Category: Law 18 – Common Sense

Law 18 – Common Sense

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

IMPEDING THE PROGRESS OF THE OPPONENT?

Posted on by

Question:
I am a referee grade 8 and also a coach. During my son’s U14 Advanced match on Saturday, our team played a through ball from about 35 yards out approximately even with the left edge of the goal area (as viewed by the attacking players). Our center forward had started his run toward the ball from about 30 yards from the goal line in the middle of the field. One of the defenders looked back at our forward, never looking at the ball, and ran back and placed his body between the offensive player and the ball. The ball was about 2 yards away. Our forward was right behind his back and the defender continued to be between the attacker and the ball the entire way until the goalkeeper picked it up. The defender also put out his arms to block the attacker from getting through, but the attacker never contacted the arms. At the time, I thought our team should have been awarded in IFK, but I wanted to look at it objectively.

Here are the issues that need to be answered in my mind.
1. Is 2 yards playing distance for a U14 game? To me, this goes to the opinion of the referee.
2. Is the defender looking back a sign that he is not playing the ball and playing the man, thus he is impeding the progress of his opponent?
3. I believe that the arms outstretched are irrelevant because the attacker never tried to go around and never made contact with his arms.

USSF answer (November 4, 2008):
1. Only the referee on the game can judge whether or not this is “playing distance.” And that decision rests on the referee’s evaluation of the player’s speed and skill.
2. It makes no difference what the defender does if he or she is deemed to be within playing distance of the ball. Any defender wants to know where the opponent is, so looking back and adjusting positon is clearly legal — as long as the requirement for playing distance is met. However, if not within playing distance of the ball, looking backward to “place” the opponent could certainly be seen as an indication of impeding.
3. And we agree.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

REFEREE GRILLS PLAYER AFTER GAME

Posted on by

Question:
We just returned from a tournament and my question is whether or not a ref has the right after a game to pull a player aside and talk to them. The other team had a player that made an allegation against our team for flipping them off at the end of the game. The coach said he did not know which player or if it had happenned for sure. After the players had left the field to leave. The ref placed their arm around the player and accused them off this with a finger pointed in their face. In the end the player was crying, not proud of the win and been accused of something. I would think a better option would have been to talk to the team as a whole as nobody had seen the player do this. Or if the other player was telling the truth. It almost seemed like an abuse of power.

USSF answer (November 3, 2008):
The referee certainly has the right to speak with any player after the game. The referee has the authority to deal with misconduct as long as the teams and the referee are still in the immediate vicinity of the field. — this could certainly include talking with a player regarding an actual, potential, or alleged act of misconduct. However, the referee does not have the right to grill the player or subject that player to the third degree.  After all, whatever misconduct may have occurred happened far enough back in time that the referee’s valid interest in the matter had long passed.  Either he dealt with it or not.  Normally, the extension of authority is assumed to cover acts of misconduct that occur during the post game period while the teams are in the process of exiting the field (or possibly that occurred immediately prior to the end of the match).  Anything earlier is simply rehashing old news, usually to no good end.

Report the referee to the tournament, local and state authorities.…

"Inventive Instructors"

GOALKEEPER LEAVES PENALTY AREA BALL IN HAND

Posted on by

Question:
A goalie comes out of the his area with ball still in hand. Direct or Indirect Kick?

I have asked 5 referees and get different answers. The classes I have gone to claim a goalie can not cause a direct free kick is this right.

USSF answer (November 3, 2008):
You are the 250th person to have asked this question this year. We cannot believe that any referee instructor in any state would tell referees to punish this offense with an indirect free kick. Does no one ever read the previous answers or the Laws of the Game? You have only told us of two answers you received. What are the others?

While recognizing that the offense by the goalkeeper of crossing the penalty area line completely with the ball still in hand is never doubtful, but often trifling, we must also recognize that it is certainly an infringement of the Law and must always be treated as such by the referee. The referee will usually warn the goalkeeper about honoring the penalty area line but allow the first such act to go unpunished; however the referee must then clearly warn the goalkeeper to observe and honor the line and the Law. If it occurs again, the referee should call the foul and, if the offense is repeated, caution the goalkeeper for persistent infringement of the Laws of the Game.

The correct restart is a direct free kick for the opposing team from the place where the offense occurred. That means the point just outside the penalty area where the goalkeeper still had the ball in hand.

We might also add that in many cases assistant referees do not do their job correctly in this respect. Instead of judging the place where the ball is released from the goalkeeper’s hands, they concentrate on the place where the goalkeeper’s foot meet the ball, which could be well outside the area with no offense having occurred.…

Law 15 - Throw In

LOCATION OF THROW-IN

Posted on by

Question:
The player restarted with a throw-in. The referee made him redo the throw-in because he wasn’t close enough to where the ball went out. Can’t a player throw in the ball behind that point so he doesn’t get an advantage. Can’t it be 5, 10, 20 yards behind where it went out? Especially when he wants a quick restart instead of moving up to where the ball went out?

USSF answer (November 3, 2008):
No, the throw-in must be taken from within one yard/meter of the place where the ball left the field of play.

Beyond that, the referee’s action was entirely and grievously wrong.  A throw-in cannot be redone because the referee is not satisfied with some technical requirement such as location — although some local rules do allow a retake of an improperly-performed throw-in for very young players.  If the throw-in was not satisfactory and the referee stops play, the ball must be given to the opposing team.  If the referee doesn’t want to do this, the only proper action is to let the infringement of Law 15 go as doubtful or trifling and, at most, warn the player about doing better next time.  In short, if the throw-in is “good enough,” the restart is allowed; if it is not “good enough,” it has to go to the other team.…

Handling

GOALKEEPER STEPS OUT OF PENALTY AREA WITH BALL IN HAND

Posted on by

Question:
I recently refereed a playoff game and the following situation arose:
The defending goalkeeper stepped out the 18 yard box prior to punting the ball. I called for an indirect free kick for the attacking team as I thought that it was unintentional. Was this the right call? none of the coaches caught it but myslaf and the AR’s had a discussion that it could have been a direct kick with a possibility of a sending off for deliberate hand ball.
Please advise as if i made a mistake, I do not want to make the same one again.
Thank you

USSF answer (November 3, 2008):
It makes no difference where the goalkeeper’s feet were when the ball was kicked. What is important is when the goalkeeper released the ball to kick it. If that occurred when the ‘keeper’s hands were inside or on the penalty area line, then no infringement occurred and no verbal announcement of any sort is necessary.

If the ball was not released until after the goalkeeper’s hands were outside the penalty area, then the proper restart is a direct free kick, not an indirect free kick.

And, just for clarification’s sake, there is no such thing as “a possibility of a sending off for deliberate hand ball” unless the goalkeeper handled the ball outside his penalty area to prevent it from going into the net.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

MARKING THE ‘KEEPER AT CORNER KICKS

Posted on by

Question:
While waiting for the attacking team to take its corner kick, the attackers and defenders are in the penalty area jockeying for position. What rules apply to the attackers, defenders and goalkeeper during this time period, before the kick is actually taken, in regards to establishing a position? I have seen attackers deliberately standing and jumping in front of the goalkeeper in order to try and block the view of the corner kick. I have also seen pushing, shoving, pulling, and bumping by attackers and defenders, who are trying to stay in front of the other player and who are trying to block the other player. Is this misconduct? Is this cautionable? Should a referee take some action to stop this type of activity?

USSF answer (October 23, 2008):
Except under certain conditions spelled out in the Laws (such as at a penalty kick or throw-in or goal kick), a player is permitted to stand wherever he or she wishes. After the ball is put in play, a player who — without playing or attempting to play the ball — jumps up and down in front of the goalkeeper to block the ‘keeper’s vision or otherwise interferes with the ‘keeper’s ability to play the ball is committing the foul of impeding an opponent. If there is contact initiated by the player doing this, the foul becomes holding or pushing. When such activity occurs, the referee should immediately stop the restart and warn the players to conduct themselves properly. If, after the warning (and before the restart), they do it anyway, they have committed unsporting behavior and should be cautioned. The restart remains the same.

Before the ball is in play, the referee can simply allow the opponent of the ‘keeper to impede, wait for the corner kick to occur, blow the whistle, award an indirect free kick coming out, and card if needed.  This is the “harsh” approach and it carries the danger, provided the jostling doesn’t sufficiently enrage the the goalkeeper (or any other defender), that the tensions pr violence will escalate to something more serious.  It is also not a good approach when it is an attacker who is doing the jostling.

The referee can see the situation developing and verbally and/or by a closer presence encourage correct behavior on the part of the jostlers in the hope that they will cease their misbehavior.  This is the “proactive” (some would call it the “wimpy”) approach and is more likely to prevent escalation, if it works. If it doesn’t work, the referee can always hold up the corner kick, caution, and then signal the restart or go to the option above.…

Law 1 - The Field

INCONSIDERATE REFEREES

Posted on by

Question:
At a U9 girls club game, the field was poorly lined – to stand over the line you could not see them. If you looked down the line they were vaguely visible.

The goalie blocked the ball from going into the net and went to pick it up. The ball never left the field, it never bounced. The ref gave the kick from the penalty line at the spot where she believed he wanted her to stand.

The ref had his left hand in the air and his right pointed to the ground. The goalie stepped up to that point and the ref then lowered both hands to the ground and the goalie stepped up to the new spot the ref motioned to and the ref called a “hand ball” and gave a direct free kick to the other team. This happened a second time, on the third time the ref told her when to stop.

He was aware of the poor condition of the lining of the fields prior to the start of the game – they were away fields for us. Our loss was 2 – 0 due to those kicks. Is this appealable?

USSF answer (October 23, 2008):
Under 9s; club soccer; lines nearly invisible, with referee fully aware of the inexperience of the players and the conditions of the field; referee gives apparently vague guidance to a goalkeeper who is relying on him for assistance.

We can understand the referee not figuring out the problem the first time, but certainly not a second time. These are Under 9s, not traveling team players and certainly not professionals.

The job of the referee at this level of play, as at every other level, is to call the game correctly, but it is also to function as an instructor of sorts, making certain that the players know at least how and why they messed up. It is clear that the referee’s performance was not up to par.

Unfortunately, it is not a matter for appeal. The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final. No matter that his advice to your goalkeeper was lacking in concern for the good of the game, this is not something that can be successfully appealed. However, something can be done: The matter should be brought to the attention of the local association or the person who assigned the game…

"Inventive" Refs

OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE; PAY ATTENTION!

Posted on by

Question:
I actually have two questions-

1- We just recently had a game where the line ref raised his flag for off side on our player and rightfully so; the middle ref did not see it until after the person who was off side had an accidental collision with a player from the other team, no call was made. Once the ref saw that the line ref was holding his flag up for off sides; he blue the whistle.  As the ref was giving the other team a kick for the off sides, there coach ran onto the field and started arguing in the ref face for a reason I do not know.  At that time the Ref tossed the Coach, who walked of the field.  Once the Coach was off the field, a parent of that team came onto the field and did the same thing.

The ref was going to give there team a kick because of off sides, but instead gave our team a kick because of the parent being on the field.  Was this the correct decision?

2- If any member of a team physically harms a player of the opposite team; by clawing them in the arms or scratching whenever they had a chance.  Is a player aloud to let the ref know this is going on; especially if it is leaving visible marks on the player?

USSF answer (October 23, 2008):
1. More inventive refereeing. Once the referee has stopped play for an infringement (in this case the offside), the restart may not be changed, no matter what happens. The coach was expelled for behaving irresponsibly and so was the parent who took his place. While that is behavior that must be included in the referee’s match report, it in no way changes the restart. Correct restart is an indirect free kick against your team for the offside.

2. Well, the player can certainly complain, but the referee cannot act solely on the basis of whatever a player says without corroboration from the referee’s own observation or observation by an assistant referee (or fourth official). But if the referee and assistant referees were actually watching the game there would be no need for it, would there?  In any event, the player should not retaliate, as that might lead to his or her dismissal (red card).…

"Inventive" Refs

GOALKEEPER CROSSES LINE WITH BALL IN HAND

Posted on by

Question:
I had this in a game I did the other night. The keeper stops a shot and gets ready to release it but I told her to hold on for one second because a player on the other team seemed to be injured. The player said she was fine so I told the goalie to play on without blowing my whistle. The goalie ran to the line and carried the ball past the penalty area before she released the ball. I then blew my whistle for the first time and awarded the other team an Indirect Free Kick for improper clearing of the ball by the keeper. I was in a two-man system and the other official (who is my father) felt the call should have been a hand ball and a direct free kick to restart. We settled on my interpretation of the rules and the kick taken was an IFK. The kick actually went off the goalie’s fingertips and went in the goal. Since it went off the goalie’s fingers the indirect free kick was satisfied, so I got lucky with the call since both direct and indirect kicks were satisfied. However, what would the correct call be so I can make the right call next time? Thanks

USSF answer (September 22, 2008):
Our opinion is that your father was technically correct: The restart, if you stopped the game for this extremely trifling infringement, should have been a direct free kick. (There is, by the way, no such infringement as “improperly clearing the ball.”) You can already see where this answer is going. You interfered with the goalkeeper’s release of the ball and then, when she committed a TRIFLING infringement of the Law, you punished her and even allowed a goal to be scored against her team.

Lesson to be learned from this: If you cannot tell immediately that a player is truly injured, there is no need to delay play. Instead, you should let the goalkeeper clear the ball from the penalty area and only then stop play, if you must, to check the possibly injured player. If you do otherwise, you have then already determined that the player is injured and should stop play immediately. And that means that the restart will be inside the penalty area through no fault of the defending team. It’s a matter of good management and common sense for referees to try not to disadvantage unfairly the team that has not committed any infringement.

Then, of course, there is always the fact that you were officiating in a two-referee game, something to be avoided by referees registered with the U. S. Soccer Federation, as the dual system of control is not in accordance with the Laws of the Game or the policies of the Federation.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

SHIELDING VS. IMPEDING OR CHARGING

Posted on by

Question:
U14G game. Two opponents are aggressively pursuing a 50/50 ball in the open field. Blue arrives at the ball an instant before yellow. Blue’s first action, with the ball now directly at her feet, is to shield the ball from the fast approaching Yellow player by moving her body sideways directly into the path of the oncoming Yellow player. Blue player has a more woman-like body. She’s at least a foot taller than Yellow and is widest at the hips. The Yellow player, with a more girl-like body, goes flying over the hip of the Blue player.

In my judgment since Blue arrived at the ball first (albeit only by an instant) and since she was clearly within playing distance of the ball, her act of shielding the ball was legal. In my opinion, the fact that Yellow went flying through the air was the result of her own carelessness. Accordingly, I did not whistle and allowed play to continue.

First, based on these facts was that the correct call?

Second, it is also my opinion that Blue knew that her act of shielding the ball would cause a violent collision between the two and that the smaller girl would be more adversely affected by such a collision. (These were two talented, aggressive players, probably the best on each team, who had been going at each other for some time prior to the collision.) Could Blue ever be called for a foul in this situation? If so, what do I look for to determine a foul occurred.

USSF answer (October 22, 2008):
A player who is within playing distance of the ball — as determined by the referee, not the player — is permitted to interpose her body between the ball and the opponent. The fact that she is larger makes absolutely no difference. If she chose to put her hips in a particular position before the opponent arrived, life is hard for the opponent. Unless you are absolutely certain that the shielding player has physically moved her hip during the actual contact, thus using a part of her body for a purpose that is not permitted — charges have to be shoulder to shoulder, even for women — then there has been no foul here.…