Category: Law 13 – Free Kicks

Law 13 – Free Kicks

"Inventive Coaches"

RETAKE OF A FREE KICK?

Posted on by

Question:
In a match this past weekend, our team committed a foul resulting in a direct free for the opposing team (about 30 yards from goal). The winds were roughly 20-30 miles per hour that day. In this case, the wind was at the kicker’s back. Our boys set up a wall and the opposing player kicked the ball harmlessly over the crossbar. The referee blew his whistle and showed the kicker a yellow (I’m presuming for kicking when directed to wait, but that was not clarified). The referee had him kick it again. It did not score, but was a much more exciting and potentially costly attempt. My question is even though he was cautioned, should he be given another attempt or should we have been given a goal kick? If it is a “do over”, it may be a strategy to teach since it is only a yellow and the player reaps the benefit of judging the weight and reaction of the ball in the types of winds we were experiencing. Thanks for your advice!

USSF answer (February 1, 2011):
Coach, you don’t give us enough information to give a quick answer, leaving us to go three ways, although it appears alternative 1 was operative in this situation.
1. If the referee had told the kicking team to wait for his whistle (generally done by holding the whistle up and pointing to it) before taking the kick, then his action in cautioning the kicker and ordering a retake was correct.
2. If the referee had not instructed the kicking team to wait for the whistle, then the caution and the retake were not in order.
3. If the caution was for something NOT directly related to the taking of the kick, then alternative 2 may be misleading. It is also possible that the caution might have been for something else entirely unrelated (e. g., maybe the kicker committed dissent or used unsporting language — short of a red card), though we cannot imagine what it could be along these lines that it would have made it necessary to order the kick retaken. (For example, if the kicker had dissented, the referee could have given the card at the next stoppage.)

If you start coaching this, most referees will figure it out and simply go with the first kick (provided it misses the goal).…

"Inventive" Refs

DOGSO: THE DEBATE ON DG-F IS OVER!

Posted on by

Question:
A DOGSO question that has been subject to some vigorous debate: “[O]ffence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick” in the context of DOGSO-F clearly includes both IFK and DFK offences listed in Law 12 (except for the goalkeeper IFK handling offences).

Does it also include “infringements” of Laws other than Law 12? For example, if a defender takes a free kick outside of the penalty area passes the ball back to where he thinks his goalkeeper is, but the goalkeeper is not there and the ball is rolling towards an empty net;

The defender realizes an attacker is charging towards the ball; just before the attacker reaches the ball to shoot it into the empty net, the defender taps the ball away with his foot. The second touch by the defender is an infringement of Law 13 resulting in an indirect free kick — can it also be DOGSO?

USSF answer (January 19, 2011):
Law 12 is clear on the matter. A player, [etc.], is sent off if he commits any of the following seven offenses:

//clipped//
• denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offense punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick
//rest clipped//

And Law 13 tells us:

Free kick taken by a player other than the goalkeeper
If, after the ball is in play, the kicker touches the ball again (except with his hands) before it has touched another player:
• an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team, the kick to be taken from the place where the infringement occurred (see Law 13 – Position of Free Kick)

In the scenario you present, an offense punishable by a free kick, which may or may not have denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity (OGSO), has been committed by the defender. To be certain that the offense has denied the OGSO, the referee must apply the 4 Ds, as spelled out in the “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:

Denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity by an offense punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick
In order for a player or substitute to be sent off for denying an “obvious goalscoring opportunity by an offense punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick” (number 5 under the seven send-off offenses), four elements must be present:
* Number of Defenders-not more than one defender between the foul and the goal, not counting the defender who committed the foul
* Distance to goal-the closer the foul is to the goal, the more likely it is an obvious goalscoring opportunity
* Distance to ball-the attacker must have been close enough to the ball at the time of the foul to continue playing the ball
* Direction of play-the attacker must have been moving toward the goal at the time the foul was committed
If any element is missing, there can be no send off for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity. Further, the presence of each of these elements must be “obvious” in order for the send-off to be appropriate under this provision of Law 12

Just to make it absolutely clear, and to put an end to any further debate: If, in the opinion of the referee, all four of the “Ds” are present, then an obvious goalscoring opportunity has been interfered with and the defender who has committed a second-touch violation should be sent off for DG-F. The real question is, why would he NOT be sent off? What he did was an offense, punishable by a free-kick restart, and all four Ds were determined to be present by the referee. All free kicks are created equal as far as DG-F is concerned.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

FOULS IN THE PENALTY AREA

Posted on by

Question:
alright so first question is about the penalty box and penalties committed by the defending team. is there such thing as an indirect free kick in the box and if so is it taken from the spot of the foul? what is done then about moving players ten yards away if its within 10 yards of the goal? hand ball fouls, is there a difference between intentional and unintentional as pertaining to penalties, beside a obvious handball being a cardable foul?

and this is half question half opinion, it seems to me fouls that could be called direct penalties and then fall under a penalty kick restart aren’t all goal scoring opportunities. Is there any way of dealing with these types of fouls besides awarding a penalty? and in my opinion it seems more just that they award a corner much like field hockey’s penalty corners. just doesn’t make sense to award a player who had his back to goal on the edge of the area near the endline should receive a pk for being fouled in a non scoring opportunity.

thanks for clearing everything up.

USSF answer (September 1, 2010):
1. Yes, the referee may award an indirect free kick (IFK) to the attacking team in the defending team’s penalty area. That would be done for any infringement punishable by an IFK.

If the IFK is to be taken from closer than 10 yards to the goal line, the defending team may stand on the goal line.

There is no such thing as an “unintentional hand ball.” Handling is either deliberate or it does not exist.

2. Sorry, life is very hard and the Laws of the Game are quite explicit. A penal foul (direct free kick/DFK foul) is a DFK foul, no matter where it occurs, unless it is in the penalty area. In that case, if it was committed by the defending team, it becomes a penalty kick. There is no connection between most penalty kicks and a goalscoring opportunity.…

"Inventive" Refs

FAILURE TO RESPECT THE DISTANCE REDUX

Posted on by

Question:
In the April 16 question about failure to respect the distance, my question is how do we call this at the lower levels when it is not called at the higher levels? I don’t think I’ve ever seen failure to respect the distance enforced in a professional match in spite of it occurring on nearly every foul called.

USSF answer (April 27, 2010):
The argument given by those who are reluctant to enforce the distance at a free kick is that the players do not expect the rule to be enforced and are willing to put up with it. It is clear that this is not true and the Federation has launched a campaign on this problem. Ask your State Director of Referee Instruction to let you know when there will be a clinic on the “Managing the Free Kick” module.

In addition, please note that this is an important consideration at the professional level and is certainly called at every level of the professional game. However, we acknowledge that referees at all levels are sometimes a bit lax and need to be more forceful in enforcing the law.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

FAILURE TO RESPECT THE REQUIRED DISTANCE

Posted on by

Question:
The following occurred in a U15 boys recreational match.

I was the AR on the side of the field where this occurred. Ball was traveling on the ground towards the goal, outside the penalty area about 23-25 yrds from goal. The keeper got confused, thought he was still in the box and ran out and picked it up. The Center Referee called the handling violation. At this point the keeper was clearly out of position. An offensive player realized the situation and ran up to the ball and was going to attempt to kick it into the open goal.

Another defender ran up 2 yards from the ball to stop the play from occurring. The offensive player gestured to the defensive player, then quickly passed to the right and play continued, not resulting in a goal.

Two questions
1. At the next stoppage, would it be appropriate for the Referee to issue a yellow card for failing to respect the required distance to the defender?

2. If the offensive player had kicked the ball towards goal, and it had deflected off the defender, and in the opinion of the referee it would have gone into the net, would this be a red card for DOGSO?

Thank you.

USSF answer (April 16, 2010):
1. What the referee should have done was to stop play immediately and caution the defender for failure to respect the required distance.
2. Such foolishness would be unnecessary if the referee followed the advice in 1.…

"Inventive" Refs

PLACE OF THE RESTART

Posted on by

Question:
Do the laws specify where the ball is to be placed for restarts. I remember from my reffing days that the restart was supposed to take place within a yard from where the foul or ball was when the incident occurred. During a match the other day a foul occurred right at the half line and the referee let the player move the ball almost 10 yards closer to the goal and when I questioned him he stated that the ball had to be within 10 yards for the restart.

USSF answer (April 13, 2010):
There is no “ten-yard rule” on free kicks. With certain specific exceptions, such as offenses within the goal area or penalty kicks or illegal entry onto the field by a substitute, free kicks are taken from the place where the offense occurred. The referee clearly cannot always expect to have the ball placed on the exact blade of grass upon which the foul or misconduct was committed, but every effort should be made to have the restart taken within a reasonable distance of that blade of grass. The accurate placement of the ball becomes more important the nearer the event occurs to the goal being attacked.…

Advice to Referees

FREE KICKS FOR THE DEFENSE IN THE PENALTY AREA

Posted on by

Question:
I have a question involving the 2009/2010 ATR vs 2009/2010 FIFA Laws and interpretation of the laws. In the ATR 13.6 in reference to free kicks awarding to a defending team in their own penalty area. In the second paragraph it says that all opponents must remain outside the penalty until the ball has gone into play. And I believe that into play means leaving the penalty. But in the FIFA law book in the interpretation of the laws section for free kicks on page 123. Under the “Distance” heading the third paragraph talks about opponents being in the penalty, and the defending team takes a quick kick the referee must allow play to continue.

My question is this, what happens if the defending team kicks the ball to the opponent in the penalty area before the opponents have left the penalty area? Would the kick be a retake for the defending team or is it similar to a regular quick kick where it is taken at the risk of the team taking the kick. Or should I pretend I never saw the part in the FIFA law book.

Thank you for your insight

USSF answer (March 9, 2010):
In your comparison of one section of the Advice to a section of the Laws covered in the Interpretation section of the Laws, you are comparing apples and applesauce. Advice 13.6 simply repeats what is already in the Law:

Free Kick Inside the Penalty Area
Direct or indirect free kick to the defending team:
* all opponents must be at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the ball
* all opponents must remain outside the penalty area until the ball is in play
* the ball is in play when it is kicked directly out of the penalty area
* a free kick awarded in the goal area may be taken from any point inside that area

The information on p. 123 of the Interpretation states that the same principle that applies to free kicks outside the penalty area applies to free kicks for the defending team within the penalty area:

“If, when a free kick is taken by the defending team from inside its own penalty area, one or more opponents remain inside the penalty area because the defender decides to take the kick quickly and the opponents did not have time to leave the penalty area, the referee must allow play to continue.”

There is no dichotomy here, as any kicking team surrenders its right to opponents remaining at the required distance if it takes the free kick quickly, without waiting for the referee to remove any opponent who has remained too near to the ball. What this means with regard to your question is that the restart should not be held up by the referee solely because there may be one or more opponents still within the penalty area. In short, the goal kicking team has the right to kick immediately (not with a ceremony) even though there are opponents within the minimum distance.

However, at this time a major difference arises between kicks from within the penalty area and those taken outside the area. This involves what happens if one of those opponents makes contact with the ball while both are still within the penalty area. For a goal kick or a free kick, because the ball is not in play until it leaves the penalty area, there is no distinction between interception and interference — it’s all interference before the ball has been put in play (just as it would be if the contact had been made by a teammate rather than an opponent). If there is interference within the penalty area by an opponent on this sort of kick, the kick must be retaken.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

FAILURE TO RESPECT THE REQUIRED DISTANCE

Posted on by

Question:
Last week I was officiating a game when an indirect free kick was issued. While the wall was being set by the official, an attacking player stood with a foot on the ball. The referee then got into position and blew his whistle while the attacking player’s foot was still on the ball. The player removed his foot from the ball and the wall immediately charged before the ball was kicked by the attacking team. By the time the attacking team kicked the ball the wall had charged to within 1 yard.

I immediately signaled for an infraction as, by my interpretation, the wall delayed the restart by moving inside the 10 yard zone before the kick.

Needless to say the defending team was livid as they felt that the ball had been played by the attacking team and so they charged.

I stand behind my call because I do not feel the ball was “kicked” or “moved” by the attacking team (as well I believe the official was in the wrong by blowing the whistle while the player was still in contact with the ball, making this muddy situation happen).

Any insight would be appreciated. Thanks!

USSF answer (March 1, 2010):
The kicking team is allowed to use deceptive tactics when taking the free kick, but they are not required to kick the ball into play immediately. The defending team is required to remain at least ten yards away until the ball has been kicked and moved, unless the kicking team decides to take the free kick quickly without waiting for a signal from the referee. To be put into play, the ball must be kicked from “here” to “there.” In other words, it must clearly move from one spot to another spot (which need be more than a trivial distance away).

The kicker (or putative kicker) may place and rest his or her foot on the ball. That is not an infringement of any of the Laws and there is no need for the referee on this game to be displeased with this portion of the restart. The kicker may then remove his foot from the ball and walk away, possibly to be replaced as kicker by a teammate or to immediately return and kick the ball. That is the right of the kicking team. The defending team should know that they have NO RIGHTS in this situation other than the right not to be confused by the referee — and that did not happen. They confused themselves and failed to follow the requirements of the Law.

Accordingly, the opposing team crashed in and, therefore, the free kick should have been halted immediately by the referee, at least one or more of the crashers cautioned for failing to respect the required distance, and play resumed with the original free kick.…

Law 13 - Free Kicks

MANAGING FREE KICKS

Posted on by

Question:
I have a question about free kicks. If a defender, less than the required distance, intercepts a free kick by moving/lunging to the side (NOT forward) is this acceptable per the new parameters involving free kicks? The 2009 directives were not especially clear on this point.

USSF answer (February 13, 2010):
You would seem to have not read quite far enough in the Directive on Free Kick and Restart Management. The second bullet point under 4.

Quick Free Kick — Deliberately Preventing the Free Kick from Being Taken reads:

* Intercepts the QFK after the kick is taken: The referee may exercise discretion depending upon whether he/she felt the defender deliberately prevented the ball from being put into play. The referee must take into consideration whether the attacking team had the opportunity to play the ball and whether the attacker knew the position of the defender at the time the QFK was taken.
– If the attacker knew where the defender was at the time the QFK was taken, then the likelihood that the defender prevented the free kick from [being] taken is minimal. In this case, it can be assumed that the attacker “assumed the risk.”

This point is nicely illustrated in the new USSF DVD, Managing the Free Kick. Your State Director of Referee Instruction should have a copy of the DVD.

The DVD differentiates between Interference and Interception. In brief (see the video for full details), the video encourages to “wait and see” when an opponent stands too near the ball and the kicking team does not ask for the full distance. Interference occurs when the defending player, as the ball is kicked, steps TOWARD the kicker and plays the ball. This is failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a free kick, a cautionable offense.

Interception occurs when the defending player, as the ball is kicked, either moves to the side or sticks his/her foot to the side to play the ball; there is NO forward motion.

These changes in procedure have been made on the advice of FIFA, based on training they are giving to referees around the world.…

Ball in Play

CORNER KICK PLAYS, LEGAL AND ILLEGAL

Posted on by

Question:
For clarification purpose, I would like for you to honestly assist with normal procedure and correct interpretation of the law and in accordance to; and in US Soccer and FIFA opinion the correct procedure and your recommendation to the following.

In the first half of a competitive match, a corner kick was being taken from the leading AR side. Properly, the Assistant referee applied the distance of encroachment and the team taking the corner kick tricked the defense as the kicker walked away and another player acted as if he was going to take the kick started dribbling the ball towards the goal when he got to the corner kick spot. I made eye contact with the leading AR who did nothing and I let the play go.

In the same half, a corner kick was awarded to the same offense, but now in my quadrant. The ball was set, and the kicker stood over the ball with his foot on the ball but made no movement because the defense this time were encroaching. When I realized the the attacker won’t play the ball, I instructed the defense to respect the distance of which they obliged. While we were waiting for the corner kick to be taken, number 7 of the team taking the corner kcik who was behind me in the goal area loudly yelled to his team mate on the the ball. “Leave it, let me take it.” He then ran past me and the defenders while his team mate walked away from the ball. When he got to the ball, he took position as if he was going to put the ball back in play, then he started dribbling the ball towards the goal. All these happened while I was still holding back the defense from encroaching. When I realized he was in active play, I blew the whistle walked to him and cautioned him for unsporting behavior. I then restart the play with an indirect kick to the defense for double touching a direct kick restart. 

As usual, the cautioned player pleaded his case and claimed that was their trick and my response was that you were deceptive. I told him it’s legal to apply trick fairly, and by audibly being deceptive, you gained unfair advantage.

USSF answer (February 6, 2010)
The kicking team is allowed to use a certain amount of trickery at any kick restart, including corner kicks. If the kicker actually kicks at the ball, then it is now in play. Observe these two video clips of corner kicks, one of which was not allowed by the referee. However, both were totally legal, as the ball was played in a kicking motion by the original player on the ball.

First clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nBoKNy7j0Y&feature=related

We responded to a question on this clip back on January 30, 2009:
It is perfectly legal to do this. How could anyone object to this tactic? The player has put the ball in play in accordance with the Laws of the Game. The kicking team is allowed to use such deceptive tactics and SHOULD NOT be punished for them. However, if the kicking player had merely stepped on top of the ball and then left it for the next player, who dribbles it away, that would not have been a legal restart. But even that is not punished with a caution, as it is not misconduct; in that case, the referee would call the second player for a double touch and award an indirect free kick to the opposing team.

Second clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWWm1H1DC-Q&feature=related

The assistant referee’s flag was incorrect and the referee should have waved it down; the resulting goal should have been allowed.

So, what is NOT allowed?
The ball must move a perceptible distance from “here” to “there” to be considered in play through a kick. If the “kicker” only steps on top of the ball and does not kick it, and therefore the ball has NOT moved from “here” to “there,” the kick was not properly taken and must be repeated. It is not a cautionable offense. …