint numbers/symbols on their face.
Questions: Can players wear anti glare paint/strips under the eyes? Can players paint numbers or symbols on their face?

USSF answer (September 15, 2008):
Law 4 – Player Equipment – tells us:

Safety
A player must not use equipment or wear anything which is dangerous to himself or another player (including any kind of jewelry).
The basic compulsory equipment of a player is:
– a jersey or shirt
– shorts — if thermal undershorts are worn, they are of the same main color as the shorts
– stockings
– shinguards
– footwear

The referee must enforce the Laws of the Game, particularly as they apply to the safety of players. In other words, the player must not wear anything that is dangerous to anyone on the field and must not wear jewelry. The only players allowed — by custom and practice, rather than by the Law — to wear any other items of clothing are goalkeepers. It is up to the referee to determine what is dangerous to the players in the game being refereed on this particular day at this particular field. The Federation cannot set separate guidelines for different age groups. There is no difference between under-tiny soccer, under-16 or -19 soccer, amateur soccer, professional or international soccer.

Anti-glare strips or paint on the face might be considered acceptable, as might paintings of flowers or the team mascot, but some face painting — combat camouflage, stripes, etc. — is clearly intended as an attempt to intimidate the opponents and is thus unsporting behavior, rather than simply a matter of “building spirit,” the reason usually offered for the practice.

If questioned by players, the referee should simply refer them to Law 4. If they do not wish to remove items that are unacceptable to the referee and thus to conform with the Law, inform them that the only alternative to removing the unauthorized equipment is not to play at all. Safety and common sense must be the referee’s guideline.

If leagues or tournaments wish to prevent problems, they should adopt rules of competition which take the burden of determining that certain items are not acceptable in their competition. Referees should not be forced to make all the decisions in this area and thus become the target for player, coach, and spectator abuse.

And as a well-known former FIFA Referee would say: “Only in America!”…

Interpretations/IFAB

WRESTLING WITH CHANGES IN THE LAWS

Posted on by

Question:
Obviously some things have changed in the last year concerning misconduct (violent conduct) by players on and off the field. Would you please correct or clarify two examples that may have changed and what the correct restart (and by whom) should be:

1. The classic example of the goalkeeper that steps into the goal and over the goal line while the ball is in play to strike an opponent who is caught in the goal net due to momentum. The previous restart would have been a dropped ball. It seems the new restart is now an indirect free kick at the point of the ball. Correct?

2. A player on the field of play is guilty of violent conduct while the ball is in play against a substitute or substituted player. I find an answer (AIG 08; FIFA LOTG 2009) as an indirect free kick… but for whom? Chronologically the substitute or substituted player has entered the field of play illegally (caution; unsporting conduct) before the player misconduct which would be an indirect free kick for (and sent off) for violent conduct with and indirect free kick awarded to the opposing team. Pulled in both directions.

USSF answer (September 15, 2008):
Considering the amendments to and revision of the Laws of the Game for 2008/2009, you may have a point here.

In the first scenario, the IFAB has now made it clear that referees have to decide if the player left the field for the purpose of committing the misconduct or whether the player left the field (or was ordered off — blood, equipment — or was given permission to be off) for some other reason and happened to commit misconduct while off the field. Indirect free kick for the former, dropped ball for the latter.

In the second scenario, the change in emphasis occurred at the same time as the change in restart. After declaring that the restart for an illegal entry by a substitute or substituted player was indirect free kick rather than dropped ball, the Board made it clear that restarting for the illegal entry was the referee’s only choice — i. e., it didn’t matter what the substitute/substituted player did while on the field illegally or what a player did to the substitute or substituted player who was on the field illegally, the restart would still be the indirect free kick for the illegal entry.…

Illegal Gamesmanship

HE WHO LEAVES MUST RETURN QUICKLY

Posted on by

Question:
Both the LOTG and Advice to Referees state that a player who accidentally goes out of the field of play while contesting for the ball or to beat an opponent should not be considered as having left the field without the referee’s permission. Is there any time or space limit that could apply to this ruling, as if a player runs (uncontested by an opponent) for 10, 20 or 30 yards totally outside the touchline?

This appeared to be the case in a recent game, although the reason for the actual call was not clear. My opinion was that the call would not have been for leaving the field but for some other infringement.

However, I would like a definitive answer.

USSF answer (September 15, 2008):
The Laws tell us: “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.” But they also tell us that any players who do so are expected to return to the field as quickly as possible. The player in your situation would seem to have infringed on the Law.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

PREVENT PROBLEMS: CONTROL YOUR MOUTH

Posted on by

Question:
I have a question.. if a player questions the Center ref’s call is that grounds for a Red Card?

What are the grounds for a red card to a player?

Situation:
Ref calls a foul!
Player: “What kind of call was that?”
Ref: “Who are you to ask me what kind of call?!” Gives the Player U16 a yellow card.
Player~ walks away
Ref: yells You don’t walk away from me!
Player: yells give the yellow card then!
Ref: you don’t talk to me like that!  Gives 2nd yellow card then pulls out red card and kicks U16 player off field.

Please advise.

USSF answer (September 11, 2008):
The Law is very clear on what is cautionable and what constitutes a sending-off offense. The player would appear to have expressed dissent from the referee’s original decision and then dissented again, a second cautionable offense in the same game, for which he/she must be cautioned a second time and then sent off and shown the red card. Here are the reasons, excerpted directly from Law 12 (Fouls and Misconduct):

Disciplinary Sanctions
The yellow card is used to communicate that a player, substitute or substituted player has been cautioned.

The red card is used to communicate that a player, substitute or substituted player has been sent off.

Only a player, substitute or substituted player may be shown the red or yellow card.

The referee has the authority to take disciplinary sanctions, as from the moment he enters the field of play until he leaves the field of play after the final whistle.

A player who commits a cautionable or sending-off offense, either on or off the field of play, whether directed towards an opponent, a teammate, the referee, an assistant referee or any other person, is disciplined according to the nature of the offense committed.

Cautionable Offenses
A player is cautioned and shown the yellow card if he commits any of the following seven offenses:
1. unsporting behavior
2. dissent by word or action
3. persistent infringement of the Laws of the Game
4. delaying the restart of play
5. failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner kick, free kick or throw-in
6. entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee’s permission
7. deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission

A substitute or substituted player is cautioned and shown the yellow card if he commits any of the following three offenses:
1. unsporting behavior
2. dissent by word or action
3. delaying the restart of play

Sending-Off Offenses
A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off if he commits any of the following seven offenses:
1. serious foul play
2. violent conduct
3. spitting at an opponent or any other person
4. denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
5. denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offense punishable by a free kick or penalty kick
or a penalty kick
6. using offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
7. receiving a second caution in the same match

A player, substitute or substituted player who has been sent off must leave the vicinity of the field of play and the technical area.

Of course the referee could easily have prevented the second caution and the send-off by simply not asking the player an inflammatory question.…

"Inventive" Refs

VERBAL THREATS

Posted on by

Question:
A case recently happened in one of my U19 games that I was playing in. In the 7th minute of play, one of my teammates was sent off for “making verbal threats to an opponent on the field” after telling an opposing player “don’t you dare go after my player #29”. I myself am a certified referee and looked through every single book I had and I could not find any ruling as far as how supposed “threats” were handled. The closest othing I could find for a send-off offense would be what was considered abusive language. However, I explictily remember during my recertification course that my instructor told us that you cannot give cards for threats and you must duly make a note of the player number and make sure that player stays under control. Is it possible or even legal for the referee to send off a player for making a verbal threat?

USSF answer (September 8, 2008):
Verbal threats are remarks that carry the implied or direct threat of physical harm. Such remarks as “I’ll get you after the game” or “You won’t get out of here in one piece” shall be deemed abuse.

This answer paraphrases an answer of April 1, 2002, which dealt specifically with the verbal abuse of referees by players. The principles expressed there are equally applicable to interactions between players.

The use of offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures is punishable by a dismissal and red card. Offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures that threaten physical harm are a step up and involve misconduct plus a threat.  Behavior that involves “threats” pushes the act to the level of abuse and can carry not only a red card penalty but additional sanctions if the state association so chooses.

So, yes, the offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures could be construed as abuse, most especially if it is ongoing — more than just a word in the heat of anger. If there is a clear indication that some physical punishment will be extracted, even though there is never any explicit threat of physical harm (“Don’t you dare go after my player, #29!”, and on and on as an example), it could be considered to be abusive. In this instance, the key is whether or not it is ongoing or is a single word or phrase in the heat of the game. For the single word or phrase (depending on the circumstances) the caution or sending-off option is available; for a tirade or series that is ongoing, the situation clearly constitutes an instance of threat and abuse.

You might suggest that your instructor review this message.…

Disciplinary Matters

ATTACKING THE REFEREE

Posted on by

Question:
What should the penalty be for a player and or their team for striking the referee after a game was over? A review of incident shows several players chasing the referee and one of them hits the offical with a jersey.

USSF answer (September 4, 2008):
The punishment for this serious misconduct would be up to the competition authority. If the referee was still on the field, he or she could show the red card for violent conduct, but that doesn’t sound like a viable action in this situation. The best thing would be for the referee to include full details — as many as he or she could remember — in the match report. And if there is a video, the referee should also send a COPY of the video along with the report.

In addition, the referee should pursue remedies through his/her state or regional referee associations. If the referee was actually struck, there are civil and criminal remedies available.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

GOALKEEPER FOULS (?) OPPONENT WHILE HOLDING BALL

Posted on by

Question:
A GK makes a save and falls on his back within the penalty area. As he is getting up he kicks an opponent – non violently – while still holding the ball and within the 6 seconds he has to release it. Is the ball still in play? Or is it out of play while the GK holds onto it? If it is in play and the referee blows his whistle to address the kicking of the opponent by the GK would not the restart be a PK and possibly caution of the GK?

USSF answer (September 3, 2008):
If the goalkeeper has not risen fully, the six-second period has not begun. It begins only when the goalkeeper is upright and in a position o assess the situation and judge where to play the ball. However, the matter of the six seconds is irrelevant if the referee decides that a foul has been committed by the goalkeeper.

The referee must decide whether this was a deliberate act or simply an accident. If a deliberate act and thus a foul, then the restart is a penalty kick and the punishment would be either a caution or a send-off,depending on what the referee saw. It makes no difference whether the goalkeeper has used the allotted six seconds.…

Handling

GOALKEEPER DROPS BALL, PICKS IT UP

Posted on by

Question:
Today’s question involves the goalkeeper releasing the ball from their possession.

Situation is U15Gs, travel, but really just above recreational in skill. Early morning game, grass is wet, ball is wet. Goalkeeper is wearing gloves and long sleeve jersey.

Goalkeeper picks up a ball, is moving towards edge of penalty area to release. In some combination of fumbling, squeezing, and the ball being slippery, the ball slips out of her possession and onto the ground. Goalkeeper picks the ball back up immediately.

Does this constitute a second touch by the goalkeeper?

My first thought is I’m asking a question with an obvious answer — yes, this is a second touch. Accidental or deliberate, the ball was released, and picked back up again without an intervening touch by another player.

If so, can you then explain the rationale that allows the goalie to toss the ball into the air and catch it, or bounce it and catch it, and not count as a second touch? I certainly understand why we dont allow the opponent to challenge in those conditions, being potentially dangerous. But why cant we expect the goalkeeper to just put the ball back into play without any intervening tosses or bounces?

And does this not then put us referees in the position of judging a deliberate, allowable “second touch” vs. an accidental release and recovery, which is not allowed? Why cant it just be a release is a release is a release?

USSF answer (September 2, 2008):
Of course there was a foul, but read on. There is no analogy with tossing the ball up in the air and catching it, because that action has ALWAYS excluded the ball hitting the ground (which is what happened here). All the offense takes is deciding that the goalkeeper had possession in the first place.

The entire refereeing system puts referees in the position of judging whether or not an offense has occurred. We make thousands of decisions of this nature during a game, even those involving “Under-tinies.” In this particular situation, the referee must make the judgment based on the skill level of the players, the conditions on the field, and any other considerations that occur during the game.

Of course, the referee could always decide that there wasn’t any initial possession (i.e., control) and so there wouldn’t be an offense, but the scenario says that the ball “slips out of her possession” so, again, obviously there was a “second touch” offense.

But deciding there was an offense is only the first (though necessary) step in deciding if the offense should be called by stopping play and punishing the foul with an indirect free kick. For that, the referee must decide that the offense was not trifling — in other words, wasn’t important, didn’t affect the course of the game, didn’t unfairly prevent an opponent from challenging for the ball by taking possession a second time. Given the description in the scenario, this seems very likely.…