WHEN IS A MATCH OVER?

May 1, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
When is a match complete when terminated? Specifically, if 1/2 the match is played, and weather, darkness, etc. require the match to be terminated, is it complete? Or must the second half be started? Can you cite the Law or Paragraph in ATR? I don’t see any.
This has been an argument for many years with fellow referees.
thank you.

USSF answer (May 1, 2009):
You won’t find it in the Laws or in the Advice to Referees for one simple reason: There is nothing there. This situation is governed by the rules of the competition under which the game is played. The FIFA rule for the competitions it sanctions is that the game must be replayed in its entirety. Many competitions required that at least half the game have been played before a game counts as completed. Other competitions have different requirements. Know the rules for every competition in which you officiate.…

"Inventive" Refs

“ILLEGAL” GOALKEEPER CHANGE

April 30, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
there was keeper change during the game. he did sub in during a throw in but did not acknowledge me about the goalie change.

During the game the opposing team scores 2 goals on this goalie where the this goalie never touched the ball with his hands. finally this goalie touched the ball with his hands, I called a hand ball and penalty kick because he had not told me offically about the goalie change. What is the correct call? Or was I correct?

USSF answer (April 30, 2009):
Let us ponder this: You were fully aware of the change when it happened and did nothing about it. Now you want to punish the new goalkeeper for handling the ball. You allowed the new goalkeeper to play for much of the game and did nothing.

Would you have punished the goalkeeper if he had touched the ball on its way into the goal for the two scores that occurred before you took action? If so, that would have denied the opposing team whichever of those goals you took away.

What you should have done was to be proactive and ask the captain or the new goalkeeper if he wanted to tell you about a substitution. And you should have done that right away. We do not play power games with the players. It is their game, not ours. Help them play correctly.

The failure to notify the referee — if indeed there was a failure — is clearly a minor issue and you should only have reminded the new goalkeeper about the requirement. But all referees need to understand that under NO circumstances can this goalkeeper be penalized for handling the ball illegally. The strongest action the referee can take is to caution the ‘keeper at the next stoppage of play (but only the stoppage that occurs directly following the goalkeeper’s appearance on the field) — if the referee allows this opportunity to pass then he can’t even do that!

Our feeling is that this was a simple substitution during which someone forgot to say the magic words to you. When you allowed the substitution and whistled for the restart of play with player X now wearing a distinctive goalkeeper jersey, due notice was given to and acknowledged by you.…

"Inventive" Refs

WHEN MAY A TEAM SUBSTITUTE?

April 30, 2009April 30, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
When are teams allowed to make make substitution?

I am a new referee at the Recreational level. I am confused as to when teams are permitted to make substitutions. Having heard conflicting responses from the referees I work with, I want to ask the question on here, because I am serving as central referee for the first time this weekend. I could not find a clear answer in the publications “Laws of the game,” or “Guide to Procedures.” However, a common pattern of answers where I work is that you can sub at most stoppages but not during corner kicks or opponent throw-ins. Yet other claims are that you can only make subs when the restart is in the advantage of your team. If you could clear this issue up for me, I would be very pleased and would educate refs and coaches alike in my league.

Thanks in advance for your help!

USSF answer (April 30, 2009):
Actually, you will find the procedure for substitutions in two separate places in the Laws: In Law 3 (The Players) itself and in the back of the book, under Interpretations and Guidelines for Referees. We include here only the latter, as it is more complete:
Substitution Procedure
– A substitution may be made only during a stoppage in play
– The assistant referee signals that a substitution has been requested
– The player being substituted receives the referee’s permission to leave the field of play, unless he is already off the field of play for reasons that comply with the Laws of the Game
– The referee gives the substitute permission to enter the field of play
– Before entering the field of play, the substitute waits for the player he is replacing to leave the field
– The player being substituted is not obliged to leave the field of play on the halfway line
– Permission to proceed with a substitution may be refused under certain circumstances, e. g., if the substitute is not ready to enter the field of play
– A substitute who has not completed the substitution process by setting foot onto the field of play cannot restart play by taking a throw-in or corner kick
– If a player who is about to be replaced refuses to leave the field of play, play continues
– If a substitution is made during the half-time interval or before extra time, the process is to be completed before the second half or extra time kicks off.

You will find, as you progress up the refereeing ladder, that many competitions (leagues or tournaments, etc.) make up their own rules for substitution, many of them not quite in agreement with the Laws of the Game — the Laws allow for different rules only for players below the age of 16, “veterans” (over 35), female players, and disabled players. If you accept a game in such a competition, you are bound to follow their rules.

Most of the local substitution rules are at least partly consistent with the Laws of the Game, but are valid ONLY if the players are below the age of 16, veteran (over 35) or female footballers, or disabled.…

Advice to Referees

RESTART WHEN PLAYER INTERFERES WITH THROW-IN

April 30, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
This question has come up three times in the last 5 weeks of our adult amateur soccer league play. Each time, there has been controversy over the re-start, so we are submitting this to the “experts” for final adjudication in writing.

Red Team player #1 is taking a throw-in in accordance with Law 15.

Blue Team player #2 decides to move to a position where he is standing in front of the thrower, clearly less than 2 yards away.

Before the Referee can warn Blue player #2 to move back, the ball is thrown in by Red player #1, and the Referee blows his whistle to caution Blue player #2 for Failure to Respect the 2 yard Distance on the throw-in.

In reading the new FIFA Laws of the Game (on page 125), we believe that play is restarted with a throw-in for the Red Team. This appeared to the correct restart and was the restart employed in each of the three games. This past weekend, two Assessors and an Instructor (along with many other referees) proclaimed that the correct restart should be an Indirect Free Kick. The logic given was that the ball had already crossed the plane of the Touch Line so it should be deemed to be “in play”.

It appears to me that the restart for this “Failure to Respect the Distance” violation should be treated the same as any other. If there were a “FRD” violation on a corner kick, we would re-take the corner kick. If there were a “FRD” violation on a direct free kick, we would re-take the direct free kick.

What is the correct restart for a “FRD” violation, for which a yellow card is shown, on a Throw-in?

USSF answer (April 28, 2009):
The correct restart in this case is a retake of the throw-in. The ball was not in play when the infringement occurred. The Advice to Referees makes it very clear that failure to withdraw the required distance on a throw-in (or a corner kick) is to be handled the same way as would be the case on a free kick.…

Coach

GOALKEEPER CHANGE

April 23, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
Attacking team had possession of the ball near the defending team’s goal. Meanwhile, way back at the attacking team’s goal area, with play still in progress, the attacking team’s coach had come onto the field and helped his GK take off his shirt and put it on one of his defenders

USSF answer (April 23, 2009):
And where were the referee and the assistant referee(s) and fourth official (if assigned) while all this was going on?

Law 3 (The Players) tells us what to do if a team official enters the field of play without permission:

Team Officials
If a team official enters the field of play:
– the referee must stop play (although not immediately if the team official does not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
– the referee must have him removed form the field of play and if his behavior is irresponsible the referee must expel him from the field of play and its immediate surroundings
– if the referee stops the match, he must restart play with a dropped ball in the position where the ball was at the time when the match was stopped, unless the ball was stopped inside the goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was when play was stopped.

We must emphasize how significant a factor in this is the age of the players. No need to get upset about this, but we suggest “educating” the coach at the first opportunity) for kids in the below 8 or 9 year age range. We might be tolerant eveh at an age level 1-2 years older than this if it was apparent (out of the corner of my eye) that the GK had become so hopelessly entangled in his jersey that he was virtually wrapped up in a straight jacket. Anything older than this or short of these circumstances, the players get cautions, the coach is informed that it is entirely his fault, and full details of the incident are included in the game report.

We also suggest that the nearer assistant or fourth official commit seppuku for allowing this to happen.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

GOALKEEPER INJURY

April 23, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
I just accessed the U.S. Soccer web-site to be sure I had your up-to-date contact information and to browse the questions and answers before I sent my question, to make sure it wasn’t already answered. Lo and behold, the April 14 posting “Role of the Goalkeeper” opens up the topic that I want to address, albeit a different aspect of it.

I observed a game where the goalkeeper got injured. The near assistant referee and the center referee clearly saw what had happened and had no doubt that the goalkeeper would not be able to participate in play for a little while at least. They let play continue and the attacking team score. Then the center referee called the coach out to attend to the goalkeeper.

My question is this (and it may be that I misunderstand the intent of the law): The law states that one player on each team is a goalkeeper. If the goalkeeper has been incapacitated so that he/she cannot play, in effect the team does not have a goalkeeper, that is they do not have a functioning goalkeeper. What should the referee do if that happens – stop play? If you give an answer that is not just a straight “yes” or “no”, please give some guidance: Does it make a difference as to the age of the players or the level of play, or the circumstances of the game. I’m looking to clear up my own murky thinking in this area and to share your answer with colleagues, too. I know there is a risk of cynical goalkeepers feigning injuries to get play stopped and I have a bit of a soft heart, so I could get suckered into stopping play inappropriately. While you can deal with the goalkeeper’s simulating an injury, the effect on the game itself may not be remedied. Similarly, if a goal is scored and allowed to stand while the goalkeeper cannot play, the effect on the game is also profound.

USSF answer (April 23, 2009):
Let us start with several premises:
(a) All players are perfect angels until they prove otherwise.
(b) While the team is required to have a goalkeeper, there is no requirement that that goalkeeper be on the field nor able to participate in play.
(c) The referee is directed by Law 5 to stop play only if a player is seriously injured. If, in the opinion of the referee, the player (goalkeeper or field player) is not seriously injured, there is no need to stop play and have the player treated. (We could point to an October 2004 incident in an English Premier League match between Manchester City and Bolton Wanderers in which the referee allowed the goalkeeper to lie on the ground unattended for well over a minute; the goalkeeper, who had fallen without any contact from either opponent or teammate, finally got up. Luckily for him and his team no goal was scored.)
(d) The Law also allows the goalkeeper (or any other player) to leave the field during the course of play and if, after the restart (typically a throw-in), the goalkeeper has not returned and a goal is scored, life is hard.

Given that the goalkeeper is often the last line of defense against a goal, referees should interpret this to mean that they should stop play more quickly in the case of a goalkeeper injury when the players are young, unskilled, and inexperienced. Furthermore, if, as you said in your question, the referee “had no doubt” that the injury precluded the goalkeeper from participating in play, this certainly sounds like it should have been considered a serious injury at just about any level of competition.…

"Inventive" Refs

INEFFECTUAL REFEREE

April 21, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
High level U15 girls national championship series preliminary match. To set the scene – Game is tied 0-0 in the second half. White goalie comes out to near 18 and makes a save. Ball comes loose and blue forward hits ball off goalie. Goalie jumps on ball outside the 18 and is called for handling. Goalie then proceeds to argue with CR for 30-45 seconds (I believe stating that she had control when the blue player hit the ball which is not what I saw or what the CR saw). CR does not issue caution and says after the game that “this was a high level state cup game and emotions were high” so she did not issue a caution (AR stated during game that he would have cautioned keeper).

With 4 minutes left in game and white winning 1-0, white keeper makes another save and trips blue player just inside the 18. CR blows whistle and issues keeper (who is still holding the ball) a caution.

After a short discussion with keeper, CR backs off and allows keeper to punt. After the game, CR states that caution was for dissent and that she would have just dropped the ball to the keeper and allowed her to punt and since there was not much time left, she just allowed the keeper to punt.

How should this have been handled?

USSF answer (April 21, 2009):
While we might agree with the referee’s initial decision not to caution the goalkeeper for dissent because of the high emotional level of the game, we do not recommend allowing protracted sessions of “discussion” with any player. The referee should state her decision, take care of business (if any), and get on with the game. (And the AR should have kept his mouth shut unless speaking directly to the referee.)

The second decision raises three areas of concern.
– First, the caution for dissent may or may not have been correct, but if the referee saw it that way, then it was correct. We wonder if it should not have been for unsporting behavior (reckless play in tripping the opponent).
– The second area of concern is the possibility that there was an obvious goalscoring opportunity — we don’t have any details to determine one way or another.
– The third area of concern is the way the game was restarted — or “continued,” as a punt is definitely not a way to restart the game. A dropped ball is not possible. A punt is clearly an abomination. If the caution was for dissent, the only legal restart is an indirect free kick (not a dropped ball) for the opposing team where the goalkeeper committed the dissent. However, if the caution was for the goalkeeper tripping the opponent, then the correct restart is a direct free kick or, in this case, a penalty kick.…

Law 11 - Offside

LEAVING THE FIELD TO AVOID OFFSIDE

April 20, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
Consider the following setup.
An attacker is in an offside position on (or close to) the goal line.
A team mate takes a shot from around 14 yards while the goalkeeper went out of the goal to challenge him. All defenders are behind the line of the attacker who has the ball.

1. The offside attacker (which has no defenders around him and is not interfering with or disturbing the goalkeeper) gets hit by the ball and the ball enters the goal. Even if the ball had not touched him, it is obvious that the ball would have still ended up in the goal.

Question: Should the offside position be called or should the goal be allowed? (By the book: call the offside – interfering with play because he touched the ball)

2. The offside attacker deliberately steps inside the goal to avoid the offside possition (no matter if he gets hit by the ball there). In this case the goal should be disallowed and the offside player cautioned for deliberately getting off the field without permission, right?

3. The offside player stumbles and falls beyond the goal line inside the goal (being hit otherwise by the ball), avoiding this way the offside position. What should be the call in this case? What if the player fakes (not so obviously maybe) a stumble and falls inside the goal avoiding this way the offside (supposing that this would be the only way to avoid being hit by the ball)?

USSF answer (April 20, 2009):
1. Offside. No one could say for certain that the ball would have entered the goal without the player’s touch, no matter how much it would have appeared so.

2. No offside. Unless the referee believes otherwise, the player who enters the goal to avoid being involved in the play and does not touch the ball before it fully crosses the goal line and does not in any way prevent the goalkeeper from saving the shot has not interfered with play and should not be punished.

Furthermore, when an attacker leaves the field in order to demonstrate noninvolvement in active play for purposes of avoiding being declared offside, the Laws of the Game have traditionally recognized that this attacker has left the field “in the normal course of play” and should accordingly not be cautioned for this reason.

3. This decision can be made only by the referee on the game, taking into consideration what the referee has seen of play and the player thus far in the game.

In any event, whatever the attacker’s motivation or method of entering the area of the goal, the fact is that this attacker did not make contact with the ball, did not interfere with play, and thus should not be declared offside.…

Illegal Gamesmanship

UNCONVENTIONAL PLAY

April 20, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
I had a strange situation come up this winter in indoor, but I suppose I could have seen it just as easily in outdoor, and couldn’t find any written information.

Here’s the situation: A ball is kicked to another player and the ball wedges itself between her legs, just above the knees. Everyone freezes for a second, and the player begins to hop down the field with the ball still trapped between her legs. After 4 or 5 hops, she let it fall and resumed dribbling as usual. I let it go, because I could think of no infraction that would include that occurrence. Did I make the correct no-call, or should I have made a call in this situation, perhaps Playing in a Dangerous Manner? What would you have done?

USSF answer (April 20, 2009):
This player has both played in a dangerous manner and committed unsporting behavior. Players are not allowed to “carry” the ball with any part of their body, neither the head not the shoulders nor their legs. Other than when the goalkeeper is in possession of the ball, at which time he or she cannot be interfered with, the ball must always be available for others to play fairly.

By keeping the ball between her legs, this player has placed both herself and others in danger; herself, because another player might decide to take a kick at the ball to dislodge it, and others, because they cannot play the ball fairly and might injure either her or themselves by trying to do so. She has also committed unsporting behavior by unfairly withholding the ball from play.…

"Inventive" Refs

ATTEMPT AT SERIOUS FOUL PLAY

April 20, 2009 by Jim Allen

Question:
A game with older teenage boys. There is a breakaway of two attackers, running at full speed. At the 18 yard line the striker gives a glancing kick. The keeper kneels on the six and easily collects the ball. The other striker continues running at top speed, leaps into the air & lunges at the keeper, who is still kneeling & still holding the ball. The attacker’s leg is extended, his cleats are up, and he is aimed at the keeper’s head. The keeper ducks, & the attacker misses. In the opinion of the referee, if full contact had been made, as the referee believes was the attacker’s intention, it would have excited the interest of the E-911 emergency ambulance, and indeed possibly the Grand Jury.

The referee is aware that the IFAB writes that any lunge at an opponent that endangers the opponent’s safety should be sanctioned as serious foul play, but until now these examples have always been for cases where the tackle or lunge did in fact make contact.

As the attempt to endanger an opponent missed, and no contact was made, the referee is unclear how the Laws should be applied. In particular, do the Laws regard this instance as Serious Foul Play?

USSF answer (April 20, 2009):
Nowhere does the Law (including the Interpretations and Guidelines for Referees you refer to) say that there must be contact in the situation you describe. Look at the four violations of the Law that embody this view:
– kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
– trips or attempts to trip an opponent
– jumps at an opponent
– strikes or attempts to strike an opponent

In such a case the referee should have no doubt, no fear, no hesitance. Players who behave like the striker you describe MUST be sent off immediately for serious foul play. No debate, no dithering. Just do it!…