Category: Procedure-Ref

Procedure-Ref

Law 11 - Offside

USA VS. ITALY

Posted on by

Question:
If you haven’t heard this question I’m sure you will.  Does US Soccer agree with the decision in the us v italy game on the offsides decision?  I say yes under the distracting clause b/c I believe the defender saw the attacker and would have played the ball differently had he not thought he was beat by the attacker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLIc6iMsmU4
2nd clip

USSF answer (June 23, 2009):
The operating rule for ARs in such cases is, “When in doubt, keep the flag down.” The decision was correct…

"Inventive" Refs

NO ADVANTAGE BY THE ASSISTANT REFEREE

Posted on by

Question:
What is the proper way to apply advantage as an Assistant Referee? Or is advantage generally to be applied only by the Center?

Do I signal the foul and allow the center to determine advantage? Or may I, as the AR, keep my flag, run with the play to see what develops, and if no advantage materializes in 2-3 seconds then raise my flag and call the previous foul?

USSF answer (June 18, 2009):
In general, the AR should flag only for fouls or misconduct that the referee cannot see. However, that does not give the AR the right or privilege or power to invoke the advantage clause; that is reserved for the referee. In addition, a late flag by the AR for a foul in which the AR him- or herself might have “invoked” the advantage earlier is problematic. In the unlikely case that it might need to be done, this is a matter to be discussed in the pregame conference. …

"Inventive" Refs

DIAGONAL SYSTEM OF CONTROL

Posted on by

Question:
While using the diagonal system of control is there anything that prevents a referee from using a right diagonal instead of a left?

While working a tournament I was told by a referee that has been in USSF for a while that I can not choose to run a right unless there is a good reason such as deteriorated field conditions where the AR’s would run in a left diagonal. Supposedly there was a directive put out by USSF on this matter but with about an hour or 2 of reading and searching couldn’t find anything on it. I did find one question on here that mentioned an EPL game answered on July 22, 2006 but it didn’t really answer it.

I had been choosing to run a right number 1, because I feel more comfortable in that pattern. The other reason I do it is players arent used to me being there and it keeps them on their toes by me being there when they don’t expect it.

Is there any documentation to support my preference or am I doing something that is prohibited.

USSF answer (June 11, 2009):
The “standard” diagonal for the referee is the one that runs from bottom right to upper left of the field, just as shown in the diagrams in the back of the Law book. However, there is no “rule” that says the referee cannot run the other direction instead. And that other diagonal may be the one best suited for either the personality of the referee and the conditions of the field, as you point out. If you wish to use the opposite diagonal, you are more than welcome to do so.

Referees should remember there is no actual fixed diagonal run. The “diagonal system of control” is simply a name for a way of ensuring proper coverage by the referee and the assistant referees for management of the game. According to the 2009-2010 edition of the Guide to Procedures, the referee’s positioning during play is flexible, using the diagonal system of control. The referee:
• Follows positioning diagram guidelines during play and at restarts but uses discretion to choose alternate positions when needed
• Able to observe active play and lead assistant referee
• Remains close enough to observe important aspects of play without interfering with player or ball movement
• Understands that attention may be needed elsewhere on the field to monitor behavior of specific players not actively involved with playing the ball

And, as you mentioned in your question, it is also practical to use the reverse diagonal due to the condition of the pitch (particularly the status of the AR’s patrol area) or, occasionally, to take an AR away from people (spectators or team).…

Handling

DELIBERATE HANDLING VS. OFFSIDE — NEW INTERPRETATION

Posted on by

Question:
A pass from a teammate goes to an attacker in an offside position.  Only this attacker is in the area of the pass and it is clear that the pass was intended for this attacker.  While the ball is in the air, a defender reaches up and handles the ball to prevent it reaching this attacker.  Should we call the handling foul even though we know that we will call this attacker for an offside violation if the ball reaches him?

USSF answer (June 9 2009):
ATTENTION!!! All referees please note that this answer involves a change in prior guidance due to the evolving interpretation of the offside offense by the International Football Association (the people who make the Laws).

Back in “the good old days,” pre-2008, it would have been simple: Punish the offside (interfering with play) and award the indirect free kick to the defender’s team, but caution the defender for unsporting behavior for the deliberate handling of the ball. This was based on the argument that the offside offense occurred first and, since it was going to be called because the pass was clearly “going to” the attacker, the referee’s decision to accept the AR’s flag for the offside stopped play and the handling therefore occurred during a stoppage.  The caution was for unsporting behavior since it was the defender’s intention to “interfere with attacking play.”

Now, however, in the modern, post-2008 era, we are unable to do this because the offside offense has become somewhat more complicated. Under current guidance for deciding if an attacker in an offside position has interfered with play, we look to whether or not the attacker makes contact with the ball (not counting the possibility that the attacker’s actions might be considered to have interfered with an opponent).  We must remember that, despite the intentions of the teammate and despite how clearly the ball is “going to” the attacker, that attacker could still decide not to interfere with play by avoiding all contact with the ball.  That “pass to the attacker” by itself does not constitute interfering with play.  Consequently, based solely on that “pass to the attacker,” the AR should not raise the flag for an offside violation, so we are left with the handling offense — direct free kick (or penalty kick if the handling occurred in the defender’s penalty area).  The referee should still caution the defender for the tactical foul.  If the AR does mistakenly raise the flag based solely on the pass, the referee should wave it down and proceed as indicated to deal with the handling.…

Guide to Procedures

WHAT’S IN A PREGAME CONFERENCE?

Posted on by

Question:
Your answers to questions frequently illuminate topics that should be discussed in the referee team’s pregame conference. Yet I have a difficult time remembering all of the various topics that should be addressed in pregame. I have searched but have been unsuccessful in finding a quide or outline for the pregame conference.

What are the topics that the referee A) must discuss, B)should discuss, and C) might discuss with his assistants in the pregame conference. I imagine that the topics in categories B and C will likely depend upon the experience of the referee team, age level and competition level of the match, among other factors.

USSF answer (June 5, 2009):
Your imagination is working well. As leader of the officiating team, the referee must establish during the pregame conference how the team will work and cooperate. The referee (depending on his or her own level of experience) should tailor the pregame to fit the composition of the refereeing crew, including their likely varying levels of knowledge and fitness; the age, competition, and skill levels of the players; and the particular requirements of the competition itself. It is often useful for the referee to develop a checklist for topics to be covered in the pregame conference. The amount of detail would be tailored to the needs (see above) of the referee, the assistant referees (ARs), and the fourth official. First and foremost, the referee must ensure that the ARs (and a fourth official) are familiar with the guidelines and mechanics laid out in the USSF publication “Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials.”

For starters, when working with unfamiliar crew members, the very first task (after introductions) is to ask questions which (gently) elicit information about these issues — e.g., How long officiating? Grade level? Most frequent level of assignment? Club/league/association? Entry class instructor (if within first or second year of experience)? This will help the referee tailor the pregame to the needs of the team.

Ideal topics for the checklist would include the duties of the AR, signals of the AR (including NOT signaling when the referee can clearly see the incident), what to do when AR signals are missed by the referee (such as when and how long to maintain the flag); duties of the fourth official (if one is assigned); differences between the rules of the competition and the Laws of the Game, if any; what the ARs should do in situations that are not covered by the Laws of the Game, such as unofficial signals or when the AR may/should enter the field; duties at a penalty kick; a reminder to communicate at all possible moments (such as a quick look exchanged between the referee and the lead AR on all through balls or at stoppages in play. Likely the most important item is a reminder to the ARs and the fourth to immediately alert the referee to any mistakes in procedure, such as having cautioned a player a second time but failed to send that player off.

Finally, the referee should encourage the ARs (and a possible fourth official) to ask questions during the pregame conference, just to ensure that they have understood what has been discussed and what they are to do.…

Advantage

OFFSIDE AND ADVANTAGE

Posted on by

Question:
The assistant signals an offside position against team A.

The central ref does not notice the signal. Meanwhile team B regains possession of the ball and on the counter attack they score. During all this time the AR still keeps his flag up. The central ref allows the goal, but before the restart he notices the AR’s flag and goes to him. The AR tells him about the offside position. The ref disallows the goal and comes back to award team B the indirect free kick due to the offside position signaled by the AR.

What should have been the correct decision? I have understood that there is no advantage at offsides, so the offside needs to be punished, right?

Myself, I would have allowed the goal, as I would have considered that the AR made a mistake keeping the flag up. The recommendation is that if the AR signals the offside position and the central ref does not see the signal, the AR must put down the flag when the defending team has gained clear possession of the ball. Right?

USSF answer (June 5, 2009):
The clear and uncontested answer is that the assistant referee (AR) should have lowered the flag as soon as the opposing team gained control of the ball. (See the Interpretation/Guidelines for Referees, Law 6, in the back of the Law book.) Allow the goal, slap the AR on the wrist for keeping the flag up unnecessarily and thus interfering with the game.

That said, there are some disturbing statements in your question that could confuse referees, assistant referees, players, coaches, and spectators.

1. Signal offside position?
The assistant referee (AR) should NEVER signal simply offside position. He or she should signal only a definite offside; this means that the player in question is in an offside position and is involved in play. The referee than makes the decision as to whether there truly is offside, or that the offside signaled by the AR will not be called. In other words, offside either is or is not. In all events, the AR must know for certain that a player in an offside position is involved in play before the AR lifts the flag.

2. Advantage:
The advantage clause can be invoked only on infringements of Law 12, not on infringements of other Laws. Those who say that advantage may be called on offside are confusing two meanings (or categories) of the same word. The first, “Advantage” as treated in Law 5, applies only to violations of Law 12: It means that the referee believes that the team that had committed the foul (or misconduct) would benefit from a stoppage and the team that had been fouled would lose a good opportunity to advance the ball. This is the only situation in which the the referee gives the advantage signal of upswept arms and states, “Advantage, play on.”

The second, a “silent” advantage, applies to any other violation of the Laws COMMITTED BY A PLAYER (offside, second-touch on restarts, encroachment under Law 14, interfering with the goalkeeper on a corner kick) for which the impact is so fleeting or the ball changes possession so quickly that stopping play would unnecessarily interfere with the flow of the match. Offenses for which “silent” advantage is applied would not be counted in determining persistent infringement. For all other violations of the Law not committed by a player (“foreign” ball or outside agent entering the field, lack of corner flags), no advantage of either sort would be appropriate and the referee would apply the concept of doubtful or trifling in deciding what to do.

A third situation that seems to afflict some referees is the wish to call “play on” and signal the advantage when there has been no foul, but simply some sort of contact that was not a foul. In cases like this, the referee should find something else to say other than “play on” and should definitely NOT give the advantage signal: “Go on, no foul”; “Nothing there”; or “I saw it, number 6 [or whatever number applies], and there was no foul.”…

Advantage

ADVANTAGE VS. MISCONDUCT AND “NATURAL” STOPPAGES REDUX

Posted on by

Question:
In the UEFA championship match, there was a situation where the referee applied advantage to a reckless foul (deserving of a caution) and allowed play to continue.  Over the course of the next several seconds, the advantage was fully realized but, in the end, the ball ended up in the hands of the opposing team’s goalkeeper.  At that time, the referee stopped play and showed a yellow card for the reckless foul.  Is this proper?  I thought you had to wait for the ball to leave the field before giving the card?  Was the restart correct?

USSF answer (June 2, 2009):
Several questions have come in regarding this incident, a few referring directly to the UEFA match and others raising the issue generally.  Although we have answered these questions individually, there has been some misunderstanding of what is truly at issue here.  Accordingly, we are using this latest question to offer some general advice for handling such situations.

Several referees felt that the referee, having decided not to stop play immediately for misconduct based on the application of the advantage concept, cannot thereafter stop play solely because the advantage, which lasted long enough to erase the foul, has ended. Our position is not only yes, he can do that, but we would ask in return, why not? The Law requires only that the card be given at the next stoppage of play and, per the Law, that can occur by the ball leaving the field (which is often the ONLY type of stoppage considered here) or by the referee stopping play. Why do referees stop play? Well, there are hundreds of reasons, including (see Advice to Referees) simply wanting to talk to a player as well as such more obvious things as injuries, weather, another foul, etc., or simply for the good of the game”!

We recommend for everyone’s reading the Interpretations/Guidelines (on p. 90 of the 2008/2009 Laws) regarding the referee missing the AR’s flag for severe misconduct and reiterated in the USSF Memorandum Supplement 2008:

Law 6
Both last year and again this year, the International Board has created an exception to the general rule that, if advantage is applied to misconduct, the appropriate card must be shown and the proper action taken (e.g., the player sent off) at the next stoppage; otherwise, the opportunity to card has been lost. The Interpretations provide that, if an AR signals for violent conduct but the signal is not seen until after play is restarted after the next stoppage, the referee may still display a red card and send the player off the field. If this should occur, the restart is based on the current stoppage of play rather than on the violent conduct that occurred previously.

USSF advises that:
– this exception is not limited to “violent conduct” in its official sense as a form of misconduct but applies as well to serious foul play (where violence or excessive force is involved) and other acts of misconduct,
– the AR must have signaled for the misconduct at the time it occurred and maintained the signal until it is seen by the referee, and
– if play is stopped solely in response to the signal by the AR, play is restarted with a dropped ball where the ball was when play was stopped (except for the special circumstances involving restarts in the goal area) but otherwise the restart is in accordance with the Law.

Referees are strongly urged to cover this type of situation in their pregame discussion and to make clear what sorts of misconduct are serious enough to warrant maintaining the AR’s signal past the next stoppage of play. If a player has received a second yellow card in the same match but was not at that time shown a red card and sent off, the referee remains able to correct the error at any time it is brought to his or her attention by a member of the officiating team.

This information from the Interpretations/Guidelines is not directly related to the question at hand and some will argue that it is also “not specifically authorized” in the Laws of the Game. However, there are many things we do that are “not specifically authorized” and fall under the words used in the Laws themselves, “If, in the opinion of the referee.” In this case the solution is indeed part and parcel of the Laws and it prepares the way for a more proactive role for the referee after applying the advantage. If the referee has to stop the game because no “natural” stoppage seems imminent, then he can do so. Referees are expected to do what is needed to meet the demands of the Spirit of the Game, to give the players a fair game. Waiting for a “natural” stoppage in this game would have left open a path for more infringements. Better to stop them now, before they occur, rather than wait and hope.

As we read it, the International Board was so concerned about violent conduct going unpunished that it carved out this exception to the general rule that a card not given at the next stoppage (natural or “unnatural”) is lost forever. With this in mind, why should the referee be prevented from implementing the same spirit by stopping play himself after the advantage has been realized and the opposing team (the one that committed the violent conduct in the first place!) now has control of the ball? This does not mean that the referee should in every case do as was done in this situation, stopping play without waiting for a “natural” stoppage. However, it does mean that the referee must keep his or her finger on the pulse of the game, applying, as we suggest in Advice 13.5, his or her feeling for the game in what FIFA calls “Fingerspitzengefühl” (literally: “sensing with one’s fingertips”). Only by exercising common sense can the referee do what is correct in such cases.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

MISCONDUCT VS. FOUL AND “NATURAL” STOPPAGE

Posted on by

Question:
Three questions about the same incident. The comprehensive answer is, as usual, at the bottom of the item.

A. Please evaluate the actions taken by the referee in the following scenario:

As red #6 makes a pass from the middle third of the field, blue #8 comes in late with a clearly reckless tackle. The pass finds red with an excellent attacking opportunity with pace toward the blue’s goal and numerical advantage. The referee opts to invoke the advantage clause.

The attack ends when red #10 takes a shot on goal which is handled and held by blue’s goalkeeper.

At this point, the referee stops the match to deal with blue #8’s misconduct, and awards red an indirect free kick from the point of the original offense.

Has the referee taken appropriate action in this case? If not, what are the referee’s options?

B. UEFA Champions League Final…

I realize you can’t officially comment on what FIFA referees do or don’t do, but if this were to occur in a USSF-sanctioned match…

2nd half, Barcelona player gets recklessly fouled by a Man U player in Barca’s defensive half. Referee plays the advantage for Barca.

Attack is continued while fouled Barca player is down and injured.

Shot on goal is eventually taken by Barcelona but saved by Man U goalkeeper, who then distributes ball to Man U teammates. Barca player is still down and referee still plans on issuing yellow card to original Man U player that committed the foul. Man U eventually plays the ball into touch, but is this sequence of events a good candidate for applying the fact that fouls and misconduct are two separate things by stopping play to deal with the misconduct once the advantage had been “spent” so to speak?

C. The referee has applied advantage to a foul that also involves a cardable offense, and plans to award the card after the advantage has dissipated. The resultant attack ends with a save and possession by the ‘keeper. The questions are: 1. Can the referee stop play at this time (to give the card), or must the referee wait until the ball next goes out of play before giving the card? 2. If the answer to #1 is the first option, is the restart an IFK or dropped ball? 3. Where?

USSF answer (May 28, 2009):
The referee has a very brief span of time in which to decide whether or not the advantage has been realized, no more than 2-3 seconds. If the advantage was not realized within the 2-3 seconds, then the original foul gets called, the yellow card is shown to Blue #8, and the restart is a direct free kick where the tackle occurred.

However, if the advantage was realized and maintained but then lost (as it clearly was when the GK saved the shot on goal), then the referee’s actions were entirely correct — the foul tackle is gone, the referee stopped play solely to handle the misconduct (reckless foul), and he restarted with an indirect free kick (stoppage for misconduct committed on the field during play by a player) where the misconduct occurred.

The only thing worth additional comment (simply because most referees would have failed to recognize what this referee recognized) is that the referee stopped play to deal with the misconduct when the advantage disappeared, rather than waiting for the so-called “natural” stoppage (the ball leaving the field) in order to come back to #8. There is no need to wait for a “natural” stoppage to come back and punish the miscreant.…

"Inventive Assessors"

CHECKLIST FOR KICKS FROM THE PENALTY MARK

Posted on by

Question:
At a recent tournament we had a kick from the mark situation. The state referee (AR1) set up the the players as follow: Five identified players from each team outside of the center circle in a group, approximately 20 yards from the center half way line and the rest of the players inside the center circle. Furthermore he placed himself between the the identified players and the rest of the players. I was assessing the referee and DDA indicated that he liked this set up which I disagreed. My reasoning were; number one that is not what the book said, secondly since AR1 back was to 10 other players, he would not be able to see if there was any misconduct that could occur behind him and lastly this sort of self proclaimed bending of the procedure would deteriorate the consistency that federation would like to uphold. Please give me your thoughts on this matter.

USSF answer (May 27, 2009):
The procedure followed by the AR stationed at the center circle was not correct and is not endorsed by the Federation. A complete checklist for kicks from the penalty mark was published on April 2, 2009. Referees may download the checklist from this URL:
http://www.ussoccer.com/articles/viewArticle.jsp_13664259.html…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

OFFICIAL REASON FOR CAUTIONABLE OFFENSE / DIFFERENCES IN PHYSICAL PLAY

Posted on by

Question:
1. During a recent U19 boys’ match, team A scores a goal with 10 minutes left, but are still behind 3-2. Team B’s defender picks the ball up out of the goal. Immediately after leaving the inside of the goal, one of team A’s players tries to grab the ball out of team B’s hands. Knowing the game situation, I had recognized this as soon as the goal was scored and was sprinting, blowing the whistle and telling team A’s player to get in position for kick off. I got there quickly enough and there was no other issue other than the initial grab for the ball. I decided to caution team A’s player for provoking the confrontation that could have easily escalated. I believe that the official reason be “Unsporting Behavior”. Is that correct?

2. During a tournament this past weekend, I refereed a U16 boys’ game. I did some research on the teams before the game and determined that one of the teams was a top level youth (premier- team A) and the other was an entry /silver level select team (team B). It became apparent very early in the game, that team A was much more physical and stronger than team B. Team B was getting frustrated because team A was legally charging them off the ball. In the middle of the 1st half, I sent off a player for team B for grabbing a player from behind who had the ball with both arms wrapped around his chest area and then wrapping his leg around his leg and throwing him to the ground much like a player would in the other kind of football. This was after he had the ball taken away through legal charging. After he left the pitch, my AR on that side observed him receiving “high fives” from several substitutes on the bench which he mentioned at half time. I tried to explain to team B’s captain that team A was charging legally, but there were several other issues especially in the first half. Based on this, I have a few questions.

A. Other than communication with the captains and players, what else can a referee do to manage these differences in physical play? How can a referee prevent a misconduct rather than just punish and still be fair to both teams in this scenario?
B. Would the “high fives” be cautionable offenses for the substitutes as unsporting behavior? If so, would cautioning one of the substitutes be sufficient for this action? I also explained to my AR that he should have mentioned this at the time it happened. I also noted the high fives in the match report.

Thanks for your advice.

USSF answer (May 27, 2009):
1. After the referee has stopped play for the goal, the ball, although “dead” until play is restarted with a kick-off, does belong to the team against which the goal was scored. Traditionally the ball is carried back to the center spot by the team against which the goal was scored (Team B). A player who is “provoking a confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play” may be cautioned for delaying the restart of play. (Interpretations and Guidelines for Referees in the back of the Laws of the Game 2008/2009.) This would be the case of the player from the scoring team (A) who was interfering with the Team B player carrying the ball to the center of the field. (And don’t forget to add the appropriate amount of time for the delay.)

2. A. It is not fair to team A to punish them for the lack of skill of team B by calling the game in a way that would benefit B, nor is it fair to B, whose players will clearly learn nothing beneficial from being given an advantage of this sort. Call the game in accordance with both the Letter of the Laws and the Spirit of the Game — insofar as the players allow you to do that. It would seem that team B was not interested in a challenging game.

2. B. Your AR should have alerted you immediately about the “high fives,” so that you could have addressed the matter at the time. A strong dressing down and possibly at least one caution (you pick the substitute) would have been good. Then supply full details in the match report (as you did).…