SEND-OFF OR NOT?

Question:
My son is a goalie on his team. At a particular game, we were playing during a rainy day. The white line on the 18 was not visibly able to be seen due to so much rain. He reached down and picked the ball up with his hands just past the 18 line. The ref gave him a red card and threw him out of the game saying that he tried to stop the other team from scoring a goal. It was a playoff game and he became very upset. Was the ref correct in giving him a red card?

USSF answer (March 12, 2010):
We cannot say that the referee’s action was correct unless someone can answer the question, “But for the handling, would the ball have entered the net?”…

MUDDY FIELD

Question:
During a recent U9 Boys Championship Match I was working, one end of the field was very muddy. On several instances, players would kick at the ground before a corner or goal kick, like they were attempting to tee the ball up. I gave a warning to both teams to stop. Of course neither coach agreed with this warning, saying their players needed the extra leverage due to the poor field conditions (although they players did stop). Does this fall under the ATR related to modification of the field? Thanks!

USSF answer (March 10, 2010):
By allowing play to begin following your inspection of the field, you accepted the condition of the field as safe and usable. To then punish the players for trying to do their best under those conditions is not entirely within the Spirit of the Game. However, the fact that the field is muddy should not be used to protect behavior which, if performed on a pristine field, would be worth a warning to stop it. Teeing the ball up is not permitted if it involves creating hills by scuffing the field. We would certainly warn a goalkeeper who is marking the field to HIS advantage — muddy or not. Exercise common sense in this situation.…

FREE KICKS FOR THE DEFENSE IN THE PENALTY AREA

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.…

THE REFEREE UNIFORM

Question:
Evidently the Adidas referee jerseys are making it to the states and being sold at TJ Maxx for #25 each. See the discussion at [an internet referee board]. Referees are purchasing these jerseys with the intent of wearing them in USSF games. They will have enough extra jerseys for referees who don’t have the Adidas jerseys. Is there any reason that referees cannot wear the Adidas jerseys? I can see a lot of confusion if allowed, with referees being pressured to buy the Adidas jerseys or having to wear borrowed jerseys.

USSF answer (March 4, 2010):
The uniform sold by Official Sports International (OSI) is the official uniform for referees affiliated with the U. S. Soccer Federation. The standards for that uniform were established by the USSF Board of Directors and may not be changed by anyone else. The design sold by OSI must be worn to all games and tournaments affiliated with the Federation. If referees find another uniform that meets the same design standard, they may wear that uniform for their lower-level games. Unless the Adidas uniform meets those standards, it may not be worn for any affiliated games.

See the USSF Referee Administrative Handbook for a description and pictures of the only approved uniforms:

Standards of Dress and Appearance Official U.S. Soccer Federation Referee Uniform
Official Sports International (OSI) is the official supplier of referee uniforms to U.S. Soccer.
GOLD SHIRT: with black pinstripes (long or short sleeve)
ONE BADGE ONLY: U.S. SOCCER FEDERATION – WITH CURRENT YEAR (Securely fastened to shirt over left chest. The badge should be for the highest grade for which the referee is currently qualified)
BLACK COLLAR
BLACK CUFF: (on long sleeve shirt only) (no cuffs on short sleeves)
BLACK SHORTS: Bottom edge of shorts not less than 3 nor more than 7 inches above the top of the knee- cap.
BLACK SOCKS: with Federation referee crest
BLACK SHOES: (may have white manufacturers design) with black laces
Alternate Referee Uniforms
The following four shirts have been approved by the Federation as alternates that can be worn in case of color conflict. There is no order of preference among the alternate jerseys. The other parts of the referee uniform (shorts, socks, shoes) do not change if the referee wears an alternate shirt.
BLACK SHIRT with, BLACK COLLAR, and BLACK CUFFS (on long sleeve shirts only). RED SHIRT with, BLACK COLLAR, and BLACK CUFFS (on long sleeve shirts only). BLUE SHIRT with, BLACK COLLAR, and BLACK CUFFS (on long sleeve shirts only). GREEN SHIRT with, BLACK COLLAR, and BLACK CUFFS (on long sleeve shirts only).
Logos, Emblems and Badges: Only manufacturer’s logos and U.S. Soccer approved badges and/or emblems may be visible on the referee uniform.

Note: Older versions of the OSI uniform may be worn until they need to be replaced.…

TWO PLAYERS “INJURED” IN KICKS FROM THE MARK

Question:
During a sudden death penalty shoot out the away side’s two weakest kick takers have gone down, writhing around and claiming they have hamstring injuries. Their manager says they can’t take their kicks, so now the first two takers, penalty experts, should go again. What do you do?

USSF answer (March 3, 2010):
Under the Laws of the Game, either or both of the two sides may be reduced to one player during kicks from the penalty mark, so the number of kickers is not an issue. In this particular set of circumstances, if there is no doctor available and the players assure the referee that they are indeed “injured,” the referee has no recourse other than to accept their statements at face value , bolstered by whatever evidence the referee may have (appearance, surface injury, statements by a trainer, player’s mother, etc.), and begin the kicks from the penalty mark with the “available” number of eligible players. In any case, all facts must be reported to the competition authority.

If the referee has any doubts about the players’ true state of health — and who would not, with such an apparently crass display of poor sportsmanship and the attempt to bring the game into disrepute — he must make that clear in his report. The final decision is up to the competition authority.…

DOGSO , ADVANTAGE, AND SEND-OFF

Question:
An attacker A1 shoots the ball toward the goal and the ball is handled by defender D in the penalty area preventing a goal. As a result of D’s handling, the ball is deflected to another attacker A2 with a possible shot on goal that is at least as good an opportunity to score as a penalty shot. Say, no real challenge by a defender on A2. The referee allows advantage, and A2 shoots toward the goal but misses. The ball goes directly over the goal line after A2’s shot.

Q1.What is the restart? Penalty kick or goal kick ?

Q2. Does D get a caution or a send off? Note that according to 12.39 of “Advice…”, if A2 had scored, then D would be cautioned and the restart would be a kick off.

Game level: To the extent that the answer is level dependent, I would appreciate a response reflecting that up thru adult pro.

USSF answer (March 1, 2010):
According to the Laws of the Game 2009/2010 (Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees, p. 122), “If the referee applies advantage during an obvious goalscoring opportunity and a goal is scored directly, despite the opponent’s handling the ball or fouling an opponent, the player cannot be sent off but he may still be cautioned.” In this case, the referee applied the advantage, which was realized, in that the attacking team was able to shoot, but failed to score a goal. Decision? See below.

You cited Advice 12.39, but apparently did not consider its second paragraph:

In cases where a goal or goalscoring opportunity has been denied by handling (DGH) or by a foul (DGF), but advantage has been applied, it is advisable to stop play as soon as possible once it becomes clear that the offended team has not been able to benefit from the advantage. This would be the case when, after roughly 3-5 seconds and at least one subsequent play, the team was not able to maintain a successful attack. In such cases, of course, the referee should return to the original foul and, additionally, show the red card for the denied opportunity associated with the foul. Because circumstances vary from game to game, there is no single mandatory decision that would be universally correct. The referee must use discretion in making the decision, based on experience, game circumstances, and common sense.

FAILURE TO RESPECT THE REQUIRED DISTANCE

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.…

REF OR AR AS FIRST AID PROVIDER

Question:
If during a game, a player is injured and no trainers or first-aid providers are available but one of the referees has extensive medical training; is it appropriate for that referee to assess the injury and provide advice to the coach on how to treat the injury or instruct the coach to seek emergency medical care for the player?

USSF answer (February 20 2010):
Only as an absolute last resort. In this litigious society of ours, a referee who is not a licensed medical practitioner would be well advised to stay out of any medical emergency that occurs during the game that referee is working.

The situation is generally controlled by state law (sometimes called a “good Samaritan” law, but also laws that cover specific professions). In some states, you are expected to perform whatever emergency services you are trained/certified to do. An EMT who is also a referee must therefore take off his referee hat and put on his EMT hat if faced with a serious injury on the field. Otherwise, stay out of it and remember that there are other important referee things you could be doing while staying out of it.…

PROPER PLAYER UNIFORMS

Question:
When in a match can you wear small white socks over the original colours of your kit like so many players do in the premiership?

USSF answer (February 16, 2010):
In theory, never, unless all players on a side wear them. Each player’s kit (other than the goalkeeper’s) is expected to be exactly like his/her teammates’ kit as regards color and the color of any under- or overgarments. For answers pertaining to the EPL, you should direct your question to the appropriate authorities.…

MANAGING FREE KICKS

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.…