Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

DOGSO QUESTIONS (SOME UNLIKELY)

Posted on by

Question:
I am embattled in a debate with some fellow referees about the following (albeit, unlikely) scenarios concerning the special privileges of keepers.
Care to referee?

1) Defenders hanging on the crossbar
1a) Outfield player hangs from the crossbar and prevents a ball entering the goal with his leg.
DOGSO-F
1b) Keeper hangs from the crossbar and prevents a ball entering the goal with his leg.
DOGSO-F
1c) Outfield player hangs from the crossbar and prevents a ball entering the goal with his arm.
DOGSO-H
1d) Keeper hangs from the crossbar and prevents a ball entering the goal with his arm.
IFK

On a free kick taken from 25 yds in front of his own goal, a field player (red) passes the ball towards his own, unguarded net.
An attacker (blue) chases after the ball. The player who took the free kick chases after him.
The ball and both players arrive at the top of the six at approximately the same time.

2a) Red fouls blue and clears the ball
DOGSO-F
2b) Red gets a second touch with his foot, clearing the ball a fraction of a second before blue can score
DOGSO-F

3) same as #2, except the red player is the red keeper
3a) Red fouls blue and clears the ball a fraction of a second before blue can score
DOGSO-F
3b) Red gets a second touch with his foot, clearing the ball a fraction of a second before blue can score
DOGSO-F
3c) Red gets a second touch with his hands, clearing the ball a fraction of a second before blue can score
IFK

USSF answer (December 6, 2011):
You and other referees need to understand that the DOGSO-F acronym includes DOGSO for misconduct as well. The player can be sent off for denying the OGSO through any act punishable by a free kick, not necessarily a direct free kick or penalty kick, but also an indirect free kick. All of these denials are DOGSO-F.

1. Players (goalkeepers are also “players”) hanging on the crossbar
(a) DOGSO-F, indirect free kick (IFK)
(b) DOGDSO-F, IFK
(c) DOGSO-H, penalty kick (PK); the misconduct became a continuing offense during which the defender committed a PK offense, which takes precedence over the IFK. Apply advantage to the misconduct and nail him on the deli ng behavior in hanging from the goal)
(d) Send-off DOGSO-F; IFK (unsporting behavior in hanging from the goal)

2. Following free kick 25 yards from goal by field defender
(a) DOGSO-F, PK
(b) DOGSO-F, IFK

3. Following free kick 25 yards from goal by goalkeeper — but do you really mean that the goalkeeper pass the ball back toward his own goal? Highly unlikely
(a) DOGSO-F, PK
(b) DOGSO-F, IFK
(c) DOGSO-F, IFK…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

LACK OF CARDS DOES NOT EQUAL NO BOOKINGS!

Posted on by

Question:
The referee forgets to bring red & yellow cards and notebook to match. advises team managers who say it’s not a problem.

during the course of the match 1 player gets a “yellow card” booking and another gets 2 “yellow cards” and therefore a “red”.

However, due the the lack of the appropriate equipment, should these “bookings” stand and should the players still receive fines (we’re talking and under 15’s sunday match here.)

Should the referee offer to ignore the offences in his match report and could the teams involved ASK him to ignore the bookings on the basis that he forgot his match official’s equipment.?

USSF answer (November 29, 2010):
Yes, despite the referee’s own carelessness in forgetting his cards, the bookings stand, as does the dismissal for the second caution in a match. No, the referee cannot ignore the bookings, and any attempt by the two teams to ask him to do so should also be includ…

Guide to Procedures

AR POSITIONING; CHANTS & DANCING; “WINNER’S TUNNEL”

Posted on by

Question:
Quick positional question. If you are AR on a game, where is the best place to line up for judgement of offside? dead even with the last defender,or even with the back heel of the last defender to see across the plane of their back. second, u15 post match the winning team goes back onto the field faces their fans sideline,lines up performs a chant,with or without choreographed movements. unsporting behavior? same question post match in youth games,and parents coming on field post match,and forming a “winners tunnel” for team to run through.

USSF answer (November 29, 2011):
1. The AR should be level with the second-last defender. If you are confused about the status of the goalkeeper, just remember that the ‘keeper is a defender, a member of the same team as the field players. If you are confused about whether to line up with the second-last defender’s back heel versus his torso or kneecap or forehead, you need to review the USSF publication “Guide to Procedure for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials.”

2. The game is over. As long as nothing derogatory is said about the other team, who cares?

3. Such things are rather juvenile, but who cares; the game is over.…

Advice to Referees

DENIAL OF AN OBVIOUS GOALSCORING OPPORTUNITY

Posted on by

Question:
This is a question for clarification of the Denying an Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity offense, particularly in reporting it. I am aware that for the DOGSO-H variety to be applied, in the U.S.A. we have the direction, “but for the handling, the ball would have entered the net” as a requirement. But, I am confused about 2 scenarios which by all rights should be DOGSO, but may not be, leading to massive game control issues. The scenarios:

Scenario A: An attacker is on a breakaway with no defenders around for 15 yards. Just outside the penalty area, within the arc, directly heading towards goal (all D’s met) the GK jumps down on top of the ball grabbing it away from the attacker’s feet outside of the penalty area. The attacker had not taken the “shot”, but if not for the illegal handling, an obvious goal scoring opportunity existed.

Send-off? DOGSO-F or DOGSO-H?

Scenario B: An attacker is on a breakaway. The GK is out of the area (pick a reason, i.e. whole team pushed up for corner kick, and he’s not very fast.) The attacker is outside or inside the penalty area, (which side of the 18 yard line only necessary in determining restart.) He has the ball at his feet, directly in between the goal posts and is heading straight towards goal. One defender manages to match his speed, but no other defenders within 15 yards. The defender dives, reaches out, and grabs the ball with his hands just before the attacker takes his shot. Now, the shot had not been taken, so it wasn’t headed into the goal.

However, all other aspects of the Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity are present. The attacking team expects the send off, the defending team expects the send off, but according to the Guidance, “the ball was not headed into the goal but for the handling.” So, send-off? How would this be written up?

DOGSO-H? DOGSO-F?

Your response and clarification would be most helpful, as some other referees and I can’t seem to meet agreement here.

USSF answer (November 19, 2011):
In Advice to Referees 12.37 the Federation has said that a red card for denying a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity requires that a goal be prevented: “applies to any player (or substitute) other than the goalkeeper in his own penalty area who handles a ball to prevent it from entering the goal … . A red card for denying a goal by handling cannot be given if the attempt is unsuccessful; in other words, if the ball goes into the goal despite the illegal contact.” Accordingly, the ball on its way into the net is the sine qua non of denying a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity — if it is prevented from going into the goal, it is a red card; if the ball goes into the goal anyway, it is not; and if the ball wasn’t going into the goal but was interrupted by a handling violation under conditions that meet the 4 Ds, it is a red card for denying a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by an act punished by a free kick..…

Law 18 - Common Sense

TOO LATE TO CHANGE NOW, REF!

Posted on by

Question:
If the ref calls,corner kick , the kick is taken, ball is in play then a goal is scored. After the goal is scored can he say,”oops, it was supposed to be a throw in not a corner kick” The ref claims he can change the call before the ball is put in play….was the fact that the corner was taken and goal scored considered “in play”?

USSF answer (November 29, 2011):
Just as the referee cannot rescind a caution (yellow card) or a send-off (red card) after play has been restarted, neither can the referee change the restart itself if it has been taken.

If the referee discovers after play has restarted that the wrong restart was taken, the referee must provide in the match report all details relevant to the mistake.

The failure of the referee to include in the match report accurately and fully any such errors is a serious breach of the referee’s responsibilities.…

"Inventive" Refs

NO GOALKEEPER SEND-OFF FOR HANDLING IN OWN PENALTY AREA

Posted on by

Question:
In a game i played in today the referee sent off the opposition goalkeeper for picking up a back pass and i was just wondering if there are any examples of this happening before and if the referee was right to do so? The situation the ball was kicked long the defender misread the ball and turned at full stretch he tackled the striker the ball rolled to the keeper who under pressure from another striker shutting him down picked up the ball. The referee then decided to send the goalkeeper off for denying a goal scoring opportunity and gave a indirect free kick was he right to do so? thanks harry.

USSF answer (November 28, 2011):
The referee was wrong to send off the goalkeeper in at least two ways: (1) by kicking the ball away from the opposing player, the defender was not kicking the ball to the goalkeeper, he was simply clearing it and it happened to go to the goalkeeper; (2) the goalkeeper may not and cannot be sent off for denying a goal or a goalscoring opportunity by handling the ball in his penalty; that is stated specifically in Law 12.…

"Inventive" Refs

RETRIEVING THE BALL

Posted on by

Question:
I dont ref all that often, but when I do ….

Attacking team kicks the ball out over the goal line. Player from the attacking team goes off the field, is right next to the ball, but does not retrieve the ball. I actually did think about carding this young lady for Unsporting behavior?

To paint the picture, she was right there, but, in the opinion of this referee, deliberately did not make any effort to gather the ball back for the defending team to take the goal kick.

Also, got me thinking about this case, which DID NOT actually happen today, but …

Defending team kicks ball out over the goal line. Player from the defending team retrieves the ball, sends it to the corner. Attacking team takes the kick before said defending player – oh lets say it is the goal keeper – is back in position. Unsporting behavior?

By the way, when I coached, I did tell my players to never retrieve a ball for the other team ….

USSF answer (November 24, 2011):
As we all know from experience, no coach will ever tell his or her players to provide any sort of aid to the opposing team’s players.

It is certainly common courtesy for a player to retrieve the ball if he or she is near it, but there is no requirement that the team that put the ball out of play must retrieve it. Just as in the case of the referee waiting until a substitute reaches his or her proper playing position for the restart, it is also traditional that the team with the restart wait until the opponent who retrieved the ball has returned to a proper playing position. The referee must be proactive and stop the restart if the team is unsporting enough not to wait for that player. However, it is not illegal if the player takes the corner kick before the goalkeeper returns to the field — provided that the goalkeeper was not the player who retrieved the ball.…

"Inventive" Refs

LOST BOOT; BALL KICKED “TO GOALKEEPER”

Posted on by

Question:
The first I cannot figure out after reviewing the LOTG etc. and asking fellow referees their opinions. It has to do with equipment. Team A was at the 18 yrd line with the ball. Defender from team B won the ball and passed it 10 yrds forward to another teammate. A player from team A ran toward him and in the process his boot came off. The team A player caught the team B player gaining control of the ball. I whistled for a foul and awarded the B team an indirect kick as Player A was not in uniform. I read something about a dropped ball being called but I would guess that would be rewarding the A team. Anyway, I am not sure what to do and seek your guidance.

The second has to do with kicking the ball back to the GK. I was told by one of our senior referees that we cannot read the field players mind when the ball is kicked to the GK, intentional or not and should award an IFK when if occurs unless it is so obvious that there was no intent. For example, the player kicks the ball into the wind and it blows back to the GK who grabs it. I was the center at a u14 game.

The ball was in the middle of the penalty area.

the defender ran and took a mighty kick at the ball which glanced off the foot and rolled towad the GK who picked it up. I did not award an IFK causing dismay in one of the opposing players who questioned me about it. What is the proper interpretation of the pass back rule regarding intent?

USSF answer (November 24, 2011):
1. A player is expected to replace his footwear as quickly as possible if it comes off during play, but that does not mean that he has to do it immediately. You would have been wrong to caution this player for misconduct; there was no foul committed in the scenario you present, so no kick was necessary. You should have started with a dropped ball (for stopping play incorrectly) and apologized to all concerned

2. The referee should not be looking for fouls to call when none occurs. You would have been mistaken in punishing the goalkeeper for his teammate’s misplayed ball. The ball was truly deliberately kicked, part of the foul, but it was not sent to any place where the goalkeeper could play it; that was pure happenstance, not a foul. Furthermore, the teammate kicking the ball in this sort of scenario is NEVER the one who commits the foul. The foul — if it exists at all — is committed by the goalkeeper if he chooses to use his hands instead of some other part of his body.…

"Inventive" Refs

FEET ON THE LINE AT A THROW-IN

Posted on by

Question:
As a referee, I have always been told that the lines on a field are part of the area of which they “contain”. However, this seems to be in conflict with the law regarding throw-ins and the placement of the feet of the individual taking the throw-in along the touchline.

I recently had a game in which I had to explain the lines are part of the area of which they contain and he brought up the fact that on a throw-in as long as both feet are touching the touchline in some form that the throw-in is considered legal. However he then pointed out that by my description, would not that be illegal since in a throw-in the player must take the throw-in from outside of the field of play, however the line is considered in play?

The only reasoning I can come up with for this is that at its most basic form the throw-in is a method of restarting the match and thus follows a slightly different set of circumstances or rules than normal course of play.

But is there any further reasoning as to why a player is allowed to be completely in the field of play when taking a throw-in (in the case where they keep both heels on the inside edge of the touchline) and yet the throw-in is technically taken to put the ball back in to play?

USSF answer (November 24, 2011):
The answer to your question lies in applying Laws 1 and 15 as they are written, not in finding reasons to doubt them. “He,” whoever “he” may be, was totally wrong in suggesting that having one’s feet on the line had anything to do with a dichotomy in the Laws. Your original understanding is correct. Your interlocutor is talking apples and applesauce, two different things, and creating his own muddled version of the Laws.

Law 1:
Field Markings
The field of play must be rectangular and marked with lines. These lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries.

Law 15:
Procedure
At the moment of delivering the ball, the thrower:
* faces the field of play
* has part of each foot either on the touch line or on the ground outside the touch line

This is the Law and it is also tradition. Where the Law is clear, follow the Law; where it is not, do the best you can (including applying logic).…

"Inventive" Refs

DELAYS THE RESTART OF PLAY

Posted on by

Question:
Having a debate here about definition of ‘delay of game’.

On a kick-off from the half line, after a goal, or starting a game, if a team does an improper kick-off (i.e. ball does not move forward, and cross over the half line) several times, is this delay of game? I have seen teams do this in the past. I would allow this twice, then give an IDFK to the opposite team. I was recently told by a senior official that this is not a delay of game and not IDFK. Well, if so, what do you do about it?

USSF answer (November 17, 2011):
The tactic you describe could be considered to be delaying the restart of play. A number of examples are given in the USSF publication “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:

12.28.4 DELAYS THE RESTART OF PLAY
The following are specific examples of this form of misconduct (some of which may also be committed by substitutes):

• Kicks or throws the ball away or holds the ball to prevent or delay a free kick, throw-in, or corner kick restart by an opponent

• Fails to restart play after being so instructed by the referee

• Excessively celebrates a goal

• Fails to return to the field from a midgame break, fails to perform a kick-off when signaled by the referee, or fails to be in a correct position for a kick-off

• Performing a throw-in improperly with the apparent intention of being required to perform the throw-in again, thus wasting time

• Unnecessarily moving a ball which has already been properly placed on the ground for a goal kick

• Provokes a confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee has stopped play

Because the ball was out of play at the delay, the restart after any caution in this case would still be the kick-off.…