"Only in America!"

GOLDEN GOAL

Posted on by

Question:
I recall in one of your past posts your comments on the “golden goal.” How do clubs get away with this at USSF Sanctioned Tournaments? Not only that, but in the Competition Rules it reads “OVERTIME: There is no overtime in preliminary round games. There is no overtime in consolation games. In playoff games, overtime shall be two 10-minute periods for U11-18 and two 5-minute periods for U10. The FIFA Golden Goal Rule shall apply.” Just like you said, there is no such rule.

Many tournaments I’ve worked this summer have used this method. Is this something that can be amended by each state’s youth rules (such as the unlimited substitution rule?) and still be sanctioned by USSF?

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
You raise a complicated question. Under the Laws of the Game, the only allowable method of determining a winner of a game or a home-and-away series is through kicks from the penalty mark. In some competitions, the kicks from the penalty mark may be preceded by two equal periods of extra time. The IFAB, the people who write the Laws of the Game, removed the “Golden Goal,” also known as “sudden death” or “sudden victory,” from the methods for determining the winner of a game in the Laws of the Game 2004/2005. We suspect that the cited rule is a hold-over from the days when this WAS permissible and the competitions have neither the interest nor the inclination to bring their rules up to date (inertia is so much easier than work). Competitions in the United States and affiliated with the U. S. Soccer Federation — including all state associations and youth soccer — are NOT PERMITTED to use this method of determining the winner of a game.

The club or tournament is affiliated with the state association and the state association is affiliated with USSF and USSF is affiliated with FIFA. If the match “counts” for the referee, then it should also follow the Laws of the Game, with the only exceptions being those permitted by the IFAB itself (as described in the Lawbook). Referees should always review the rules of the competition before accepting an assignment and remember that they could jeopardize their standing by working games that are not run in accordance with the Laws of the Game.…

Law 12 - Fouls & Misconduct

SAVING FALLEN COMRADES

Posted on by

Question:
I saw a situation while watching WPS this past weekend that got me thinking. A shot came in to the keeper who caught it and stumbled backwards towards the mouth of the goal. She caught herself on the goal post and was successful with the save. Here is my question, what if she had not been stopped by the goalpost, but my a teammate? I know a player cannot use a teammate to boost themselves up, for example in a header, and that this can be considered unsporting behavior. What about a stumbling goalkeeper with ball in hand falling back towards the goal? Would you allow this? Unsporting behavior with a caution and IFK according the special circumstances for IFK offenses inside the goal area? I would assume one could make a case for DOGSO, but good luck with that (arguing the 4 D’s would be difficult.) I appreciate your response. Thanks.

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
This is one of those issues that has been much debated and, while there is no significant conceptual difference between a teammate propping up the goalkeeper to prevent her from falling back — not misconduct — into the goal (thus causing a goal) and a player lifting a teammate up to enable her to head the ball — the latter being clearly a misconduct — we would hesitate to make an ironclad ruling on this.

All of this makes for an interesting discussion, but the long and short of it is that it would be difficult to sell the notion that the teammate had prevented an obvious goalscoring opportunity under any circumstances — if the ‘keeper had the ball in her possession, there was no chance for the attacking team to play the ball. It would also be difficult to caution the teammate for unsporting behavior, unless the act was so blatant that it could not be denied. Apply The Seven Magic Words: “If, in the opinion of the referee, . . ..”

Now, if that teammate lifted up the ‘keeper so that she could control the ball . . .…

Handling

HANDLING THE BALL OUTSIDE THE PENALTY AREA

Posted on by

Question:
During a recent Men’s intramural game the Goal Keeper went for a low hard shot and collected the ball but due to his momentum running for the ball and a wet field, he slid outside the penalty area. In my opinion he was unable to stop and slid out by a few feet but did have possession of the ball when he slid out. Immediately the attacking team was calling for a “hand ball”. In my opinion he played the ball in the area and did not deliberately handle the ball outside the penalty area. I allowed him to get up and go inside the area and release the ball. After the match several players and referees approached me and disagreed with my call saying I should have awarded a DFK. Your opinion please.

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
Our opinion, and it is strictly opinion, is that if the condition of the field caused the goalkeeper to handle the ball outside the penalty area, the referee COULD apply the common sense notion of a “trifling offense” and do as you did, allowing the goalkeeper to return to the penalty area and release the ball into play for others.

However, we must point out that the Law does not recognize weather conditions and the correct decision would be to award a direct free kick for deliberately handling the ball.  Although we need to remember that the Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players, that does not apply in this case.

There is no case to be made here for saying that the goalkeeper’s handling offense prevented a goal, so there would be no reason for showing a red card to the goalkeeper.…

"Inventive" Refs

REFEREE CANNOT ORDER SUBSTITUTIONS

Posted on by

Question: Hi!
great website.

I was a coach of a u12 boys team. In a league game, one of my players was injured, and I was beckoned onto the field by the referee to attend to my player.

By the time I reached the player, he felt better, and wanted to continue to play. The referee stated that since I had entered the field, I was required to substitute for the (briefly) injured player, and that he could re-enter the game at the next appropriate substitution opportunity.

I know that once a player leaves the field for an injury, he must wait for approval from the referee to re-enter the playing field, but I was puzzled that I was made to substitute for the injured player who had never left the field, for the sole reason that I had come on to the field to tend to him.

Was the substitution correctly required? Thanks!

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
Under the Laws of the Game a player must leave the field if the referee has allowed someone to enter the field to assess or treat an injury. Under the Laws of the Game, that player may not return to the field at all if a substitute replaces him (or her), but many rules of competition do allow such substitutions.

In addition, the referee had no authority to require a substitution. His only authority is to require the injured player to leave the field — whether that player is substituted for or not is a decision of the player/coach/team and is subject to any limiting rules of competition.…

"Inventive" Refs

COACH QUESTIONS STRANGE SUBSTITUTION RULE

Posted on by

Question:
I have a question regarding substitutions and whether anyone has ever encountered something like this before. I was coaching a U11 boys/girls team (full field 11 vs 11 games). We’re behind in the game but manage to score a goal. The ref is walking the ball back to half and I call for a sub. He denies me the change. I question why? He says “its the other teams advantage”. Now I am somewhat confused and ask if we scored because I thought perhaps I missed something. He became annoyed and chastised me for questioning his authority. And fyi, there was a good 15 mins remaining in the half so its not like the halftime was upon us. And I was neither yelling or being out of control. I was more confused then anything.

At halftime, I raised my hand up almost like a schoolboy and asked the ref if I could speak to him and clarify the rule (and I did so privately so as not to embarrass him). He proceeded to get very defensive, telling me I was wrong with the rules and that I can only sub on a goalkick or when its my advantage (like when the other team scores against me). He then tells me that I cant sub when its not my advantage nor can I sub when its a free kick or corner kick (which I already knew). Then he goes off on a tangent about having refereed soccer for over 8 yrs and I smiled and just walked away…realizing it was useless asking him about it (and not bother informing him I have been playing the game for over 32 yrs). Just curious if a rule like that could possibly ever be in place. I keep asking the local committee to clarify but no one will get back to me. Personally, I was just trying to be kind to the guy refereeing as I didnt want him making the same mistake in a game that truly meant something but he took it as if I was questioning his authority I think. And no other ref in this same age group has ever called the same no-sub after a goal rule.

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
Mysterious are the ways of referees — there is no rule under the Laws of the Game that a team may substitute only when it is to their “advantage.” Mysterious also are the ways of the people who “craft” the rules for various competitions.

Are you certain of the rules for substitution in your league? We ask solely because many competitions do not follow the Laws of the Game and allow substitutions only on certain occasions. They thus operate counter to the Laws of the Game, which allow substitution at any stoppage of play. The Federation has no direct control over these leagues, which are affiliated with the state association to which they or their club belong, but these affiliation links carry certain obligations, one of which is to maintain local rules of competition which are consistent with the Laws of the Game (including having local variations which are consistent with the areas in which the Laws of the Game permit variations). If any affiliated team, club, or state association were to pose a question to the Federation, as you are doing here, our obligation is to answer based on the presumption that this obligation is being honored.…

Guide to Procedures

WHISTLE FOR RESTART?

Posted on by

Question:
My question pertains to a proper re-start, specifically who the referee is suppose to respond to when determining whether or not to utilize a second whistle.

I’m confused on this point and apparently there are 2 different interpretations, according to the Guide to Procedures and USSF classroom instruction provided last month. The 2009-10 Laws of the Game does not address this specific question, but simply states (p.29), “If, when a free kick is taken, an opponent is closer to the ball than the required distance: the kick is retaken.” According to the 2009-10 Guide to Procedures (p.28), the referee should “allow a quick free kick, without the necessity of a second signal, except where the kicker indicates a need.” During my USSF refresher, I asked this question to the instructor and he indicated that anyone from the kicking team can ask for the required distance and as a referee you are obligated to provide a second whistle at that point (if the defenders are indeed clearly less than the required distance to the ball).

In being in and around the game for over 35 years, as a fan, player, coach, and the last 10 years, as a referee, my understanding and according to the Guide to Procedures, that only the kicker can create the need for a second whistle. Is it basically being up the referees’ discretion? Or is it that anyone can ask for the required distance (a teammate on and/or off the field, coaching staff, or spectators) and be granted with a second whistle?

USSF answer (August 11, 2009):
We see no conflict here; provided the referee is satisfied the request is in the best interests of the kicking team, it makes no difference who on that team requests it. There is often confusion in any case as to who will take the kick, so the specific reference to “the kicker” can include any member of that team. However, the referee pays no attention to anyone OTHER than a player of the attacking team (no coaches, substitutes, spectators, color commentators, etc.).…

Law 15 - Throw In

SPINNING THROW-INS

Posted on by

Question:

In a recent game a player was spinning the ball and not actually throwing from above and *behind* the head. Spinners only throw from above the head and perhaps slightly back and are therefore able to place their dominant hand more behind the ball. It is difficult to get so much spin on a ball thrown properly from behind the head.

How far back is “over and behind the head”?

Since a ball spinning that much is harder to control do referees consider it a wash?

USSF answer (August 10, 2009):
There is no rule that the ball may not “spin” when thrown.  Complete requirements for the throw-in are spelled out in Law 15 (The Throw-In) in the Laws of the Game.

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
* holds the ball with both hands
* delivers the ball from behind and over his head
* delivers the ball from the point where it left the field of play

All opponents must stand no less than 2 m (2 yds) from the point at which the throw-in is taken.
The ball is in play when it enters the field of play.

After delivering the ball, the thrower must not touch the ball again until it has touched another player.

And the referee is the sole judge as to whether or not this procedure has been followed.…

"Inventive" Refs

BALL IN PLAY FROM KICKS COMING OUT OF PENALTY AREA

Posted on by

Question:
On a kick by the defense from within its own penalty area (could also be a goal kick), what is the restart if the ball is kicked backwards and goes over the goal line between the boundaries marked by the sides of the penalty area?

I’m asking because this scenario was posed to me by a USSF State Referee. His amazing explanation, which he said was confirmed by [a high-ranking referee and USSF manager], was as follows. The penalty area only has three sides: the line in the field that is 44 yards long (the “18 yard line”) and the two lines on the sides. The line that is at the back of the penalty area is the goal line; the goal line is not part of the penalty area.

Therefore, a ball that is kicked out over the goal line, as described, has left the penalty area and is in play briefly as it crosses the goal line. Therefore the restart is a corner kick because the last player that touched the ball was a defender.

I disagree. Law 16 says “The ball is in play when it is kicked directly out of the penalty area.” In my scenario, the ball has not gone into play; therefore the kick must be retaken.

A corner kick would be the correct restart only if the ball exited the penalty area and crossed the goal line between the corner flag and the side of the penalty area….but that is not the scenario we’re discussing (I was shocked by the State Referee’s answer, therefore I confirmed exactly where he said the ball went out).

Please help. Thank you.

USSF answer (July 29, 2009):
We are extremely disappointed with the “USSF State Referee” who has falsely quoted the high-ranking referee and USSF manager.  His explanation is indeed “amazing”; however, the correct information for this situation is entry-level material.  In this situation the ball must leave the penalty area and enter the field to be considered in play.  If the ball leaves the field without exiting the penalty area and entering the field proper, the kick is retaken.…

"Inventive Coaches"

SUBSTITUTION

Posted on by

Question:

U-16 girls game.  Score is tied 1 – 1.  Substitute player was at the half line ready to sub.  Play rules allow substitution on any dead ball.  Play was stopped for a corner kick.  Referee beckoned the substitute onto the field.  Coach pulled the substitute back and did not send her in for the corner kick.  Second dead ball situation.  The same substitute is at the half line ready to enter the game.  Referee beckoned the same substitute onto the field.  Substitute identified the girl she was replacing and AR1 took her card.  The coach informed AR1 that it was his decision when to sub the player, not the referee’s and that the substitute should wait until he told her to enter the game.  AR1 informed the coach that since she was beckoned onto the field and did not enter the field, she had used her substitution and was no longer allowed to sub in.  Coach became irate.

Correct procedure ??  If not, what should have happened

USSF answer (July 28, 2009):
Once the substitute has reported to the fourth official (or assistant referee if there is no fourth official), only the referee makes the decision as to when the substitute may enter the game.  In no event does the coach have any right to dictate what actions the game officials take.

On the other hand, neither the referee nor the assistant referee has any right to deny the player the right to enter the field because “she had used her substitution.”  (Do we detect someone applying college rules here?)  That is arrogant behavior that is not acceptable under the Laws of the Game.  Game officials should be a proactive as possible, particularly at the youth level.

The referee has every right to expect the substitution to occur once he (or she) has beckoned, but there is no authority in the Law that REQUIRES the substitution — i. e., the substitute could withdraw (after all, he/she cannot enter the field unless and until the player being swapped leaves the field and we all know that the player can lawfully refuse).  However, in such cases, the referee COULD consider this as a time-wasting ploy and treat it accordingly.…

"Only in America!"

BALL AND PENALTY AREA (WHICH INCLUDES THE LINE)

Posted on by

Question:
In one of last year’s ‘week in review’ articles (and in one of the DVDs provided this year to the SDIs), there is a statement that says, “the goalkeeper may legally handle the ball as long as any part of the ball is crossing the penalty area line whether on the ground or in the air. The position of the goalkeeper’s body plays no role in determining the handling offense.”

Now I ask you to consider a situation in which part of the ball is within the penalty area, but the rest of the ball is geometrically outside of the penalty area. The week-in-review statement suggests that it would be legal for a goalkeeper to deliberately touch (with his hands) that portion of the ball, even if the goalkeeper’s body were geometrically located entirely outside of the penalty area.

I have four questions.

First, is what I just said true? That is, is it legal for a goalkeeper (irrespective of his location) to use his hands and deliberately touch the red portion of the ball in Fig 1a?

Second, if the above is true, how is the ruling reconciled with the Law, which tells us to award a direct free kick to the opposing team where the offense occurred unless the goalkeeper is within his own penalty area? Do we simply say that, if a player touches a ball and if the ball is in the penalty area, the touch (by definition?) occurs within the penalty area?

Third, if a field player uses his hands deliberately to touch the red portion of the ball, do we award a PK?

My fourth question is this: If a player is off the field of play and deliberately touches the red portion of the ball with his hands, is the offence considered handling? That is, would we stop play and restart with a DFK?

USSF answer (July 27, 2009):
Let’s look at it in increments.  If any part of the ball is on the line, the ball is within the penalty area.  At no time in this situation did the ball leave the penalty area.  The fact that part of the ball was outside the penalty area is irrelevant.  The BALL was still in the penalty area and, accordingly, it can still be handled by the goalkeeper, and that includes ANY PART of the ball.  The BALL is a whole thing and either is or is not in the penalty area.  If it is, it can be handled by the goalkeeper.  If it is not, it cannot be handled by the ‘keeper.  Thus the WIR article is in complete agreement with the Law.…