Question:
The ball is out of play over the touch line, but barely.

As AR I raise my flag, but the referee does not see it. A couple of seconds later the referee whistles a foul and issues a caution for unsporting behavior. My flag is still up. Before the restart he sees the flag and elects to restart play with the throw-in.

Should the caution be rescinded, since technically the ball was out of play and the foul and caution “never occurred”?

(Actually, the referee never saw my flag and restarted with the free kick. But I got to thinking about the above possibility.)

USSF answer (April 7, 2008):
The referee’s decision to restart with the throw-in was (or would have been) correct. When the referee decides to go with the AR’s flag for a throw-in, then the “foul” and misconduct become simply misconduct, which can still be punished with a caution for unsporting behavior. The decision to go with the throw-in does not void punishment for the cautionable offense.…

Question:
in a recent game, the attacking team A shot into the box from a wide position, striking a player on Team B, the defending team(who was inside the box). the referee stopped play and awarded a free kick with the ball clearly placed inside the box approximately 5 yards from the top and 5 yards from the side of the box. the free kick was taken w/out any scoring. at halftime, we saw the referee and asked what infringement had occurred on the play-specifically asking if it had been an indirect foul such as dangerous play. the referee said that it was actually a handball inside the box but he did not deem the foul to be worthy of a penalty.
is a free kick inside the box a correct application of the laws of the game in this case?

USSF answer (April 7, 2008):
Another case of a referee with no courage. While the Laws of the Game allow referees plenty of discretion, allowing them to make some decisions based on the statement in the Laws that many infringements occur only “in the opinion of the referee,” this is not one of them.

Based on your statement that the ball struck the player (rather than the player striking the ball, which would be deliberately handling the ball), it would appear that there was no infringement at all. If the ball simply hits a player’s “hand” (anywhere on the arm from shoulder to finger tip), that is not a foul. There must be a conscious act by the player to manipulate (sorry for the unintended pun) the ball.

Timid referees like this one might consider giving up the game altogether, as they do no favor for referees who want to get it right.…

Question:
This applies to all USSF games.
I recently heard that once a goal is scored the Referee is to blow his whistle and point to the center spot.

What is the difference between a defensive free kick which requires to blow the whistle and point the direction and the Goal scored and blowing the whistle and pointing toward the center spot when you are in the last third of the of each end?

Blowing the whistle and Raising the arm and pointing to the center spot when in the penalty area gives the impression to the fans, coaches and managers that a defensive free kick has been awarded not a goal.

USSF answer (April 7, 2008):
Correct practice for the referee and lead assistant referee is outlined in the USSF publication “Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials.” The guidance you seek for the referee’s signal reads:
“Points up field and, only when satisfied that the teams are disengaged and further attention on the goal area is not needed, backpedals toward center circle.”

A whistle would be required only if it is needed to get the attention of players — e. g., the ball is still being played despite the fact that the AR has signaled a successful goal.

The signal of pointing toward the halfway line is traditional throughout the world. If “fans, coaches and managers” in your area are confused, it might be because they have not followed play closely enough.

The Laws of the Game do not require a whistle in this situation — see above. You can find guidance on when to whistle in the Additional Instructions and Guidelines for Referees and Assistant Referees in the back of the full version of the Laws of the Game 2007/2008:

Use of whistle
The whistle is needed to:
• start play (1st, 2nd half), after a goal
• stop play
– for a free kick or penalty kick
– if match is suspended or terminated
– when a period of play has ended due to the expiration of time
• restart play at
– free kicks when the wall is ordered back the appropriate distance
– penalty kicks
• restart play after it has been stopped due to
– the issue of a yellow or red card for misconduct
– injury
– substitution
The whistle is NOT needed
• to stop play for:
– a goal kick, corner kick or throw-in
– a goal
• to restart play from
– a free kick, goal kick, corner kick, throw-in
A whistle which is used too frequently unnecessarily will have less impact when it is needed. When a discretionary whistle is needed to start play, the referee should clearly announce to the players that the restart may not occur until after that signal.

Question:
On occasion, especially during difficult weather conditions, players are allowed to wear additional clothing, such as long pants in cold weather, or a sweatshirt under their uniform. The league or tournament usually tells the referees to allow this, or sometimes I do this on my own if I feel it’s appropriate. But what about the referees? I’m talking about such things as long pants or a hat in cold weather, or more importantly for someone like me who wears eyeglasses, wearing a cap in the rain so that I can actually see the play! Who has the authority to allow or deny deviation from the official uniform? Is it the SRA, the SDI, the referee assignor for that particular leagure or tournament?

USSF answer (April 2, 2008):
As to caps or other hats, Federation policy on hats was published in the October 1999 issue of Fair Play and has been reiterated several times in this venue:

Q. May referees wear caps and sunglasses?
A. With regard to caps, the policy of the United States Soccer Federation was stated in the Spring 1994 issue of Fair Play magazine: “Under normal circumstances, it is not acceptable for a game official to wear headgear, and it would never be seen on a high level regional, national or international competition. However, there may be rare circumstances in local competitions where head protection or sun visors might sensibly be tolerated for the good of the game, e.g. early morning or late afternoon games with sun in the officials’ line of sight causing vision difficulties; understaffed situations where an official with sensitive skin might be pressed into service for multiple games under strong sunlight or a referee who wears glasses needing shielding from rain.” Sunglasses would be subject to the same considerations. In addition, we ask referees to remember that sunglasses have the unfortunate side effect of suggesting that the referee or assistant referee is severely visually impaired and should not be working the game. They also limit communication between the officials and the players by providing a barrier against eye-to-eye contact. Sunglasses, if worn, should be removed prior to any verbal communication with players.

We know from Law 4 and “Law 18” (Common Sense) what equipment the players may wear. We also know that the intelligent referee will try to make an exception for players due to severe weather conditions, such as knit caps or gloves on very cold days. This would even extend to tracksuit pants, provided everyone on the team wears the same color — which need not be the same as the color of the shorts. The same is true of the officiating crew.

There should be no need for a written statement regarding referee attire. Referees are expected to look professional for every game they do, regardless of the level of play. Referees should exercise good sense in choosing what to wear — and what not to wear. Indeed, they should be certain to take care to protect themselves from severe weather conditions just as the players do. However, the intelligent referee will ensure that the officiating crew is not dressed more warmly than the players for whom they are officiating the game.…

Question:
In a recent game, a ball was passed over forward to an offensive player who was clearly onside at the time the ball was passed, but ran to an offside position to play the ball. The pass was intercepted by a defensive player who attempted to pass it back to mid field. In doing so, he struck the back of another defensive player and the ball bounced back to the offensive player, who was now clearly in an offside position. The assistant referee called an offside call, clearly giving advantage to the team who had committed an unforced error. Was this the intent of decision 2 shown in the 2007/2008 laws of the game pamphlet?

USSF answer (March 31, 2008):
The assistant referee made a mistake, as it makes no difference where the player was when the opposing player struck the ball. The moment the referee (and the AR) must be interested in is where the player was when his/her teammate struck the ball. In this case the player did not infringe any portion of Law 11 and is thus not offside.…

Question:
At the end of the game whistle is blown, everyone knows game is over.
Both teams lined up to shake hands, two players from team A take their shirt off and are walking towards the line to shake hands without jerseys.
I want to know what the procedure for this is, This was a youth game U17.
In my mind this is a misconduct since those players are being disrespectful to the opponents.
What is your take on this?

USSF answer (March 11, 2008):
Removing the shirt after a game is over should not be treated as misconduct in most cases.  When the match is over, the referee’s best course of action is to leave and, while leaving, to be only concerned about player actions which are violent, which direct dissent at the officials, which include taking off more clothing than just the jersey, or which involve clearly abusive, insulting, or offensive language.…

Question:
In a GU11 club game, defending team is whistled for a handball in the penalty area. Keeper drops her arms and the other
defenders slow down, attacker strikes the ball a second or two after the whistle and it goes into the net. Referee disallows the goal at first, then walks over to the near A/R and talks to him as the parents from the attacking team start yelling.

Referee signals for the kickoff and tells our coach that he should have called “advantage” and that was why he decided to allow the goal. The ref went on to say, “never replace a scored goal with a PK.”

I maintained that he misunderstood the LOTG, and once the whistle was
In a GU11 club game, defending team is whistled for a handball in the penalty area. Keeper drops her arms and the other defenders slow down, attacker strikes the ball a second or two after the whistle and it goes into the net. Referee disallows the goal at first, then walks over to the near A/R and talks to him as the parents from the attacking team start yelling. blown, play was dead, and a PK should have been awarded.

USSF answer (March 10, 2008):
O, those inventive (and chicken-hearted) referees!

You are correct. The referee cannot change his decision to stop play after having blown the whistle, no matter what input the assistant referee provided in their brief conference. No goal. Restart with the penalty kick.…

Question:
Is FIFA looking at using 2 referees in future World Cup matches?

I recently played in an adult league match where there were 2 referees. Each refereed called the game on their half of the field. When I asked about the 2 referee format, I was told that it would be implemented by FIFA for the 2010 World Cup.

Can you verify that this is the case?

USSF answer (March 10, 2008):
There was an announcement recently that FIFA was considering an experiment with a two-referee system (with assistant referees) with an eye to using it in a future World Cup setting. This was only for purposes of high-level soccer, not for our everyday games.

We do not know where you play, but the dual system of control, the “two-man” system, is not allowed to be used in games under the aegis of the United States Soccer Federation or its affiliates. The only system of officiating to be used is the diagonal system of control, as described in the Laws of the Game.

And, as a follow-on, this item from Soccer America online:
http://publications.socceramerica.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.san&s=25820&Nid=40278&p=72831

More refs experiment OKed; goal-line tech scrapped
Tuesday, Mar 11, 2008 6:45 AM ET
[REF WATCH] At its Annual General Meeting, the International Football Association Board, which oversees FIFA’s Rules of the Game, has suspended the pursuit of goal-line technology and agreed to experimentation with two additional assistant referees.

FIFA’s statement on goal-line technology included, “Amongst others, the questions of the human aspect of the Game, the universality of the Rules of the Game, as well as the simplicity and efficiency of the technology were taken into consideration.”

FIFA President Sepp Blatter said, “There has been no change of heart. Referees make decisions, not machines. I have defended goal-line technology but it has become clear that such systems are too complicated and very costly. Nor would they necessarily add anything positive to the game and could harm the authority of the referee.

“We have to maintain the laws of the game in their simplicity. Do you want technical devices to take decisions? That’s why, after three years of tests with no conclusions, I am in favor of putting the whole thing on ice.”

The IFAB has approved a proposal from FIFA to conduct an experiment involving two additional assistant referees who will mainly focus on the fouls and misconduct in the penalty area. The competition in which this test will be conducted will be decided at a later stage.

The IFAB also approved specific field-size guidelines for “A” internationals. It set a fixed size of 105m long and 68m wide (instead of a minimum and maximum length – from 100m to 110m – and a minimum and a maximum width – from 64m to 75m).

Also, FIFA President Blatter addressed violent tackles, reiterating that “players committing such acts should be banned”.

The International F.A. Board is composed of The English Football Association, The Scottish Football Association, The Football Association of Wales, The Irish Football Association (Northern Ireland) and FIFA. Representing its 204 other members, FIFA has four votes on the body, while the four British associations have one vote apiece. A proposal requires a three-quarter majority (i.e., six of the eight votes) to be passed.

Question:
Please give me a read on the following scenario. As always, thanks in advance for your response.

Free kick for the attacking team just outside the 18 yard box (ceremonial restart, wall is placed appropriately, etc).

In this scenario, the defending team decides to place a defender on each post, a la a corner kick, so there is no immediate potential for offside.

Seeing this, an attacking player takes up a position one yard in front of the GK, with the intent (in the opinion of the referee, who I realize does not judge intent…) of obscuring his line of sight. So far, so good. If the kick is taken at this moment, and the attacking player maintains his position and does not attempt to impede the movement of the GK, then all is good. What if, prior to the kick being taken, the player who has taken up the position in front of the GK, starts jumping up and down: 1) with arms at his side; 2) with arms raised over his head and waving back and forth (potentially further obscuring GK’s vision)? Unsporting behavior in either instance?

I think I can answer my own question about # 2; warn the attacker, prior to the kick being taken, to cease and desist. Or if the kick is taken before a warning can be issued, whistle for impeding, or maybe misconduct? But I had some doubts about # 1. Any action required by the referee prior to the kick being taken in scenario # 1 (once the kick is taken, the attacker has the right to jump and attempt to head the ball)?

As I thought about this, I started to come up with variations on the theme. What about the attacker who takes up position adjacent to the defensive wall; what if he starts jumping up and down prior to the restart (hands at side). Any issue? Or for that matter, what if the defenders in the wall are jumping up and down (hands at side), prior to restart?

USSF answer (March 4, 2008):
We agree that the attacker in question is likely engaged in misconduct.  There might be some room for argument if the attacker merely stands his ground, but misconduct is absolutely clear cut if he jumps around and/or waves his arms.  This would be the functional equivalent of shouting to distract and we have no problem declaring this misconduct. As to the “merely standing” — this would be acceptable behavior unless (a) the attacker moves as the goalkeeper moves (which makes it similar to such behavior at a corner kick) or (b) is so close physically to the goalkeeper that it could be interpreted as an aggressive occupying of “personal space.”

If it can be done in time, yes, warn the player. If not, call the misconduct — not impeding.

Players in the wall are allowed to jump up and down, whether members of the defending team or the attacking team. But the attacker in this scenario was not in the wall and was clearly committing unsporting behavior.…