Advice to Referees

DELIBERATE OR NOT DELIBERATE HANDLING?

Posted on by

Question:
I have a point to make about arm extension and ball control with regard to handling the ball, and my question will be “does my argument hold any water.” I’m aware by the answers to numerous questions on the subject that the call is made based on “deliberate” or “not deliberate”. I contend that the reason that there are numerous questions on the subject is that there is such difficulty in determining what is deliberate and not. I’m aware that there is a list of items to look for in determining the call, but it seems to me that arm extension and advantageous ball possession are key elements in determining whether the action may be deliberate. Otherwise, its just too difficult to make that call consistently. I’m speaking of occasions where it is not absolutely clear that the action is non-deliberate, but there is otherwise a difficulty in determining that the “handling” meets the specificity of what is deliberate. And for the most part, we’re talking about bang-bang plays.

The rule’s words are “deliberately handle” which implies control.

The point of the game is to control the ball – which hopefully leads to more goals for your side – and as such, would be the point for any action in the match. Therefore, unless it is clear that the handling action was not deliberate, then control of the ball should be a determining factor in deciding to make a call for deliberate handling (handball). In my opinion, same difficulty can be applied to arm extension, and since arm extension can be a form of ball control, should be applied in the same manner.

p.s. a true “deliberate” handball is a potential send-off, but of course, it is typical for many handball calls to be made during a match that are technically then “deliberate”, but for which it would be foolish to warn on each, much less send off for the infraction.

Maybe we can change the terminology on the greater infraction to “intentional”, similar to basketball’s intentional foul?

USSF answer (March 31, 2010):
You are trudging a well-worn path, but it leads you in the wrong direction. First, watch out for the notion of “unnatural position,” because what is natural for a female player maintaining balance is not natural for a male player maintaining balance under the same circumstances. The mere fact that a player, regardless of age or gender, may have an arm/hand raised does not magically transform accidental contact with the ball into a foul — it is only one factor to be considered. Next, where does the notion come from that a “deliberate handball is a potential send-off”? Nonsense! No more so than any foul is a potential send-off if the conditions are right.

Our perception is that most whistled handling offenses are not deliberate handling. And many that ARE called could be considered trifling or have advantage applied to them. Unfortunately, many referees who otherwise understand doubtful/trifling and advantage seem not to want to apply either of these concepts to a handling offense.

There is perfectly good and clear guidance out there in the USSF publications “Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game”:

12.9 DELIBERATE HANDLING
The offense known as “handling the ball” involves deliberate contact with the ball by a player’s hand or arm (including fingertips, upper arm, or outer shoulder). “Deliberate contact” means that the player could have avoided the touch but chose not to, that the player’s arms were not in a normal playing position at the time, or that the player deliberately continued an initially accidental contact for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage. Moving hands or arms instinctively to protect the body when suddenly faced with a fast approaching ball does not constitute deliberate contact unless there is subsequent action to direct the ball once contact is made. Likewise, placing hands or arms to protect the body at a free kick or similar restart is not likely to produce an infringement unless there is subsequent action to direct or control the ball. The fact that a player may benefit from the ball contacting the hand does not transform the otherwise accidental event into an infringement. A player infringes the Law regarding handling the ball even if direct contact is avoided by holding something in the hand (clothing, shinguard, etc.).

NOTE: In most cases in the Laws of the Game, the words “touch,” “play,” and “make contact with” mean the same thing. This is not true in the case of deliberate handling, where the touch, play, or contact by the offending player must be planned and deliberate.

and in the Directive on Handling the Ball:

Handling The Ball
2009 Referee Program Directives
February 2, 2009
Keys to Identifying Handling the Ball
There are several key criteria referees should use to determine whether contact between a player’s hand/arm and the ball constitutes a foul for handling. Many of the criteria have formed the foundation of referee identification of handling offenses for years. Despite this foundation, handling criteria continue to be applied inconsistently.
Going forward, additional criteria will need to be considered by officials in determining if contact by the ball with the hand/arm is, in fact, a handling offense. For example: Did the player make himself bigger?
The following 3 criteria should be the primary factors considered by the referee:
1. Making yourself bigger
This refers to the placement of the arm(s)/hand(s) of the defending player at the time the ball is played by the opponent. Should an arm/hand be in a position that takes away space from the team with the ball and the ball contacts the arm/hand, the referee should interpret this contact as handling. Referees should interpret this action as the defender “deliberately” putting his arm/hand in a position in order to reduce the options of the opponent (like spreading your arms wide to take away the passing lane of an attacker).
• Does the defender use his hand/arm as a barrier?
• Does the defender use his hand/arm to take away space and/or the
passing lane from the opponent?
• Does the defender use his hand/arm to occupy more space by extending
his reach or extending the ability of his body to play the ball thereby benefiting from the extension(s)?
2. Is the arm or hand in an “unnatural position?” Is the arm or hand in a position that is not normal or natural for a player performing the task at hand.
3. Did the player“ benefit?” In considering all the “signs” described above, the referee should also consider the result of the player’s (usually a defender) action. Did the defender’s action (handling of the ball) deny an opportunity (for example, a pass or shot on goal) that would have otherwise been available to the opponent? Did the offending player gain an unfair tactical advantage from contact with the hand/arm which enabled him to retain possession? In other words: Did the player benefit by putting his hand/arm in an “unnatural position?” The referee needs to be able to quickly calculate the result of the player’s action to determine whether an offence has been committed.
After applying the aforementioned criteria, if the referee is still uncertain as to whether handling the ball has occurred, the referee should then incorporate the following two criteria as part of his decision making process:
4. Reaction Time The less time a defender has to react, the less likely there has been a handling offense. For example, a ball struck from a close distance, or a very fast moving ball, or a ball coming in from a direction which is outside the defender’s view gives little or no time for the defender’s reaction to be “deliberate.” The referee must take into consideration whether the defender’s reaction is purely instinctive, taken to protect sensitive areas of the body as the face. Distance is a factor in determining “reaction time.” The further the ball, the more reaction time a play may have.
5. Hand/arm to ball Referees must be ready to judge whether the player moved his arm to the ball thereby initiating the contact. Additionally, the referee should evaluate whether the player deliberately readjusted his body position to block the ball thus intentionally playing the ball with his hand/arm.

We strongly urge that you not allow the word “benefit” in item 3 of the Directive to confuse you. It clearly states in that paragraph that this benefit can only result from a deliberate action. Any “benefit” that accrues to a player who has NOT deliberately handled the ball is purely and simply a serendipitous event and must not be confused with a planned action. And also review the guidance in our first two paragraphs.…

Injury

SHOULD THE REFEREE ADMINISTER FIRST AID?

Posted on by

Question:
During a match a while ago, a very unique situation occurred – one that I have never seen nor heard of before. I was observing a close under 14 girls mid-level match on a wet day while I waited for my ride after my last match of the day and I did talk to the Referee after the match to pin down some of the details.

So, here we go. A defender was dribbling at speed into her own penalty area playing for time to pass the ball to the outside to a team mate who was running into position to accept the pass. The dribbling defender had an attacker just off the back of her left shoulder. The defender touched the ball forward and then ran up on it. As the defender’s right foot moved forward to kick the ball, the attacker lunged forward with her own leg between those of the defender, missing the ball, and causing the defenders kicking leg to impact with the attacker’s ankle, at which point the defender tripped, and fell awkwardly with the attacker falling next to her.

The Referee blew the whistle, and awarded a direct free kick to the defender (for tripping) and pulled the yellow card from his pocket to award a caution for Unsporting Behavior.

Let’s leave questions as to the correctness of the decision up to now, because what occurred next was the strange part. The Referee had the card in his hand held straight down by his side, presumably to show to the attacker once she regained her feet. However, the attacker was more seriously injured than she had upon first glance, and she apparently had dislocated her knee when the defender’s legs scissored her own as the defender fell. Now to add to the strangeness of the situation, I know that the Referee, a friend of mine, is a certified Emergency Medical Technician in the State of Colorado. As such, when he observes a serious injury to someone, he is required by State law to render assistance to the best of his ability. To this end, he quickly stuck the card back into his pocket, called both coaches onto the field (the defender was shaken up on the play as well), yelled for the lead AR to enter the field to keep and eye on the players, identified himself to the running coaches as an EMT and knelt to begin examining the attacker. He quickly determined that an ACL tear was likely and had a parent call for an ambulance.

He remained with the attacker until the ambulance arrived and he could hand off custody of the case to the arriving paramedics. After the ambulance left, but before play was restarted, he informed the attacker’s coach that his player had been cautioned for UB, before restarting play with the direct free kick for the defender’s team.

Under these very narrow facts and circumstances, were the Referee’s actions correct? While his personally tending the player is not in line with USSF policy, State law regarding medical professionals clearly overrides USSF policy. Secondly, when the Referee officially removed his EMT hat and put back on his Referee hat, the girl was in the ambulance already. In both of our opinions, he would have looked foolish showing the yellow card to the back of a moving vehicle. He would have looked equally foolish, not to mention cruel and uncaring, if he had shown the card to the player while she was curled up on the ground in tears. He had already pulled the card out, and the foul, in his opinion, most certainly warranted a caution. Could he simply take no action at all? Or, as he actually did in this case, could he consider pulling the card out to be “showing” it and verbally inform the coach of the caution? We both agreed after the match that things would have been simplified if he had left the card in his pocket and used the “slow” carding method (book then show), in which case he would have seen the extent of the player’s injury before the card was ever out. However, he was still determined to caution the player, as in his (and my) opinion the self-injury did not wipe out the reckless tackle and injury to the defender. Had he gone the slow path, when would the correct time to show the card be? While the player was on the stretcher? Finally, a hypothetical situation – if a referee was not an EMT in this same situation, and therefore left the player to the attention of the local athletic trainers, when (if at all) should he or she show the card? In this case, there is not the eminently justifiable reason of needing to tend to the player’s injury, but there also does not appear to be an opportune moment to show the card. We both agreed that in a higher-level match we would just show the card in the general direction of the player while they were on the stretcher, but at this age, we both felt that such an action would necessarily outrage the protective instincts of the watching parents, and cause the referee an even worse headache in the long-term.

Hope you can help sort this one out with me.

USSF answer (March 31, 2010):
The referee’s grasp of procedure appears to be quite good. As to exercising his skills as an EMT, if it has to be done, it has to be done, particularly if by not doing so he would have placed himself in legal jeopardy. Clearly a quick request for someone in the crowd with similar skills would have been good, but, . . ..

The referee will normally wait until the player has been treated or has risen before showing the card, but each situation is up to the decision of the referee. There is no definite schedule of events here. In a worst case situation, the referee could do as he did, informing the coach of the caution, or less usual but still acceptable, show the card to the captain (but be certain to explain the action).…

Advice to Referees

TWELFTH PLAYER ON THE FIELD

Posted on by

Question:
Situation: There’s a 12th player that a coach snuck onto the field at a water break. A goal is scored but after being notified about the extra “player” by the fourth official you ask the coach which player is the extra one and the coach refuses to tell you. I thought it standard answer dismiss the coach and if no one will tell you, you pick one, caution him and get him off the field and get on with the game. Almost everyone says can’t do this and the game must be abandoned. Seems abandoning a game is drastic but they may be right as I guess you can’t arbitrarily caution a player. Help me!!

USSF answer (March 31, 2010):
The Advice to Referees tells us:

3.17 MORE THAN THE CORRECT NUMBER OF PLAYERS
If, while the game is in progress, the referee finds that a team has more than the allowed number of persons on the field, play must be stopped and the extra person identified and removed from the field. If the referee stops play for that purpose, the game is restarted as specified in the Law; if the game was stopped for some other purpose, the game is restarted for that particular reason. Other than through referee error, this situation can occur only if someone enters the field illegally. The “extra player” can include an outside agent (such as a previously expelled player or a spectator); a player who had been given permission to leave or been ordered off by the referee for correction of a problem, but re-entered without permission; or a substitute or substituted player who enters without permission and/or during play.

In all competitions, especially those that allow substituted players to return, the officials must be extremely vigilant in counting the number of players who leave and substitutes who enter to prevent problems of this nature. Similarly, players off the field temporarily who require the permission of the referee to re-enter must be monitored to ensure that they do not participate in play until this requirement and any others (e. g., inspection to confirm the correction of the equipment or bleeding problem) are met.

The referee will allow the captain to select the player to be removed. (The captain may wish to consult with the coach, but the referee will not do so — under the Laws of the Game, the coach has no input in the process.) If the captain and anyone whom he/she consults refuse to identify the extra player, then there is no choice left to the referee but to actually makes a decision and select the player to be removed. The goal must be canceled if any player on the team with the illegal player scored it (and the goal is counted if any player on the opposing team scored it)., If the goal is canceled, the restart must be a goal kick. The referee must submit full details in the match report, including the coach’s action in putting the extra “player” into the game illegally.

Incidents like this make a clear case for not restarting the game without confirming with each assistant referee and the fourth official that the appropriate number of players is on the field. The failure of the referee, the ARs, and the fourth to take immediate action by counting and doing their jobs before the restart casts doubt on the ability of the officials to manage the game wisely and correctly.

Notice that we do not recommend cautioning anyone here, because the players were simply obeying the instructions of their coach — and in all events, as mentioned above, it is the responsibility of the match officials to keep track of the number of players on the field.…

Interpretations/IFAB

STOP, SUSPEND, ABANDON OR TERMINATE?

Posted on by

Question:
On what grounds can a referee stop and abandon a soccer match

USSF answer (March 31, 2010):
An interesting question, one that requires a good bit of space to answer completely.

Under the Laws of the Game (or, as they are called in Great Britain, the Laws of Association Football), the referee has the power to stop, suspend or abandon the match, at his discretion for any infringements of the Laws or for outside interference of any kind. A referee (or where applicable, an assistant referee or fourth official) is not held liable for a decision to abandon a match for whatever reason.

We need first to differentiate between “abandon” and “terminate” a match. The difference between terminating a match and abandoning a match is a subtle one, but it is historically correct and supported by traditional practice. (Research into the history of the Laws will reveal this clearly; the IFAB now uses “abandon” almost exclusively, most likely just to confuse us all.) The referee may abandon a match if there is an insufficient number of players to meet the requirements of the Law or the competition, if a team does not appear or leaves before completion of the game, or if the field or any of its equipment do not meet the requirements of the Laws or are otherwise unsafe; i. e., for technical (Law 1) or physical (Law 4) safety. An abandoned match is replayed unless the competition rules provide otherwise. The referee may terminate a match for reasons of non-physical safety (bad weather or darkness), for any serious infringement of the Laws, or because of interference by spectators. Only the competition authority, not the referee, has the authority to declare a winner, a forfeit, or a replay of the match in its entirety. The referee must report fully on the events. “Suspended” means that a match was stopped temporarily for any of various reasons. After that the match is either resumed, abandoned, or terminated and the competition rules take over.

CONDITION OF THE FIELD (AND APPURTENANCES)
• Law 1 states that if the crossbar becomes displaced or broken, play is stopped until it has been repaired or replaced in position. If it is not possible to repair the crossbar, the match must be abandoned. In addition, if the referee declares that one spot on the field is not playable, then the entire field must be declared unplayable and the game abandoned.

• A careful inspection of the field before the start of the game might lead the referee to abandon the game before it was started. If, once the match has begun, the referee discovers a problem that is not correctable, then the referee’s decision must be to abandon the game and report the matter to the competition authority.

• Under Law 5, the referee is authorized to stop play if, in his opinion, the floodlights are inadequate.

INTERFERENCE BY PLAYERS, OTHER PARTICIPANTS, OR SPECTATORS
If an object thrown by a spectator hits the referee or one of the assistant referees or a player or team official, the referee may allow the match to continue, suspend play or abandon the match depending on
the severity of the incident. He must, in all cases, report the incident(s) to the appropriate authorities. Using the powers given him by Law 5, the referee may stop, suspend or terminate the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws or for grave disorder (see below). If he decides to terminate the match, he must provide the appropriate authorities with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against players, and/or team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match. In no event may the referee determine the winner of any match, terminated or not. Nor may the referee decide whether or not a match must be replayed. Both of those decisions are up to the competition authority, i. e., the league, cup, tournament, etc.

“Grave disorder” would be any sort of dustup involving the players and/or spectators and/or team officials which puts the officials in immediate or likely subsequent jeopardy — fights which metastasize beyond just 2 or 3, masses of spectators invading the pitch, throwing dangerous objects (e. g., firecrackers, butane lighters, etc.) onto the field, and so forth.

THE NUMBER OF PLAYERS
• The referee has no authority to force a team to play if they do not wish to continue a game nor to terminate the match in such a case. The referee will simply abandon the game and include all pertinent details in the match report.

• In the opinion of the International F.A. Board, a match should not be considered valid if there are fewer than seven players in either of the teams. If a team with only seven players is penalized by the award of a penalty-kick and as a consequence one of their players is sent off, leaving only six in the team, the game must be abandoned without allowing the penalty-kick to be taken unless the national association has decided otherwise with regard to the minimum number of players.

• The referee must not abandon the game if a team loses a kicker after kicks from the mark begin. The kicks must be completed.

• If a player has been seriously injured and cannot leave the field without risking further injury, the referee must stop the game and have the player removed. If, for whatever reason, there is no competent person available to oversee removal of the seriously injured player from the field for treatment, then the match must be abandoned.

• If player fraud is alleged prior to the game and the player will admit that he is not the person on the pass he has presented and the game has already begun, the referee will have to deal with the matter of an outside agent on the field. If the fraud were not discovered until after the game had been restarted, the only solution would be to abandon the match. If there is no goal issue, the fraudulent player is removed and the game is restarted with a dropped ball.

• If a player, from a team with only seven players, leaves the field of play to receive medical attention, the match will stop until this player has received treatment and returns to the field of play. If he is unable to return, the match is abandoned, unless the member association has decided otherwise with regard to the minimum number of players.

In all cases, the referee must submit a full report to the appropriate authorities.

AMOUNT OF TIME PLAYED
If the referee discovers that a period of play was ended prematurely but a subsequent period of play has started, the match must be abandoned and the full details of the error included in the game report.

TEAM OFFICIALS
The Laws make the point that the coach and other team officials must BEHAVE RESPONSIBLY and thus may not shout, curse, interfere, or otherwise make a nuisance of themselves The coach’s presence, or the presence of any other team official, is generally irrelevant to the game — under the Laws of the Game, but it may have some importance under the rules of youth competitions. If the coach or other team official is removed, known in the Law as “expelled,” that person must leave the field and its environs. If it is a youth game and the coach and all other team officials have been expelled, then the referee should consider abandoning the game. A full report must be filed with the competition authority. The referee has no authority to determine who has won or lost the game, whether by forfeit or any other process; that is the responsibility of the competition authority. The referee must file a report on all events associated with the abandonment.

RESULT OF THE MATCH
Once the game begins, only the referee has the right to decide whether the game continues, is suspended temporarily, terminated or abandoned. If a game is abandoned or terminated before it is completed, the determination of the result is up to the competition authority (league, cup, tournament). In most cases, competitions declare that if a full half has been played, the result stands, but that does not apply to all competitions. The referee does not have the authority to declare what the score is or who has won the game. The referee’s only recourse is to include in his game report full details of what caused the match to be abandoned or terminated. The status of an abandoned is determined by the rules of the competition or the competition authority itself. There is no set amount of time, but many rules of competition will call a game complete if a full half has been played.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

COMPLIMENTARY REF?

Posted on by

Question:
In a U14 girl’s game a player from the Red Team takes a few dribbles with a ball and is then challenged by a Blue Team player (#25). The challenger makes a tackle that clears away the ball but also takes down the Red Team dribbler. The tackle seemed be from behind as the tackler was positioned behind the dribblers right shoulder. No foul was called, and play continued. A small protest came from the sidelines that was something like “That’s a foul Ref”, which was when the compliment came in to play. It seemed as if in response to sidelines comment the Ref said quite loudly “Great tackle #25,that was beautiful”. Those of us hearing it on the sidelines were a bit stunned.

Until that moment I had never heard a referee compliment a player while the game is underway. I know you can not comment on whether the Ref was trying to send a message to the sidelines as you have no way of knowing her frame of mind. But should a Ref ever comment on play in that way? Is there anything in the rules or advise that speaks to this?

USSF answer (March 31, 2010):
Although he laid it on a bit thick, the referee was trying to use psychology to accomplish two things: (1) He notified the player concerned, her teammates, and their opponents, that he would accept this play. (2) He put the parents and other spectators, including you, on notice that he knew what he was doing and that this was his game, not yours.

However, the referee’s objective could easily have been accomplished by simply announcing, “A legal tackle, #25. Thanks for keeping it safe.” or “No problem with that tackle!” (or words to that effect). Calling it “great” and “beautiful” seems overly enthusiastic under the circumstances and slipped over into an almost gratuitous slap at the comment providers.…

Advice to Referees

RE-ENTRY AFTER EQUIPMENT CORRECTION; CHANGE TO ADVICE 4.6

Posted on by

Question:
I have a question concerning when a player, who has been instructed to leave the filed by the referee for an equipment problem, can return to the field.
LOTG law 4, page 19 states that the player can only re-enter the field when the ball is out of play.
Advice to referees, par 4.6 page 20 states that the player can re-enter the field when the ball is in play as long as the player enters from the touchline. I don’t understand what to do if faced with this situation.

USSF Answer (March 25, 2010:
Several years ago the Federation decided to support a slight divergence between itself and FIFA on this matter, based on a related instruction from FIFA which emphasized the importance of bringing teams back to their full strength as quickly as possible when one of the players was off the field, without substitution, for an injury and, in such cases, the referee could beckon that player to return to the field during play rather than having to wait for a stoppage. Your question inspired us to revisit the matter. The result is that as of this date Advice 4.6 has been amended to read as follows (all original text following the first paragraph remains as it was):

4.6 INCORRECT UNIFORM OR EQUIPMENT
Instructing a player to leave the field to correct an illegal uniform or equipment does not require a report by the referee as this is not a “send-off” for misconduct. The inspection to confirm that the correction has been made is conducted by the referee or, if delegated by the referee in the pregame conference, by the fourth official or an assistant referee if a fourth official has not been appointed. The player must receive a signal from the referee before actually re-entering the field and may do so only during a stoppage.

…
"Inventive Instructors"

MISSED AR FLAG (AND CORRECTION TO ADVICE 6.4)

Posted on by

Question:
At our USSF recertification class we were instructed that we now have up to six or seven restarts to “take a missed call back” to the original foul. Example given at class – Assistant Referee signals offside on white & center referee does not see nor acknowledge the offside call due to lack of focus. The AR maintains his/her position of offside during which time 1.)a goal kick took place for red, 2.) then a direct kick for white 3.) a throw-in for red 4.) PK for red resulting in a score 5.) ensuing kickoff 6.) ball out of bounds; at which point center referee now notices the AR still at attention for the original offside 6 restarts past. We were told the Referee should honor the call by the AR and award an IFK to the red team for the original offside infraction. I would not want to be the center referee in that game! Then a few weeks later this situation occurred at the college level. While there were only three restarts in between, the referee went back to the original call by the AR. Seems like a powder keg to me.

USSF answer (March 22, 2010):
You are absolutely correct. The Federation has never issued any instruction that ARs keep their flag raised through up to six or seven restarts. The Federation’s guidance has been published in the Advice to Referees on the Laws of the Game. Here is a quote from the 2009/2010 edition:

6.4 MISSED ASSISTANT REFEREE SIGNALS
If the assistant referee signals a ball out of play but the referee does not see the signal for an extended period, during which play is stopped and restarted several times, the assistant referee should lower the flag.  The FIFA Referee Committee has declared that it is impossible for the referee to act on the assistant referee’s signal after so much play.

If the referee misses the assistant referee’s signal for offside, the assistant referee should stand at attention with the flag raised until the defending team gains clear possession or until a goal kick or throw-in is awarded to the defending team.  

Although the general rule is that a card for misconduct must be given at the next stoppage of play and that, if this does not occur, the opportunity to punish the misconduct has passed, the International Board’s “Interpretations” section has stated that this does not apply to serious foul play.  However, in order to make handling such incidents credible, certain conditions must apply.  The most important requirement is that the assistant referee must have signaled the original misconduct and maintained the signal despite it not being seen by the referee.  USSF has indicated that this requirement should be discussed thoroughly in the pre-game and that the referee should clearly indicate what sorts of misconduct would qualify for this treatment.  The International Board spoke specifically of “serious foul play” but USSF guidelines include any form of violence (including “violent conduct”).  If the referee becomes aware of the assistant referee’s signal for misconduct at a subsequent stoppage of play, the restart (after the misconduct is handled) would remain the same based on what stopped play in the first place.  If, upon becoming aware of an assistant referee’s signal for misconduct, play is stopped solely for this reason, the restart is a dropped ball where the ball was when play was most recently stopped*.

To avoid such situations, the referee should make eye contact with the assistant referees as often as possible.  In addition, the assistant referees must be alert for and mirror each other’s signals if needed to assist the referee.

NOTE:The final sentence of the third paragraph of Advice 6.4 has been corrected to match equivalent information in Advice 5.13: The correct restart is a dropped ball, rather than the indirect free kick formerly included there. We apologize for the error, which did not in any way affect the misinformation that raised the original question.…

Handling

DOGSO-H?

Posted on by

Question:
A situation similar to this occurred during a recent match where I was an AR, and it got me thinking. On a corner kick, the blue team puts the ball into play and another blue player strikes a shot toward the goal. A red defender (not the goalkeeper), just in front of the goal line and between the posts, blocks the shot with his thigh, popping the ball into the air. Deciding that he has neither time nor space to play the ball legally, the red player then swats the ball away from the front of the goal with his hand. Assuming that the ball was either coming straight up or slightly back out away from the goal after contact with the red player’s thigh, would this violation be punishable with a caution for USB and a PK restart, or would this be considered a continuation of the original shot and therefore be punishable with a send-off for DOGSO-H? I know that predicting how a ball might bounce is problematic, but would it make any difference if there was visible spin on the ball, suggesting that it would have spun itself into the goal if it had been allowed to hit the ground?

USSF answer (March 20, 2010):
No DOGSO-H here unless the referee can determine that, but for the the deliberate handling, whether the ball would have entered the goal.…

Law 18 - Common Sense

REFEREE “ADVISES” ON DELIBERATE KICK TO GOALKEEPER?

Posted on by

Question:
In a recent professional match, a defender under pressure kicked the ball (with an indeterminate amount of deliberation) back toward his defensive penalty area. As his ‘keeper was coming out to play the ball, the ‘keeper seemed to make gestures that seemed to be asking the referee whether it would be permissible to play the ball with his hands (i.e., silently asking the referee whether this would be a “back-pass” infringement). It was not clear from the video whether the referee did pre-authorize the ‘keeper to use his hands, but the ‘keeper did so, and was not penalized for it.

In discussing this, some referees see no problem with this. Others suggest that the referee should not get involved in giving “extra help” in this fashion to either team. This seems qualitatively different than the verbal guidance that referees typically give to players who are close to the edge of an offense (“Stay off his back”, or “Let go of the shirt”), in that it is asking prior permission to avoid an offense. For example, I believe that an assistant referee should not respond to a nearby attacker’s query, “Am I offside?” before the player decides whether to chase a long pass – mainly because the AR can’t determine that until the player actually makes chase.

Without criticizing the referee involved in this match (and, honestly, without knowing whether this referee did any such thing), what guidance does USSF give its referees on this issue?

USSF answer (March 19, 2010):
The decision as to whether a player deliberately kicked the ball to his/her goalkeeper or to a place where the goalkeeper could play it is up to the referee on the game.

As to “individual help,” without having either seen the match or spoken with the referee, we cannot give you a definitive response. In general it is good for referees to speak with the players, but definitely not good to give advice on how to play. Giving advice would simply encourage the players to give the referee “advice” on how to referee — and we get enough of that without soliciting it.…