Question:
I do not understand something in the MLS Lessons Learned for Week 9 of 2008. It contains instructions on Second Cautionable Offenses and Persistent Infringement. Part of it says that the player who repeatedly fouls a single opponent will be cautioned for persistent infringement. It then goes on to say that when a team ‘s members engage in a series of fouls against a single opponent, one after another, the final player who is called for this offense is cautioned not for persistent infringement but for unsporting behavior, and that unsporting behavior is reported in the match report as the reason for the caution. That seems strange. What’s the deal here?

USSF answer (June 10, 2008):
The pertinent section in the memorandum (http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/LessonsLearnedWeek_9_2008.htm) reads:
Note: When a referee identifies a case of persistent infringement that falls under category 2 above (“Players who are repeated fouled”), the game report should list the caution as being issued for “unsporting behavior.” This should be the case as this is more of a philosophical approach to persistent infringement.

From this we learn that a player who personally persists in infringing the Law by fouling one or more opponents is cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws of the Game. However, the player who is the final person in a series of fouls against a single opposing player has committed only the single foul against this person and may not be cautioned for persistently infringing the Laws of the Game. Instead, that player is cautioned for unsporting behavior and that is how the caution is reported.…

Question:
I watched the highlights for this game on the MLS website. In the highlight video for the MLS game on June 7th between DC United and Chicago Fire a DC United player (Luciano Emilio) scores a goal at the end of the game (92+minute) and then the video shows that he covers his face with his jersey while celebrating his goal. I thought this was a Cautionable offense in accordance with the Laws of the Game but the misconduct summary does not indicate that a Caution was given. Why was no Caution given in this case? In the 2007/2008 FIFA Laws of the Game page 117 shows this exact misconduct (with picture) and says that the player must be cautioned. 

USSF answer (June 9, 2008):
Your interpretation of the Law is correct, but we referees are human beings, just like the players, and sometimes we “blink” when something happens.…

Question:
My question is about the concept of punishing the “first foul.” Situation: a player goes up for a header, using the shoulders of an opponent to launch himself. No horizontal movement, just vertically up. The opponent, sensing this, bends over and causes the opponent to fall over him (“tabletop”). Should the resulting DFK be for the team of the player who went up for the ball (ignoring the shoulder-push and punishing the tabletop) or for the team of the player who had his shoulders pushed on in the first place (with a possible caution or chewing-out for the tabletop)?

Would it change if the original shoulder-pusher had horizontal motion over the player who decided to bend over so he fell?

USSF answer (June 9, 2008):
Why worry about “problems” over what the Laws tell us to do? In situations like this the referee can and must punish both offenses — provided, in his or her opinion, they are indeed both offenses.

The first offense, using the opponent’s shoulders as a support, is an old and time-honored way of cheating. It is called holding and is punished with a direct free kick AND a caution for unsporting behavior. The tactic of using a teammate’s shoulders is not a foul, but is certainly misconduct and would be punished by a caution for unsporting behavior and an indirect free kick for the opposing team at the place where the offense occurred.

The second offense, in which the opponent bends over and thus trips the initial offender, might ordinarily be called a foul, but that cannot happen in this case, because the foul has already occurred and whatever follows it can only be misconduct. If, in the opinion of the referee, this is indeed an offense, rather than the natural aftermath of having extra weight and leverage applied to one’s shoulders by an outside force, then the referee must punish it with a caution for unsporting behavior. However, the restart would still be for the first offense.…

Question:
On Sunday I watched the FC Dallas vs. Denver Rapids where one forward got called offsides 5 times. I read online where someone was calling for a yellow for “persistent infringement of offsides”. I have never heard of this and I can’t find anywhere that I could justify a yellow for persistent infringement for being offsides.

I also would have to ask myself if I thought this yellow would help the game.

Please let me know if a yellow can be given here?

USSF answer (June 4, 2008):
It is perfectly legal to be in an offside position. The person who posted the suggestion you saw online is probably the person who asked us the very same question almost five years ago about high school soccer, to which we replied on October 23, 2003:
No, there is no such rule in soccer, whether at the high school level or in the . . . worldwide game of soccer. . . . Persistent infringement applies to any and all infringements of Law 12 and to some infringements of Law 14.…

Question:
I’m stumped. I’m a new referee and during my training class two items came up that have recurred in subsequent games that coached and refereed.

1) I know the “tucked in jersey” rule is a USSF one and not a FIFA law. What is the appropriate penalty to a player who’s jersey has come out? The referee in our game told my player to leave the field to fix his jersey.

2) I can’t find a specific rule as to when you can play the ball while you’re on the ground and when you can’t play it.

USSF answer (June 2, 2008):
1) There is no penalty or punishment for a player whose jersey has come out. The player is expected to replace the jersey and to look professional. If the player doesn’t do it on his or her own, then the referee should instruct him or her to do it on the field. There is no need for the player to leave the field to accomplish this arduous task.

2) There is no rule against playing the ball while on the ground. The only rule is that the player on the ground must not place him- or herself or other players in danger by remaining on top of the ball or having the ball between his/her legs, particularly if this is clearly deliberate.…

Question:
Is it a foul if an opposing player waits outside the goal box and jumps up and into the goalie’s punt, landing within the goal box and within 1 foot of the goalie? If so, is that worthy of a yellow or red card?

USSF answer (June 2, 2008):
No player is allowed to interfere with the goalkeeper’s ability to put the ball back into general play. The referee should stop play and restart with an indirect free kick for the goalkeeper’s team from the place where the infringement occurred. (Please remember the special circumstances for restarts after infringements occurring within the goal area.) If the opponent makes contact with the goalkeeper, the restart would be a direct free kick and possibly a caution or send-off, depending on the nature of the infringement and contact. In all cases, the referee might consider warning the player that this action borders on unsporting behavior.…

Question:
I am sure I saw something in the past, but cannot find it.

I under stand if an offensive player is fouled outside the penalty area and the foul continues into the penalty area, it results in a penalty kick (ex the defensive player started pushing the attacker outside and continued to push him as the player entered the penalty area).

When a foul is committed outside the penalty area by the defensive player and the offensive player falls into the penalty area. It is considered a continuation foul that results in a penalty kick in the following situations?

Scenario 1 The offensive player is moving toward the goal and is fouled approximately 1 foot outside the penalty area and his momentum carried him into the penalty area.

Scenario 2 The offensive player is moving toward the goal and is fouled well outside the penalty area and his momentum after one or two steps carried him into the penalty area where he falls.

Scenario 3 The offensive player is standing just outside the penalty area, is fouled and falls into the penalty area.

USSF answer (May 29, 2008):
The source of your information is this position paper, issued in April 2007:

Subject: When Fouls Continue!
Date: April 30, 2007

Prompted by several recent situations in professional league play, a discussion has developed regarding the proper action to take when a foul continues over a distance on the field. Many fouls occur with the participants in motion, both the player committing the foul and the opponent being fouled, and it is not unusual for the offense to end far away from where the initial contact occurred.

Usually, the only problem this creates for the referee is the need to decide the proper location for the restart. Occasionally, however, an additional issue is created when the distance covered results in an entirely different area of the field becoming involved. A foul which starts outside the penalty area, for example, might continue into and finally end inside the offending player’s penalty area. Or a foul might start inside the field but, due to momentum, end off the field. In these cases, the decision about where the foul occurred also affects what the correct restart must be.

In general, the referee should determine the location of the foul based on what gives the greater benefit to the player who was fouled. FIFA has specifically endorsed this principle in one of its “Questions and Answers on the Laws of the Game “ (12.31) which states that a penalty kick is the correct restart if a player begins holding an opponent outside the player’s penalty area and continues this action inside his penalty area.

The restarts for the actions described in your three scenarios do not qualify as penalty kicks unless the foul continues to be committed from outside the penalty area into the penalty area. Momentum alone does not change the location of the foul if the player who committed the foul stops before the player who was fouled actually enters the penalty area.

Where referees err here is to forget that some fouls are clearly single events (e. g., trip, strike, kick) whereas others at least can be continuous events (hold, charge) and still others are ambiguous (e. g., jumping at — is this foul located where the jumper starts his jump or where the opponent is at whom the jump is aimed?).

So, to emphasize it clearly: The restarts for the actions described in your three scenarios do not qualify as penalty kicks unless the foul continues to be committed from outside the penalty area into the penalty area. Momentum alone is not enough.…