This was written in 1997- A few changes have occurred since this was written – however most of the information is current.

Ask The Ref

Question and Answers

From the Internet ---- http://www.dsport.com/SoccerCentral.html

July 16, 1997

Question

My question concerns penalty kicks and the situation of encroachment by a team-mate of the kicker when a goal is not scored and the ball rebounds into play. In 1996 the referee should have stopped the game and awarded an IFK (and a caution). In the 1997 version of the laws this situation is not specifically addressed, just the general statement that if the ball does not enter the goal the kick is not retaken. My question: Is this an oversight in the writing of the 1997 laws or an intended change?

Answer (July 16, 1997):

This was an intended change made by the International Football Association Board in recognition of established practice. The IFAB recognized that referees were generally not enforcing the provision in Law 14 that players who encroach are to be cautioned. The IFAB intent is to remove the referee's obligation to caution for a first occurrence, but referees are supposed to caution for persistent infringement any player who infringes the requirement again. However, although the referee is not _obliged_ to caution on the first occurrence, there is nothing in the Law to say it cannot be done.

Question

In the old Laws of the Game, in Law 12, item 4 in the list of indirect kick offenses concerns charging the goal keeper. It states that it is an offense to charge the keeper unless he is holding the ball, is obstructing an opponent, or has passed outside his goal area. The only related item in the new Law 12 says that one cannot prevent the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands. Does this mean that a fair charge on the keeper is legal either inside or outside the goal area and whether or not the keeper is holding the ball, as long as the keeper is not in the process of releasing the ball? Or is any contact with the keeper holding the ball to be considered as preventing his releasing the ball, and therefore a foul?

Answer (July 13, 1997):

Under the revised Law 12 an opponent may now charge the goalkeeper _fairly_ at any time. That presupposes that the goalkeeper has possession of the ball and is not trying to catch or fist it away or is not trying to release the ball back into play. The charge may not be careless, reckless, or done with excessive force. Any infringement of this caveat must be punished with a direct free kick from the spot of the foul and the appropriate personal punishment (red or yellow card), if necessary. If the opponent prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball, the infringement is punished with an indirect free kick from the spot of the foul.

Question

At a recent pro game, I observed the following scenario: Attacker is moving the ball towards the goal line. The defender places himself between the attacker and the ball, puts both arms out, and slows down. The attacker is then unable to stop the ball from going over the goal line, and the resultant call is goal kick by the defender's team. Needless to say, said attacker became more physical toward that defender later in the game. I would appreciate your thoughts on whether this could be considered "obstruction", and if so, would the proper action be to award the attacker's team an IFK by applying Law 12 "impedes the progress of an opponent"?

Answer (July 10, 1997):

As long as the defender remains within playing distance of the ball -- usually considered as the distance the player could cover in two strides at the pace he or she is running -- there can be no punishable impeding in the case you describe, unless in putting his arms out the defender did more than just have them out to the side. In other words, if he moved them around to keep the attacker away rather than to "maintain his balance," then the defender is indeed guilty of at least impeding the progress of his opponent. If he made contact with the opponent, then the defender is guilty of holding, a direct free kick infringement. However, if the defender merely had his arms extended to "maintain his balance," and you could not detect that he was actively impeding the opponent with them, then there was probably no infringement of Law 12.

Even if it was a "foul," including the active sort of impediment I suggested in the previous paragraph (without the contact), this would be considered a minor and rather trifling infringement at the professional level by both players and referees and would probably not be called.

Question

Situation: The RED team has been awarded a throw in deep in their own half of the field. The RED team player taking the throw in does not bring the ball over his head...and throws it onto the playing field. May a referee apply the advantage rule if they see that an opponent has intercepted the bad throw in and is in position to start a counter attack. I have always whistled the throw in for a bad throw and turned the ball over to the other team for a throw. MAY THE REF APPLY ADVANTAGE OR NOT?

Answer (July 7, 1997):

In a word, no. Although it seems reasonable enough on the face of it, by tradition the referee does not exercise the advantage on throw-ins. Your practice of whistling for the infringement and awarding the throw in to the other team is the correct one.

Question

An attacker is taking a corner kick in the process the kicker kicks the corner flag before striking the ball, the ball goes into play. Should a call be made for kicking the corner flag?

Answer (July 7, 1997):

Last time I looked at the Laws, it was still okay to kick the corner flag, as long as it was not done carelessly, recklessly, or with intentional violence. No call necessary for such an accident as you describe.

Question

Today, in an MLS game, the attacking team shot the ball at close range towards the goal, past the keeper. A defender behind the keeper, seeing that a goal was about to be scored, attempted to swat the ball with his hand on the ground right at the goal line.

His attempt was too late; the entire ball apparently crossed the goal line, and a goal was awarded.

Is there any action required here by the referee?

Answer (July 7, 1997):

An _attempt_ to handle the ball deliberately is not punishable under the Laws, so no action is required by the referee.

Question

During a recent game, Team A takes a corner kick. The fullback on Team B handled the ball, but it was not seen by the referee. The assistant referee raised his flag, but the referee did not see that either. The ball landed at the feet of an attacker from Team A, who promptly took a shot that was wide of the goal and crossed the end line. As Team B prepared to take a goal kick, the assistant referee signaled to the referee. After a conference, the referee then awarded a penalty shot to Team A. Was this correct, or since play had continued, should the penalty shot not have been awarded?

Answer (July 6, 1997):

It was correct for the assistant referee to signal for the infringement of Law 12 by the fullback of Team B. The game had not restarted and only a brief amount of time had passed, so that should not have been a major problem in the selling of the call.

Questions:

First Question:

A defender's team is trying to do the "offside trap", but this defender is late pushing up and decides to exit the field on the goal line. This worked, since an offside was called because this defender was "not involved" on the play. What should a referee do in this situation?

Second Question:

On a play a defender is hurt and stays on the ground in pain, unable to move anywhere. At the same time his team performs an offside trap and everybody but the hurt defender pushes up. Should this hurt defender, who is on the field of play, count as one of the two defenders for the offside call?

Answers (July 5, 1997):

First Question:

The referee should not have called the opponent offside if it was only because this defender left the field of play to put the opponent in an offside position. The correct call would have been to allow the opponents to continue their attack and then caution/yellow card the defender for unsporting behavior.

See the FIFA Questions & Answers, Law 11, No. 3:

3. What action should the referee take if a defending player moves beyond his own goal-line in order to place an opponent in an off-side position?

The action of the defender is considered as ungentlemanly conduct, but it is not necessary for the referee to stop play immediately to caution the player. The attacker should not be punished for the position in which he has been unfairly placed.

Second Question:

Yes, this defender, whether hurt or not, must count as one of the two defenders for the offside call.

Question

A. Defender and goalie are in the penalty area. Defender kicks the ball, but not directly to the goalie. The goalie runs and picks up the ball. Should the play continue or should a technical foul (indirect free kick) be awarded for the goalie handling the ball?

B. Defender and goalie are in the penalty area. Defender kicks the ball, but not directly to the goalie, such that the ball would go out of bounds for a corner kick. The goalie runs and picks up the ball before going out of bounds. Should the play continue or should a technical foul (indirect free kick) be awarded for the goalie handling the ball?

Answer (July 3, 1997):

The answer to both questions is the same. The goalkeeper has picked up, i.e., played with his hands, a ball deliberately kicked by his teammate. This is an infringement of Law 12 and must be punished by the award of an indirect free kick to the opponents from the place where the goalkeeper picked up the ball.

Question

Is there a limit to how far from the touch line a player can go when doing a throw-in?

Answer (July 3, 1997):

Yes. The thrower must deliver the ball from within 1 meter of the spot at which the ball left the field of play. That means one meter in either direction along the line and one meter away from the line. Anything else is an infringement of Law 15.

Question

The Red Team is attacking the Blue Team. The Blue Goalie dives at the ball and misses in the penalty area but far from the goal. The Red attacker continues towards the goal and shoots -- but a diving Blue defender clears the ball out from the front of the Goalmouth. The Goalie has just stood up (within the penalty area but still far from the goal) and immediately sees this cleared ball aiming straight for his chest --- so he catches it!

Now what? The diving Blue defender cleared ball away without intending to kick it to the Goalie - but it happened anyway. I didn't believe the pass to the goalie to be intentional so I did not call a penalty and allowed the play to continue. Later that week, one of the coaches in a friendly way told me I blew the call. I would like your opinion.

Answer (July 2, 1997):

We need to learn to differentiate between "intentional," the previous wording of the Law, and "deliberate," the wording of the Law since 1995. "Intentional" was interpreted by many people as meaning that the player had done precisely what s/he had planned (or intended) to do, when truly, under the terms of the Law, it meant that the player had done precisely what his or her action had resulted in. Confused? Well, so were many other people, so the International Football Association Board changed the wording to "deliberate," which means (in their terminology) that the player played the ball (in this case) with full deliberation and forethought. That means that a ball "deliberately" played is one that has been kicked (or headed or whatever) by the player and sent generally in the direction that the player had meant for it to go. (That is in opposition to the ball that a defender is desperately trying to clear way up the field, but instead shanks it off to the side.)

In the situation you experienced, the defender's ball was played deliberately to get it up the field and away from the opponents. The fact that it went directly to the goalkeeper was unlucky, but still punishable under the Law. The 'keeper did what 'keepers do, and that was a mistake. As Bob Evans (a former FIFA Referee and FIFA Instructor) has said: "The Laws were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players." In this case, your decision was in error and the coach, much as I hate to admit it, was correct. If the defender had shanked the ball and it had gone to the 'keeper, then your decision would have been correct.

Question

During a corner kick at a recent tournament the blue attacker (#10) ran towards the far post and headed the ball back towards the penalty spot. In his normal motion, blue #10 crossed the goal line (outside the goal) and deliberately remained out of play - presumably to make sure that he could not be called offside by the AR (me!). The play went to the wing and the ball was crossed to the near post - no blue players were offsides. Seeing the ball coming close to him from the wing, blue #10 stepped onto the field and kicked the ball out for a goalkick.

Clearly something is wrong with this picture, but as an AR what was my call? Offside - he was when he received the ball but he was in touch (beyond the goal line) when the ball was kicked. Caution (and indirect to defense) for entering the field of play without permission, since he delayed his return to the field (this was my call, but the ref didn't like it). After soul searching and discussion (and many opinions later!) was I correct in my judgment and signal, or should I have left it to the guy in the middle to decide? - he WAS closer but I don't think he saw it and wasn't having a great game. I think it's time to ask the ref, who obviously has more time to think about the problem than I had standing on the line.

Answer (July 1, 1997):

You should have raised your flag for offside, as the player cannot be punished for anything more than that. The answer to your question lies in Question 2 in the FIFA Questions and Answers (Q&A) regarding Law 11, Offside:

2. A player of the attacking team passes beyond the boundary Law 11 Q&A 2 line for a moment in order to avoid an off-side. However as soon as he re-enters the field of play he joins in the game and plays the ball which has been passed to him by a team colleague. Would it be correct to award an indirect free-kick and caution the player as he has committed two infringements at the same time, off-side and leaving the field of play without the referee's permission?

Only off-side shall be penalized as the player's exit from the field of play cannot be considered as leaving the field without the referee's permission and therefore does not warrant a caution.

Now, if the player had left the field as you describe and then done something to suggest to the referee that his movement had a tactical aim, then Question 1 in the FIFA Q&A would apply:

1. Does a player infringe the Law if he is in an offside Law 11 Q&A 1 position and moves a little way beyond the boundary of the field of play to show clearly to the referee that he is not interfering with play?

No, but if the referee considers that such a movement has a tactical aim or is in any way a feint, and the player takes part in the game immediately after, the referee may deem his action to be ungentlemanly conduct and caution him. Play shall be restarted in accordance with the Laws of the Game.

Question

I am confused. Question and Answer 12 to Law 3 in the FIFA Questions and Answers seems to run counter to the wording of Law 3, in both the newly-revised and the 1996 versions. Here is the Q&A:

12. A substitute enters the field of play without having obtained the referee's permission. While the ball is in play an opponent punches him. What action should the referee take?

The referee must stop play send off the player guilty of violent conduct, caution the substitute and restart the game by an indirect free-kick against the team of the substitute at the place where the infringement occurred, subject to the overriding conditions of Law XIII.

But Law 3 says that a substitute entering the field without the referee's permission should be cautioned and that the restart should be a dropped ball at the place where it was when the referee stopped play to deal with the substitute. Please tell me which is correct.

Answer (June 26, 1997):

The FIFA Questions and Answers are in need of an overhaul. Some of them are now out of date and others were just wrong in the first place, like this one. The correct procedure is for the referee to stop play immediately and caution the substitute for entering the field without permission and to restart with a dropped ball, as this was the initial infringement of the Laws. The player guilty of the violent conduct is sent off, but his action came after the infringement by the substitute, which takes precedence because it occurred first.

Question

Player A, with the ball, breaks free of the defense only 6 yards from the right side of the goal and realizes at the last second that the keeper will cut off his angle and smother his attempted shot. He quickly lofts a pass from the near post and goal line back across the goal area to a teammate, Player B, who is not in an offside position but is trailing the play on the left side towards the goal. Player B then heads the ball into the left side of the goal unopposed, because the keeper was busy covering Player A and the initial attack on the right side and could not recover in time.

Here is my problem: Player A, who made the initial pass across the empty goal, was then placed in an offside position since the ball traveled back to Player B, who scored. Although Player A was not influencing play in the "activity zone" at the far left post of the goal, should the goal be allowed because of his offside position? If passing the ball back from the goal line can place you in an offside position; just when is that position ruled offside?

Answer (June 18, 1997):

When Player A passes the ball back to his oncoming teammate, Player B, who was not in an offside position, then Player A is certainly in an offside position, as he is ahead of the ball (and apparently has less than two opponents between himself and the goal line.

Player A should only be declared offside if he continues to participate actively in the play around the goal. He demonstrates involvement in the play by doing one of three things: interfering with an opponent (preventing him from getting to the ball), interfering with play (by shouting or otherwise interfering), or gaining an advantage (basically, being in a position to shoot the ball into goal). In this situation, Player A can avoid all those actions by keeping quiet and moving off the field of play, as he was already at the goal line when he passed the ball back to Player B.

In short: If Player A did not participate actively in the play, then he should not be declared offside. If he was actively involved, then he should be declared offside. Based on the information you have given me, count the goal.

Question

Although the goalkeeper had both feet inside the penalty area, I called a hand ball when he reached out his hands beyond the penalty area to receive the ball. The coach made it a point to tell me in some uncertain terms that I made an error in the call. Did I?

Answer (June 14, 1997):

No. The position of the 'keeper's feet makes no difference. What counts are the positions of the ball and the 'keeper's hands. If the goalkeeper is going for the ball and the ball and the 'keeper's hands are outside the penalty area when they conjoin, then the referee should call deliberate handling. This is the real thing we are talking about here, not American football.

Question

Last weekend I had the extreme honor of refereeing at an ODP regional tournament. Assessors were on hand at practically every game giving official and unofficial assessments. After I ran a line, an assessor advised that in the future, when I stand stationary (when the second-to-the-last defender is not moving) I should hold the flag in front of my legs so the center referee can easily find me as he scans the line. My son (also a referee) was assessed the same weekend, and his assessor told him just the opposite. That when he is stationary, he should hold the flag straight down, against the leg that is opposite the center referee, shielding it from his sight, so that while scanning the line, he doesn't see the flag blowing in the breeze and think the A/R is signaling him. Both opinions seem to have merit. Which one do you agree with?

Answer (June 13, 1997):

Neither one. They are both wrong. It would seem that your State Director of Assessment and your State Director of Instruction need to do a little revisionary training for the assessors on procedures and mechanics. Meanwhile, congratulations on the honor accorded you and your son.

The correct procedure is always to carry the flag where the referee can see it. That means that when running the standard diagonal, i.e., from the center of the field to the assistant referee's right, the assistant referee should have the flag in his or her left hand when running toward the goal line and in the right hand when running back toward the halfway line. When standing stationary on either diagonal, facing the field of play, the assistant referee should have the flag in the hand that is nearest to the halfway line.

Holding the flag out of the referee's sight is foolish, as the referee may not otherwise be able to distinguish the assistant referee from the crowd behind him or her.

Holding the flag in front of the legs is already a standard signal, indicating to the referee that a foul occurred in the penalty area.

I give this advice with the caveat that the USSF manual of Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees, and Fourth Officials is currently under revision. I am not aware that these procedures, mechanics, and signals will change, but until the new manual comes out, these are the procedures and signals required of all assistant referees.

Question

Defender takes throw in near his penalty area and throws the ball to a teammate, who is able to head the ball to the hands of the goalkeeper in the penalty area,or throws to his/her teammate who then uses his/her feet to flick the ball up in the air to head to the goalkeeper. Is this circumventing the requirements of Law 12?

Answer (June 10, 1997):

As long as the opponent has the opportunity to play the ball this would be considered a tactical maneuver and not trickery. If the opponents do not have a reasonable opportunity to play the ball, then the other players are attempting to circumvent the intent of the Law. In that case, the referee should caution the player who heads the ball to the goalkeeper.

Question

These questions all pertain to the new rules:

1.a.Penalty kick is awarded

b. Before the kicker takes the kick, teammate of the kicker encroaches (encroachment no caution)

c. Kick is taken and the ball is parried by the goalkeeper over the goal line, (not between the posts or under the cross-bar) What's the call?

2. a. Penalty (same situation as in 1.) but this time

b. the ball is parried by the goalkeeper and goes back to either the kicker or the teammate of the kicker who encroached, and scores What's the call?

3. a. Penalty (same situation as above) but

b. ball hits the cross-bar and/or the goal posts and comes back to the teammate of the kicker who scores

What's the call?

Answers (June 10, 1997):

Note: Please remember that this response has not been coordinated with the U.S. Soccer Federation and is not an official interpretation by USSF. 1. Corner kick, just like always. The rewritten Law calls for a retake only if the ball enters the goal.

2. Goal disallowed, just like always. In this case, the kick would be retaken because the ball entered the goal.

3. Ditto.

With regard to the infringements by the teammate of the kicker, the referee _can_ caution on every one of them (for unsporting behavior, rather than failing to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a free kick), but the new rule recognizes that people have been doing this for years and not much will stop them because referees have not been dealing with it. By recognizing that, the new rule tacitly suggests that you wait for repeated offenses and then caution. The new rule also recognizes that referees do not deal with goalkeeper movement by allowing lateral movement. How much will that be enforced? About the same as now, I reckon.

Question

A penalty kick has been awarded and instructions given for the taking. The whistle is given but before the ball is kicked an attacker runs to an offside position outside of the penalty area. The kick proceeds and the ball strikes the crossbar and is gathered by the player in the offside position and shoots the ball into the goal. Question, is the player offside or did he encroach?

Answer (June 10, 1997):

He encroached. It is treated just as you would treat any encroachment under Law 14. Under the Laws that go into effect on July 1, 1997, the kick would be retaken because the goal was scored. If there was no goal, the kick is not retaken. The referee need not caution the player, but it would be wise to give him or her a verbal warning to cease such infringement of the Law. (Then the referee can give the caution on the next infringement.)

Question

I am 8 and just started soccer, and I just can't get that offsides thing, can you please explain it in more detail.

Answer (June 10, 1997):

Nothing would give me greater pleasure. Traditionally a player was considered offside (_not_ offsides) when he was "off his side" and not a part of the team, otherwise called "on-side." (A team is called a "side" in British English.)

A player is in an offside position if he is closer to his opponents' goal line than the ball is, unless he is in his own team's half of the field or he is not nearer to the opponents' goal line than at least two of his opponents. (Since being even with the opponents is not offside, he could be exactly the same distance from the goal line as two of his opponents and still be onside.)

It is okay to be in an offside position unless you are "involved in active play." Those complicated words mean that you are interfering with play (by yelling or some other way), interfering with an opponent (preventing the opponent from playing the ball), or gaining an advantage by being there (which means that you probably have a good chance of scoring a goal).

The referee judges whether or not a player is offside at the moment the ball is played to him by one of his teammates. If the player was not in an offside position when the ball was played, then just running forward into a new position ahead of the opponents while the ball is coming to him does not make him offside.

The referee should not call a player offside just because the player is in an offside position. The player has to be "involved in active play."

The referee should not call a player offside if the player receives the ball directly from a goal kick, a corner kick, or a throw in.

If the player is offside, the other team gets an indirect free kick from the spot where the player was offside; not from where the next-to-last opponent was and not from the halfway line, but from the spot where the player was standing or running when he was called offside.

Question

A player, clearly in an offside position, was straddling the midfield line when passed the ball on a breakaway. My reading of the Law is that the player is not offside if in his or her own half, but this player was not entirely in his half. I called offside....good call or not?

Answer (June 7, 1997):

Excellent call. Here is a fairly good rule of thumb to use when judging which half the player is in:

1.(a) If the player's toes are on the halfway line, but not over the line, there would be no offside.

(b) If the player's feet are on the halfway line, with the toes over the line (heels on his own side), there could be offside.

2. If the player has one foot over the line and one foot completely on his own side, there could be offside.

3. If the player has both feet on his own side of the line, but his head or hands extend over the line, there would be no offside. (It would not be justifiable to count the head or hands, as we usually judge offside based on the torso. An instance of a player with both feet completely on his own side and his body over and beyond the line and still ready to take an active part in play would be improbable at best.)

The "could" in 1(b) and 2 means that you have to consider the other circumstances in offside, such as active involvement.

Question

I would like to have clarified the rule regarding a hand ball. If the ball strikes a player (making it an involuntary touch), is this still considered a foul in youth soccer?

Answer (June 4, 1997):

Not if the referee has any sense -- and not if the player did not attempt to play the ball before it struck him or her in the hand. If it was a truly "involuntary" touch, then there can be no call for handling. [What follows is a repeat of Answer of a similar question on May 6, 1997.]

I am happy to be able to quote directly from a recent article in FIFA Magazine by Michel Vautrot, a former FIFA Referee from France and a member of the FIFA Referee's Committee:

"Voluntary and involuntary handball:

"It seems some people might not like it, but a handball decision can only mean a direct free kick (or a penalty if in the area). The idea of giving an indirect free kick for a "minor" handball offense is nothing less than an error by the referee, and it could have serious repercussions.

"The referee has just one thing to consider in taking his necessarily quick decision in a handball situation : was it intentional or not? He has to decide whether the ball went to the hand, maybe on the rebound, or the hand to the ball. He should not intervene if the ball goes to hand, nor if the player is clearly protecting himself rather than trying to take advantage of the situation."

Question

A player, upset over the referee's decisions, takes a direct free kick and shoots it directly at the referee. The ball bounces back to the irate player, who kicks it again. The referee stops play, deals with the player, and restarts with a retake of the direct free kick for the kicker's team. Is this correct?

Answer (May 30, 1997):

No, it was not correct. The referee, after dealing appropriately with the player, should have restarted with an indirect free kick for the other team. The kicker had kicked the ball and then played it a second time without any other player touching it, a clear infringement of Law 13.

Question

In a recent State Cup Final, the referee cautioned a player in the first half. In the second half the same player was cautioned, but the referee wrote down the incorrect number the first time he was cautioned and so the second caution was not given, meaning the team did not have to play short. The assistant referee brought this to the attention of the referee at the time of the caution, told the ref that was the same player, yet the ref responded that #16 was cautioned the first time, and this player was #18. The assistant pointed out he recorded #18 the first time. The ref was adamant that the player in the first half was #16, and the game continued with both teams at full strength. Later in the second half, there was a throw in near the assistant and the player, the now infamous #18 who should not have been in the game any longer, was the player who was in position to take the throw in. There was a pause because of a substitution, and the assistant remarked to #18 that he was lucky to still be in the game. The player responded that he was lucky, he knew he should have been gone, but it was too late now to do anything about it. Now my question, could the assistant have reported this to the referee, and the correct player then sent off, or was it too late to do anything about it? My first thought is that even though several minutes had passed since the "second caution", the assistant could have reported the admission of that player and the referee could have sent him off. As it is, the team that should have played short went on to win 1-0, and of course there is talk of a protest by the losing team. This is quite a situation to say the least.

Answer (May 30, 1997):

CAVEAT: This is NOT an official opinion of anyone but the answerer, and is not based on any policy or directive of the U.S. Soccer Federation.

If the referee remains adamant that #16 was the one cautioned in the first half, rather than #18, there is not much the assistant can do. (This situation, with the same player being cautioned twice in the same match, happened in two MLS games last year. One of those referees is still working this year: his assistant referees did not recognize the situation for what it was and did not try to help him. The other referee is not working MLS this year: his senior assistant referee did see what was happening and tried to rectify the situation, just like the assistant in your situation. He, too, was unsuccessful.)

If the referee will listen to reason and make the change in his/her book based on the word of the assistant referee(s), then the person can be sent off at any time after receiving the second caution. Hearsay is no more admissible in this court than in any other, which is why proper recordkeeping practices are a must. The officials should compare notes at half-time as well as after the game, just to prevent the wrong player from being disciplined unnecessarily and to prevent the right player from getting away with something, as in this case.

Question

I'm not sure this qualifies as relevant for this page, but it's important. How can tournament and youth league ref assignors be encouraged to assign young BUT PROVEN refs to games at the level they need to gain experience for upgrades? Many have a policy of refusing to assign refs to "peer group or older games", meaning in effect that able and hard-working age-17-19 refs, for example, can't find games that would enable them to accumulate experience for Grades 7 or 6. How are we going to develop a good crop of seasoned refs in their 20s?

Answer (May 28, 1997):

Well, I'm not sure it's truly relevant to their general purpose of this page, but I will give an answer as I see it. Please remember that this answer does not in any way reflect the policies or statements of anyone of importance in the United States Soccer Federation.

My answer is a harsh one, reflecting my own pessimistic view of referee development in the United States.

Your question reflects for me the sad side of soccer in the United States. We have over 85,000 referees, with over 90 percent of them at the level of Referee Class 2 (Grade 8). Many of these referees are happy to stay as 8s, so that they do not have to train too hard or to have to face the nasty adult players. Others are eager to move up, but are held back for one reason or another through lack of proactive assistance from administrators or through apathy on the part of assignors.

Most tournament and youth league assignors are not interested in helping young (by which I mean relatively new to refereeing) referees move ahead. Most assignors are primarily concerned with putting a warm body on the field and making money from that body. There is a fine training program for assignors, which has been attended by hundreds of people throughout the United States. Unfortunately, the constituency of USSF, in its mass wisdom at the last annual general meeting, saw fit to derail plans by the referee program to make the registration of assignors required and to hold the assignors to certain standards. Some states have taken up the slack and made registration a requirement for their programs, but there is no national cohesion or control and thus no way of ensuring that the declared policy of the referee program, to promote upgrading of promising referees as quickly as possible is implemented.

Until assignors can be controlled and properly encouraged to help the referees rather than themselves, there will be no long-term solution to the problem you raise.

The age problem you mention is a valid concern and one that that has been looked at on a national level. For practical purposes, most 17-19-year-old referees are not "ready" to deal with players of their own age -- but some are. It is the job of the administrators to find these people and help them.

I don't have a solution to offer, other than to look for administrators and assignors who are willing to help someone with promise.

Question

In coaching a Boys U10 team (playing 8 v. 8 recreational) I recently attempted a substitution by having all the field players (all 7) exit the field at the halfway line so that I could substitute 2 players (I only had 2 substitutes on the bench) and reposition the remaining players. The referee objected to this procedure, saying that I couldn't coach from the side, and so I sent the players back out to the field at his request. I recognize that my procedure was unorthodox, but I wonder what laws or rules I violated. My state organization's laws concerning substitutions simply say "Substitutions shall be unlimited except where specified otherwise in the rules and regulations for a particular competition. Substitutions may be made, with the consent of the referee, at the following times:" They then go on to specify the typical times a substitution would be possible. Was the problem that I temporarily removed players from the field and then sent them back on, or was it that I am limited to giving tactical instructions from the side, and may not "coach" them as the referee said. Does it violate any rule or law to have the team run up to the technical area at the touch line during a substitution to receive information from the coach on how to reposition?

Answer (May 25, 1997):

It was only relatively recently that coaches were recognized at all by the Laws of the Game. The coach is mentioned in the Laws only in International Football Association Board Decision 14 to Law 5 (Referees), which says:

"The coach may convey tactical instructions to players during the match.

"The coach and other officials, however, must remain within the confines

of the technical area, where such an area is provided and they must conduct themselves, at all times, in a responsible manner."

Traditionally, the coach's job should be done before the teams get to the field. The coaching should go on at practice during the preceding week, not at the field. It would certainly be unusual to pull the entire team off the field of play to make adjustments. However, we must all recognize that circumstances sometimes dictate that the coach give advice to the players during the game, particularly at recreational level, where many of the players still have a lot to learn. As you pointed out (and the IFAB decision confirms), it is certainly your right to give tactical instructions, as long as they are kept positive and do not interfere with the rest of the game. I assume -- and that is always a signal for trouble ahead -- that the referee believed you were exceeding your rights and that you would be gaining an advantage over the opponents by pulling everyone off the field for a quick realignment of forces.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Question

My daughter is a U14 'keeper. What is the rule for steps prior to her drop kicking after she makes a save and has the ball in her hands, I have asked refs, coaches, and officials and have gotten several different answers. Also, is the goalie allowed to dribble the ball?

Roll the ball and then pick it up in the box?

No one seems sure of what the goalkeeper is allowed to do after gaining possession.

Answer (May 25, 1997):

Well, _someone_ is sure what she is allowed to do, and after you read this, you, too, will be sure.

When the goalkeeper establishes possession of the ball -- which she can do by merely pinning it to the ground with one finger -- she is allowed to take no more than four steps before kicking or otherwise releasing the ball. (And, in accordance with a new mandatory instruction from the International Football Association Board, the folks who write the Laws of the Game, as of July 1, 1997, she has 5-6 seconds in which to release the ball back into play.)

Question

Is the effect of verbally cautioning a coach or ejecting a coach the equivalent of a yellow and red card?

Answer (May 23, 1997):

Under the Laws of the Game it is impossible to caution a coach. If the referee finds the behavior of the coach or any other non-player/substitute to be intolerable, the referee has the power to dismiss that person from the vicinity of the field of play. Under no circumstances may the yellow or red card be shown to a coach or other non-player/substitute. If the intolerable behavior continues, the game may be terminated and the referee must submit a complete report to the appropriate authorities.

Under the rules of some youth competitions, it is possible to caution or otherwise deal with coaches and other non-player/substitute personnel through the use of the cards, but that is not a part of the Laws of the Game.

Question

In a recent match, I was an assistant referee. A player taking a throw-in stepped across the touch line onto the field, and as our pre-game instructions mandated, I indicated this to the referee. I raised the flag and gave a "slight wave", the same kind mentioned in the "Procedures for Referees and Linesmen and Fourth Officials." The referee is an also an assessor, and he informed me that the signal I gave is incorrect. He stated that signal is reserved for fouls indicated by assistant referees, and the signal I should have used is to raise the flag straight up with no wave. Is he correct?

Answer (May 21, 1997):

The correct signal for an assistant referee to use when indicating to the referee an infringement of the Laws (other than an offside or a problem that occurred during the scoring of a goal) is the flag raised straight up and waved slightly, just as you suggest. The flag straight up is used as the initial indication of an offside or to show that the ball has passed out of play over the goal line and returned to the field of play. Standing at attention is used after a goal to indicate to the referee that the assistant referee has information to share with the referee regarding an infringement that could negate the goal.

Question

If the ball is rolling toward out of bounds after being touched last by a red player, and a blue player intentionally plays the ball so as to stop a red player from getting to the ball, but with no actual int%nt to stop the ball from going over the line, is that obstruction? The red player is close enough to play the ball and keep it in bounds, but chooses to let it go out to gain some advantage (a throw-in on the touch line or a corner or goal kick on the goal line).

Answer (May 21, 1997):

If a player actually plays the ball, s/he can never be punished for obstruction, now called "impeding an opponent." The player does not need to actually touch the ball in a legal manner to be considered as playing it, but must merely be within "playing distance." Playing distance is generally defined as being a distance in which the player could play the ball within two strides.

In this instance, neither player could be accused of impeding the opponent.

Question

I used to be under the impression that throwing the ball at an opponent intentionally was considered Violent Misconduct and punishable by a red card. I'm not so sure now. Is it? I can't find it in the laws anywhere other than if the 'keeper does it, the opposing team gets a penalty kick if it was done in the penalty area.

Answer (May 21, 1997):

Your impression is _almost_ correct. - If the ball was on the field and in play, then throwing the ball at an opponent is punished as serious foul play. The thrower is sent off and a direct free kick (or penalty kick) is awarded to the injured team. If the ball was out of play, the offense is violent conduct. The thrower is sent off and the game is restarted as it would have been before the violent conduct.

- If the ball was thrown by one teammate at another, or by anyone at an official or a non-player or substitute, that is also violent conduct. Here is a summary of restarts after violent conduct:

Offense occurs | On Field | Off Field

and ball in play

| | | |

Against opponent | yes | no | yes | no

| | | |

against any | no | yes | no | yes

other person | | | |

| | |

restart | DFK | IFK | drop ball

| (PK) | |

| from spot of | from spot where

| offense | ball was

| |

punishment | send-off | send-off

If the ball was _out of play_, restart must be appropriate to reason ball was out of play (i.e., goak-kick, etc.)

Question

If a referee has called a free-kick (or penalty-kick, goal-kick, throw-in etc.) and before the kick is taken, his watch tells him that the period is over, what does he do? Does he wait a certain amount of time after the kick itself before blowing up? If not, there doesn't seem any point in letting the kick be taken.

Answer (May 21, 1997):

If the referee has made the proper allowances for time lost in the game through substitution, transport of injured players, time wasting, or other cause, then the half or game is over when his watch indicates that time has expired. The only case in which time must be extended is if the referee has awarded a penalty kick, which must be completed, even after time has expired.

That said, and even though the Law allows it, it is rarely a good idea to stop play with the ball on its way to goal. The referee would be better off to wait until the ball goes out of play or has been cleared by the defending team.

Question

This winter I refereed indoor soccer games (youth, on a basketball court). There was in incident where a shot was taken on goal and the keeper caught the ball just outside of the net. Once he had possession of the ball, an opponent "fairly?" charged him, shoulder to shoulder with the sole intent of knocking the keeper (with the ball) into the net. The keeper was knocked off his feet and he flew backward into the goal and onto his backside. I cautioned the player that charged the keeper for unsportsmanlike conduct and gave the keeper's team a free kick. However, after looking over Law XII, "4. charging the goalkeeper except when he (a) is holding the ball... shall be penalized by the award of an indirect free-kick" I wonder if FIFA actually permits that type of behavior in which case I unfairly took away a goal. Can a goal be scored by charging the keeper, who is in possession of the ball, and knocking him into the net?

Answer (May 21, 1997):

Soccer is a game of physical contact, and the Law permits the goalkeeper to be charged when holding the ball; however, the presumption is that the charge will be fair and will not involve the use of too much force. Your description of the incident suggests that the opposing player used an inordinate amount of force in charging the 'keeper. Your reading of the result of the charge as cautionable seems to be correct. The charge was reckless and the player should be cautioned for unsporting behavior.

Question

This is not so much a question as it is a comment. A question was raised about such matters as the number of steps goalkeepers take, and movement off the line of 'keepers during penalty kicks. You responded that some referees insist on making these calls while others are too lazy to make those same calls because "no one else does." I think you may be a bit harsh. There are some things that MUST be dealt with, yet there are things that, although they are mentioned in the Laws, are called more loose. For instance, in an MLS game, if Esse Baharmast gave each player guilty of foul/abusive language what he deserved, there would be no players left to play, the same holds true for dissent. In a later question, you remarked that common sense is important in making some decisions. I say that common sense should be taken into account when deciding to make the aforementioned decisions. Is it that important to penalize a 'keeper for taking 5,6,7 steps when a simple call like that may lead to unnecessary temper flair-ups? Sure, if that 'keeper takes 11 or 12 steps, make the call. If a player begins to throw the ball in play, then leaves the ball for a teammate, is a card there really necessary? Is that player time wasting in an U-14 game? If the game is 3-0 Mexico, and a Canadian player starts to play a free kick then leaves it for a teammate, is this really wasting time? If a goalkeeper takes the opportunity to carve a mark on the field, I know it is spelled out in the Q & A that this is not acceptable, but what does it hurt to ignore this, as long as the mark does not change the field marking? If referees begin giving cards for insignificant reasons, their cards hold no weight. You mention refs being too lazy to enforce players being in their own side of the field for a place kick. Sure it happens, but is it laziness, or merely overlooking a trifling offense which does not influence the game? That is my main point. If it is true that all these things overlooked by referees are because of laziness, then I must be a very lazy referee. I have taken the view that it is more important to deal with the major things and leave small things alone. Sure, I enforce uniform infractions, show players where to throw the ball in, make sure the ball is placed correctly for corners, but I cannot fathom a referee being completely strict about a place kick and players being on their own side of the field. In a high level game, there are some things more important than others. You encourage the use of common sense in your response to the question about a hand ball infraction by a goalkeeper where the 'keeper tossed the ball to the offensive player who played the ball early and scored. You said the keeper could "Cast the ball not too aside." No one in their right mind would penalize the 'keeper for tossing the ball a little bit away or tossing it to the ref, even though these are technically probably infractions. That is just common sense. I just want to emphasize that I believe in the Spirit of the Game, and I believe in the Laws of the Game. Somehow these two things must be combined by referees to make a game enjoyable for all participants and fans. Thank you for your time.

Answer (May 20, 1997):

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. You make some good points, but they have already been considered and rejected by the International Football Association Board (IFAB), the people who make the Laws of the Game. These are not referees; they are the leaders of their respective football associations (England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and four FIFA members from other countries), representing the players and coaches who participate in the game of soccer in their countries. They are the people who are concerned with eliminating time wasting and cheating. We referees are charged with enforcing the rules made by these people, softening the hammer they give us with common sense and the Spirit of the Game. It is the IFAB that, each year of the past 6 or 7, has made the elimination of the timewasting tactics you describe its primary focus in the changes in the Laws and in its Additional or Mandatory Instructions to referees on enforcing the Laws.

The players and coaches are the people who want the timewasting tactics stopped and the Spirit of the Laws respected. They want to see referees enforce the restrictions on goalkeeper movement and steps. They want to see cheating stopped and the game played fairly. Perhaps that is why the first two Mandatory Instructions attached to the revised Laws of the Game that go into effect on July 1, 1997, deal with timewasting tactics by goalkeepers: The first is: "Referees must not permit goalkeepers to take more than four steps while holding the ball, as stipulated in Law 12." The second is: "If the goalkeeper holds the ball for longer than 5-6 seconds, the Referee must adjudge it as time-wasting and award an indirect free kick."

Those are the reasons that my judgments of referees who fail to enforce the Laws properly are so "harsh." Referees who do not enforce the Laws, their first duty as spelled out in Law 5, do not belong on the field.

That said, we come down to your point about "common sense" and not making calls that will "lead to unnecessary temper" flare-ups. The Spirit of the Laws allows the referee to bend the book a little bit, so long as the principles are not violated. No one has said that the referee has to caution immediately for certain offenses. However, that does not relieve the referee of the responsibility to take control of the game and eliminate whatever action infringes upon the Laws and his or her control of the game. A quiet word or brief word of admonition are often enough to stop players from infringing the Laws, but the referee has to take action or the road is open for further violations, and that is where the temper flare-ups will come from.

Referees can only enforce the Laws given them by the players and coaches through the IFAB. If the lawgivers tell them to stop time wasting and cheating, that is what they must do.

Question

Situation: GK goes up for the ball in front of the goal, catches it and comes down. After he lands, he begins to bring his arms down when an attacker heads the ball from the GK's hand into the goal, without making any contact with the GK. I believe the attacker is guilty of a foul but I cannot cite a specific reference in TLOTG to substantiate my belief. Can you confirm or refute my belief?

Answer (May 19, 1997):

The attacking player is guilty of unsporting behavior and must be cautioned. The referee should award an indirect free-kick to the goalkeeper's team, subject to the overriding conditions of Law 13 (as of 1 July 1997, Law 8).

Question

If there is a handball in the box is it a pk or a card?

Answer (May 18, 1997):

It depends on who handles the ball and what the situation is. - If it is a defender (other than the goalkeeper) handling the ball in his/her team's penalty area, then the referee must award at least a penalty kick for the opposing team. - The referee might send off the defender (red card) if the defender has denied his/her opponents a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity through handling the ball. - If there was no obvious goalscoring opportunity or the defender did not deny his/her opponents a goal, and the defender handled the ball to prevent an opponent from gaining possession or because s/he was unable to play it in any other way, then s/he must be cautioned. - If the handling was by an attacking player who was attempting to score a goal by illegal use of the hand, then the referee must caution that player.

Question

On a goal kick, the goal keeper lofted the ball up to a teammate just outside the penalty box, who then headed the ball back to the keeper. The keeper then handled the ball and punted it. Is this trickery since the ball was last "played" by the foot prior to being headed back to the keeper? The keeper gained a clear advantage since he could punt the ball much further than he could kick it off the ground. (I let play continue with no call.)

Answer (May 18, 1997):

Based on your description, this act was trickery on the part of the goalkeeper, whom you should have cautioned for unsporting behavior as the initiator of the deliberate attempt to circumvent the requirements of Law 12.

Questions:

1. A penalty kick is awarded...the kick is taken and hits the side post and rebounds into play (GK not touching the ball), the player taking the PK shoots the ball into the goal, is this a goal, or does another player need to touch the ball first before a goal can be scored?

2. Is their a law that requires the players shirts to be tucked in during the duration of the game?

Answers(May 15, 1997):

1. Another player must touch or play the ball before the kicker may play the ball again, just as on a corner kick or a free kick. Therefore, yes, some other player must touch the ball before a goal may be scored.

2. At the same time that Law 4, Players’ Equipment, was changed in 1990, the International Football Association Board directed that players’ shirts must be tucked in. It is not part of the Laws, but is treated as such because it is an instruction from the lawgivers.

Question:

Defender Red handles the ball just outside his penalty area. The ball was intercepted by Red on its way to Attacker Blue. However, the ball still advances to Attacker Blue who still has a definite goal-scoring opportunity. The advantage is played, but Blue squanders the opportunity and shoots the ball over the bar. Defender Red is shown the Yellow card for Unsporting Behavior (01 July 1997 Laws). Is this the correct call, or should play have been stopped at the time of the infraction? Could Defender Red be shown the Red Card after play was stopped had he been judged to have interfered in a goal-scoring opportunity.

Answer (May 11, 1997):

I believe the original call to have been the correct one. Our aim is to advance attacking soccer, so any legal opportunity to score should be given every assistance within the realm of reason and logic.

When Blue squanders the opportunity, it is really too late to bring the play back—assuming that the recommended amount of time has expired—but the caution and showing of the yellow card is clearly deserved and proper. There is not enough information here on which to judge the appropriateness of the award of a possible red card/expulsion, but if the referee believed there was a genuine goalscoring opportunity, then it would have been legitimate to do it if no goal was scored.

The requirements for an obvious goalscoring opportunity are these: - there is no more than one defender between the player (with the opportunity) and the goal

· the player is moving _directly for goal_ -- and not merely toward the goal line or the corner

· there is a legitimate chance for a shot at goal—not a guaranteed goal, but a chance to take the shot

If these conditions exist in the situation you describe, then a sending-off and a red card is the proper punishment together with the award of a free kick or penalty kick, as appropriate, if the play is stopped and brought back to punish the original offense within the prescribed time limits.

Question:

Ball is in play and, as Assistant Referee notes a 12^th player on the field for the attacking team, the attackers score an apparent goal. The AR notifies the Referee of the 12^th player. Does the goal stand? Does it make any difference if the 12^th player either scores the goal or assists versus just being on the pitch?

Answer (May 9, 1997):

Yes the goal stands. Although the 12^th player was on the field illegally, the goal must be allowed. The 12^th player must be cautioned for entering the field of play without having received a signal from the referee and removed from the game. Because the game was already stopped for the goal, no free-kick can be awarded. The game must be restarted with a kick off.

No, it makes no difference if the 12^th player scores the goal or assists.

The assistant referee should have prevented the 12^th player from entering the field and the referee should have paid more attention. Because of the rules of competition for youths here in the United States, there is a constant danger in youth games of having too many people on the field.

Question:

Law XII.5.c specifically deals with touching the ball by the goalkeeper with his/her hands when deliberately played to him/her by a teammate. Is this law applicable in the following scenario?

The ball is played to the goalkeeper, standing within the penalty area, by an opponent and the GK controls the ball with his/her feet. The goalkeeper then dribbles the ball OUTSIDE the penalty area and, when challenged by an opponent, dribbles the ball back INSIDE the penalty area and picked the ball up with his/her hands. Is this legal or is this a variation of the ball being played by a teammate (the GK him/herself) to the GK?

Answer (May 8, 1997):

If the goalkeeper’s teammate deliberately kicked the ball, i.e., played the ball with his foot, to the goalkeeper, the goalkeeper may not touch the ball with his hands no matter how far or how long the ‘keeper may dribble the ball with the feet. The restriction applies until after an opponent has played the ball or another teammate has headed or otherwise played the ball to the goalkeeper within the requirements of Law XII. The goalkeeper may _not_ play the ball to him/herself with the feet to circumvent the requirement that someone else play the ball. (As of 1 July 1997, the ‘keeper also will not be allowed to touch a ball deliberately thrown-in to him by a teammate.)

If the ball was legally played to the goalkeeper, i.e., headed or played with some part of the body other than the feet (and without any attempt to circumvent the requirements of Law XII.5.c.), then the goalkeeper may indeed dribble the ball outside the penalty area, bring it back into the penalty area, and pick it up, provided he had not previously controlled the ball with his hands.

Question:

During a corner kick, but before the kick is taken, a teammate of the kicker steps into touch, under the goal, so as to be not noticed, and then jumps out to play the ball. It would seem that it is a cautionable offense in that he left the field of play without permission and not by accident while playing the ball. Supposing you defer to issue an immediate caution and let the play continue and the offending player heads the ball into the goal. Would you then allow the goal, card the player, and try to find somewhere to hide?

Answer (May 7, 1997):

No. The referee should disallow the goal, caution the player and show the yellow card for unsporting behavior, and restart with an indirect free kick for the defending team at the spot where the player was when he headed the ball into the goal—keeping in mind the overriding conditions imposed in Law XIII (or Law VIII, after 1 July 1997).

A player may leave the field temporarily during the course of play to avoid an opponent, to keep the ball in play, or to avoid being involved in active play during an offside situation, but s/he may not leave the field as part of a trick or ruse to fool the opponents. Such unsporting behavior (formerly called “ungentlemanly conduct”) must be punished.

Question:

In my daughter’s recent U13 game, the opposing team was setting up for a corner kick and the coach instructed a player to stand in front of the goalkeeper. What is the ruling if she A) just stands still or B) moves and follows the goalkeeper in an effort to “mark” her? I feel the latter would be a form of obstruction. I’m also of the opinion that simply standing in front of the keeper obstructs.

Answer : Question A is easily answered: Standing in front of the goalkeeper to screen him/her from play is not an infringement of the Law, unless while doing so the opponents actively prevent the ‘keeper from playing the ball or moving to a position where s/he can play the ball. In the recently-minted words of the International F.A. Board, if the opponents move with the goalkeeper, they are “impeding” of the goalkeeper to prevent him/her from having a chance to play the ball; we used to call this “obstruction.” If they merely take up the position and do not interfere to prevent the ‘keeper from playing the ball, they cannot be punished, as they have not committed any infringement. They have just as much right as the goalkeeper to play the ball—as long as that is all they do.

Question B is answered in the Additional Instructions included in the FIFA Laws of the Game and Guide for Referees published by the U.S. Soccer Federation, in paragraph 3.©, on p. 36, which reads: “[It is an offense if a player] © who is standing in front of a goalkeeper when a corner kick is being taken, takes advantage of his position to obstruct the goalkeeper before the kick is taken and before the ball is in play.” The referee should not interrupt the corner kick to caution the player, as this would run counter to the Spirit of the Game. Instead, the referee should wait for a moment until the kick is taken, then blow the whistle immediately and award the indirect free-kick against the kicking team for impeding the goalkeeper. This is fair and a good tool in man management.

Question:

As I observed referees from various districts at out recent Easter Tournament, I was happy to note an increased consistency in “no calls” for non-deliberate handball situations. This is often a the harder road to follow as coaches, players, and spectators have grown to expect a call whenever ball meets hand. Having said that, please consider the following: during a throw-in near the opponents goal area, a defender is standing still, arms down at his side, fingers curled in a loose fist. The throw-in unexpectedly goes over the heads o0f nearby players, bounces once and strikes the MOTIONLESS defender’s hand. Assuming that he struck this pose before the ball was thrown, must he move as the ball approaches? He did not play the ball since he didn’t move at all and the ball came to him. (a penalty kick was awarded)

Answer (May 6, 1997):

I am happy to be able to quote directly from a recent article in FIFA Magazine by Michel Vautrot, a former FIFA Referee from France and a member of the FIFA Referee’s Committee:

“Voluntary and involuntary handball:

“It seems some people might not like it, but a handball decision can only mean a direct free kick (or a penalty if in the area). The idea of giving an indirect free kick for a “minor” handball offense is nothing less than an error by the referee, and it could have serious repercussions.

“The referee has just one thing to consider in taking his necessarily quick decision in a handball situation : was it intentional or not? He has to decide whether the ball went to the hand, maybe on the rebound, or the hand to the ball. He should not intervene if the ball goes to hand, nor if the player is clearly protecting himself rather than trying to take advantage of the situation.”

If anyone cares to dispute this authoritative statement, go for it!

Question:

USYSA rules. A GK gets sent off for SFP (violation of IBD 13). May a substitute goalkeeper enter at this time, or must a field player become GK until a legal substitution opportunity?

Answer (May 6, 1997):

I know little of the USYSA variations, but I think they are almost as obtuse and bureaucratic as the rules used in high school and NCAA. Obviously under the Laws of the Game a substitute ‘keeper could come in for a field player, but under USYSA I _believe_ not.

I recommend for your reading the Youth Soccer—Youth Division section of the USSF Official Administrative Rules Book 1996-1997, Rule 4037, Substitutions:

“Except as provided by this Association or its affiliates, substitutions shall be unlimited except where specified otherwise in the rules and regulations for a special competition. Substitutions may be made, with the consent of the referee, at the following times:

(1) prior to a throw-in by the team in possession.

(2) prior to a goal kick, by either team.

(3) after a goal, by either team.

(4) after an injury, by either team, when the referee stops play. (5) at half time.”

Not that I could possibly recommend this, but a creative coach could certainly find an injury on his or her team at this time and request substitution(s), right?

Question:

In youth soccer (AYSO) there is a great concern for protection of the keeper. If a striker is on the attack and the keeper goes down on the ground to try to stop the ball, the issue becomes what constitutes dangerous play. If the keeper does not have possession (but is trying to get it) and the striker is getting ready to hammer the ball, there is a good possibility that an injury may occur (and the coach is the first one to claim that his keeper got kicked). I have always looked at it as: “were they both playing the ball?”. It is hard to penalize a keeper for trying to do his job (going down on the ground to try to stop the ball) and it is just as hard to penalize the striker for trying to do his job (kicking the ball in the goal before the keeper can obtain possession). If they were both playing the ball and the injury (or kick) occurs, I allow play to continue and consider the contact accidental. What do you think??

Answer (May 5, 1997):

If the referee deems the act by the player(s) to be accidental, something that happened through no fault of the player, it cannot be considered a foul. If the referee believes that the act was a foul, then the referee must determine whether it was careless, reckless, or involving the use of disproportionate strength. If the foul was careless, simply a miscalculation of strength or a stretch of judgment by the player who committed it, then it is a normal foul, requiring only a direct free-kick (and possibly a talking-to). If the foul was reckless, clearly outside the norm for fair play, then the referee must award the direct free-kick and also caution the player, showing the yellow card. If the foul involved the use of disproportionate strength, totally beyond the bounds of normal play, then the referee must send off the player, show the red card, and award the direct free-kick to the opposing team.

Question:

Some centers instruct the A/R to signal direction for the whole side-line. What is the now preferred way to signal balls in-touch?

Answer (May 5, 1997):

Until the procedure and mechanics manual is rewritten, this is the correct system of signals: The assistant referee signals direction for restart for balls in touch in his/her half of the field by holding the flag in his/her hand and extending the arm at a 45 degree angle in the appropriate direction. The assistant only signals for balls in touch in the referee’s half of the field if the referee looks to him/her for a signal or if it is obvious that the referee could not see that the ball had left the field. In the case where the ref looks to the assistant, the assistant indicates with a flag signal as described above. If the referee has not seen the ball go into touch, the assistant signals by putting the flag straight up, to indicate out of play—with the flag in the hand that would normally point at 45 degrees to show direction.

Question:

As more and more people are becoming involved with soccer, I hear more and more interpretations of the offside rule. Is there any exact wording other then “when the ball is played” to determine whether or not a player is to be ruled offsides? For instance, two opposing players are clearly in an offside position in front of the goal (within the goal area) as the defense clears the ball and begins to move away from goal. The team whose players are in the offside position plays the ball forward. The ruling that I hear is that these players are NOT offside because the play of the ball was a shot toward goal and not a pass to them. Confused?

Answer (May 3, 1997):

I trust we can alleviate your confusion through some simple facts: The Law requires the referee to determine whether the player was involved in active play—meaning was he interfering with play or with an opponent or did he gain an advantage by being in the offside position. We also look at the “active area” around the ball. Did the player do anything to interfere or to play the ball? If he had no effect on the shot, then he should _not_ be declared offside. The player in the offside position must be declared offside if the referee believes that player has gained an advantage by being in active play in that position. If the player is in an offside position during a shot by a teammate, then that player will not be penalized for offside if s/he did not participate actively and interfere in play.

There are four ways a player in an offside position may become onside:

1) The player is NOT in front of the ball when it is next played by one of his team;

2) the position of the opponents changes so the player is no longer in an offside position when the ball is next played by one of his side;

3) an opponent intentionally plays or gains possession of the ball; and

4) the ball is out of play.

There is nothing a player can do without one of these four events occurring to bring himself onside

Question:

Knowing that the Laws specify that the “basic compulsory equipment of a player shall consist of a jersey or shirt...” and that a player isn’t a “player” until he/she is beckoned onto the field, what if a team has a 14-person roster but only jerseys enough for the 11 players on the field? Passes should have been verified by the picture rather than the number, so other than the obvious inconvenience of players changing shirts before coming onto the field, and the necessity of recording names and not numbers for offenses, is there a valid reason to not allow this situation?

Answer (May 1, 1997):

The Laws are silent on the matter of numbers (and socks as well), leaving that to the authorities governing the competitions in which players and teams take part. The best idea is to stick strictly to the rules of the competition in such cases. They are there for a reason—to prevent cheating. If the referee is confident that s/he can identify all players by their photos, then there is probably little harm in allowing this to happen—but beware that problems could still occur. I would opt for extreme caution here.

Question:

There are several laws I never see enforced: on a PK, the keeper jumps off the line early and the field players cross into the penalty box and over the 10-yard circle before the ball is struck; on a throw-in, a player picks up the ball, makes several feints to throw it in, then hands the ball to a team-mate to actually do the throw; keepers carve marks in the field to - who knows why, really? - give them some (imagined?) advantage. Keeper steps: ...8, 9, 10, PUNT. I fully expect the upcoming changes to meet a similar fate - like I’m going to count “6-5-4-3-2-1-BLEEEEEEP” on a keeper possession?

So, would you like to go on record as to which laws you find regularly - and, apparently, acceptably - ignored? Do I enforce them in the youth games I do and “bend to the will of the masses” for the adults?

Answer (April 29, 1997):

Thank you for an excellent question! Without pretending to answer Question fully, I will give my insights on certain of the things you asked about. Please remember that these are my very own personal opinions and may not reflect in any way the official opinion of anyone else or of USSF or FIFA.

Much of what you ask revolves around what I call individual commitment to enforcing the Laws of the Game in the spirit of those same Laws. I know some referees who religiously enforce the requirement that ‘keepers stay on their line and not move forward. I am also acquainted with the other 95 percent who are too lazy to do so, because “no one else does it.” The same referees call (or do not call) the encroachment of players into the penalty area or into the center circle. The 95 percent who lack a solid commitment to the spirit of the Laws are the reason the International Football Association Board was forced to change the Laws with regard to movement and encroachment on penalty kicks and on the kick off (which will no longer be a “place kick”).

As of July 1, 1997, goalkeepers will be allowed to move along their goal line—I reckon very few referees will have the commitment to the spirit of the Laws to call any forward movement. At the same time, there is no longer an automatic caution for players who encroach at the taking of a penalty kick—although the Law does not forbid it. Because the ball will be in play as soon as it has been kicked and moves forward (some unspecified minimal amount), referees will no longer have to worry as much about encroachment as they might have done in the past—if they did at all.

Time wasting on throw-ins or by goalkeepers (including the amount of steps taken prior to returning the ball to play) or on any other restart has been a concern of the IFAB for many years. They are constantly coming out with reminders and additional instructions to referees to enforce the Laws and clamp down on time wasting—to little avail. I believe you are correct in your reading on the six or so seconds for goalkeeper possession—it will be enforced only sporadically. (Goalkeeper markings, as futile as I agree with you that they are, have long been on the list of items that referees should punish—again to no avail.)

The Laws will not be enforced until referees have enough courage to do it. It is that simple. They _should_ be enforced—within limits and for clearly defined reasons, which we are not discussing here—at every level.

Question:

Red team is passing ball up into Blue team’s end of field. A Red player runs past the second to last Blue defender into an offside position. Red teammate kicks ball forward in the air toward Blue goal. Second to last Blue defender moves to play ball with header. However ball bounces off Blue defender’s head back towards own goal and is next played by the Red player in the offside position. Should this player still be called offside even though ball was last played by Blue player? At what point of touching or playing the ball (possession?) by Blue player would the Red player no longer be considered offside?

Answer (April 29, 1997):

This is a clear case of offside. The Red player was actively involved in play and gained an advantage from his offside position. Because the opponent never established clear possession of the ball, which is one of the requirements for a player to become “onside” again, the assistant referee must now flag for offside and the referee must stop play and award an indirect free kick to the Blue team.

There are four ways a player in an offside position may become onside:

1) The player is NOT in front of the ball when it is next played by one of his team;

2) the position of the opponents changes so the player is no longer in an offside position when the ball is next played by one of his side;

3) an opponent intentionally plays or gains possession of the ball; and

4) the ball is out of play.

There is nothing a player can do without one of these four events occurring to bring himself onside.

Question:

I had an incident in a youth match where an attacking player was in an offside position in front of the goal, close to the “far” goal post, as the player with the ball took a shot at the near side and scored a goal. I disallowed the goal due to the “sense” that the player in offside position interfered with the play. In retrospect, I do not believe that the goalkeeper had seen that player, but rather paid attention only to the shooter, and thus I made a bad call. If the keeper had turned his attention to the player in offside position, would that constitute interference with play? Is there an advantage gained by being in front of the goal in the midst of a shot, even if the shot is made to the opposite end of the goal?

Answer (April 26, 1997):

We define interfering with an opponent as “preventing an opponent from moving towards the ball,” and interfering with play as “moving towards the opponent or the ball and thereby affecting how the play runs.” Roughly stated, if the attacking player takes advantage of the advantage he gained through the offside position, then he is offside.

The goalkeeper’s job is to worry about keeping the ball out of his own goal, not about other players. That is what he should be concentrating on. In the situation you describe, no advantage is gained by the player near the far post when the shot is being taken some 20 feet away at the other post, unless the player is shouting or otherwise distracting the goalkeeper.

Question:

What recourse does the referee have when someone will not vacate the area behind or around the goal, from which they are coaching the goalkeeper? I am referring to individuals that are not a part of the coaching staff (i.e. parents, siblings, etc.). If the individual has already been expelled from the game area, does the referee then card the bench/coach? At what point should the game be called?

Answer (April 23, 1997):

This is a difficult problem for any referee. It is not made any easier by the fact that the referee has no authority under the Laws of the Game to do anything positive about it, other than to terminate the match if all else fails. (The referee already has the power under Law 5 to deal directly with all players and named substitutes through cautions or expulsions/sending-offs, and can dismiss coaches as well.)

Under some rules of competition, i.e., the rules established by the authority that is in charge of the league or cup competition, the referee has the power to caution coaches for bad behavior by the coach or other non-playing personnel of the team and to hold the coaches responsible for the actions of their team’s supporters. If, during a game played under such rules of competition, the referee is unable to maintain the proper control and the coach refuses to cooperate, then the referee should review the options available to him or her and inform the coach what they are—that usually means “help me fix it or the game is over.” If the coach still refuses to assist in maintaining control, then the referee has little choice but to terminate the match. That should be done only when no other solution is possible. (This includes those cases in which a previously-expelled player refuses to leave the area of the field.)

In every case, whether the game is terminated or not, the referee must submit a full report of the incident to the proper authorities.

Question:

Goalkeeper for red takes a hard shot from blue player. The strike on the ball was so hard it knocks the ‘keeper into the goal. A defender for red, seeing that the ball may wholly cross the line, grabs the ‘keeper by the shoulder and pulls him from the goal prior to the ball entering the goal. The lead assistant referee cannot see if a goal was scored because he is obstructed by the defender. The referee is 18 yards parallel to the goal line and cannot be goal judge. My question is this: If a player jumps on the shoulders of his own player to head a ball, then that player is guilty of ungentlemently conduct. Would a player be guilty of ungentlemently conduct for pulling his ‘keeper from the goal to prevent a goal scoring opportunity? Would the restart be an indirect kick from the 6-yard line?

Answer (April 23, 1997):

Yes and yes, for the reason you cite.

Question:

Please define the criteria for determining which half of the field a player is in. This is in reference to (a) offside position, and (b) kick offs, where players frequently stand with one foot on the halfway line and the other in the opponents half of the field.

Answer (September 20, 1996): 1.(a) If the player’s toes are on the halfway line, but not over the line, there would be no offside. (b) If the player’s feet are on the halfway line, with the toes over the line (heels on his own side), there could be offside. 2. If the player has one foot over the line and one foot completely on his own side, there could be offside. 3. If the player has both feet on his own side of the line, but his head or hands extend over the line, there would be no offside. (It would not be justifiable to count the head or hands, as we usually judge offside based on the torso. An instance of a player with both feet completely on his own side and his body over and beyond the line and still ready to take an active part in play would be improbable at best.) The same principle would apply on kick-offs, if anyone bothered to really keep track of it. Watch any game on television, wherever you are in the world, and you will find numerous violations of the other team’s half on kick-offs. It’s _usually_ not worth worrying about, so many referees get very lazy about enforcing the rule. END OF QUOTE

Question:

Team A, defending their own goal, kicks the ball over the touchline. Before putting the ball back into play, team B calls for a substitution, two players enter the field but only one leaves. The referee signals a restart, but the AR on the side of team B waves his flag indicating an infraction. The referee does not see the flag waving and allows play to continue. Team B throws the ball in and continues to play. Some players on team A see the flag and do not restart. Within a few seconds, the ball is played into the net. The referee indicates a goal scored and moves to the center of the field. The AR informs the referee that Team B had too many players on the field when the goal was scored. Should the goal stand? If not, is the correct restart an IFK?

Answer (April 20, 1997):

You never explained whether or not the referee had signaled the substitutes to enter the field—which would mean that the players leaving the game should have already left the field. We shall proceed as if the referee had _not_ signaled the substitutes to enter. Although the 12^th Team B player was on the field illegally, the goal must be allowed. The extra Team B player must be cautioned for entering the field of play without having received a signal from the referee. Because the game was already stopped for the goal, no free-kick can be awarded. The game must be restarted with a place-kick. What could the assistant referee have done to prevent the situation? The assistant referee should have acted more quickly to keep the substitutes out of the game until the referee granted permission for them to enter. As substitutes are required to enter at the halfway line, the assistant referee should have made sure that the substitutes remained there until the referee’s signal. Now, if the referee had signaled the substitutes to enter, it would still not negate the goal. The referee and the assistant referee are jointly responsible for ensuring that no team has an unfair advantage in numbers and should have used appropriate procedures for the substitution. are the restrictions that only those who were players at the end of the game may take part in the kicks, and that the only substitution will be for a goalkeeper who becomes injured during the taking of the kicks (provided all the allowed substitutions have not been used). One point in Question needs to be clarified: The referee _never_ determines how the match will be decided. That is the sole responsibility of the competition authority, i.e., the league or cup competition in which the teams are participating. If it is a friendly, then there is no need to determine a winner.

Question:

I had a situation in a game where a player recklessly played for the ball in the air and collided with a teammate. Both were involved in dangerous play to themselves and each other. I blew the whistle and called a dangerous play, giving an indirect kick to the other team. The coach disagreed, yelling that his player couldn’t be penalized for a dangerous play against a member of his own team. Maybe so, but couldn’t he be called for a dangerous play against himself in this situation?

Answer (April 17, 1997):

A player may only play dangerously against an opponent. This topic was covered extensively in the Summer 1990 issue of U.S. Referee, now Fair Play magazine: SOME TIPS ON HANDLING DANGEROUS PLAY The wording of Law XII would appear to give the referee the power to punish ANY dangerous act: “Playing in a manner considered by the referee to be dangerous.” But is that really what should be done? The answer to that question is “no.” And since the answer appears to contradict the Law, some explanation is necessary. We need to consider what happens when a player plays in a dangerous manner. Suppose a player (A) goes to head a ball that is six feet in the air, and an opponent (B) attempts at the same time to kick the ball with a raised foot. Unless he has suicidal tendencies, (A) will pull his head back away from the foot (and the ball) so as not to get kicked. In other words, his perfectly legitimate attempt to play the ball has been affected by his opponent’s dangerous act. Player (B) has acted unfairly, even though it may not have been intentionally, and must be penalized under Law XII (1). Suppose a player © attempts to head a ball that is only a foot or two off the ground, at the same time player (D) is trying to kick it. What will happen? Unless player (D) is particularly anti-social, he will pull his foot back when he sees his opponent’s head near the ball. In other words, his perfectly legitimate attempt to play the ball has been affected by the dangerous act of his opponent ©. Player © has acted unfairly, even though unintentionally, and must be penalized under Law XII (1). In both cases, the player has been unfairly affected by the dangerous play of an opponent, who will be punished by the award of a free-kick. And this brings us to the other reason why we cannot punish dangerous play by teammates: a free-kick can be awarded to a team only if they have suffered something as a result of unfair play or misconduct BY THEIR OPPONENTS. There is not a single example in the Laws of the Game of a free-kick awarded for anything else.

Question:

What is the proper call and restart in the following situation: A non-player sticks his foot out and trips an opposing player who is running by on the field of play with the ball. Is this a cardable situation? If so, could it be violent conduct or serious foul play since he/she is a non-player?

Answer (April 17, 1997):

It could be a “cardable” situation, depending upon the circumstances. We need a more precise definition of a “non-player” here. If you mean a spectator, coach, or non-playing team person, such as managers or players who are not in uniform and not on the game roster for the day, these people may not be cautioned, but the referee has the authority to dismiss such people from the area under the provisions of Law 3, as confirmed in the FIFA Question and Answers to the Laws of the Game (Q&A), Law 3, Q&A 19. If you mean a substitute who has not yet entered the game, the referee’s authority to deal with substitutes is also clearly defined in Law 3. A USSF memorandum clarifying the differences between players and substitutes was issued in the fall of 1996. It states, among other things, that “Law III (Section 5, e) expressly declares that the referee’s authority extends to all substitutes whether called upon to play or not. While it is not possible for a substitute to commit or to be penalized for a foul, substitutes can be cautioned or sent off for misconduct (which includes showing the appropriate card).” If you mean players who have already been substituted for and have completed their active participation in the game, they, too, may be dealt with under Law 3. The memorandum goes on to say, “Players or substitutes may be cautioned or dismissed before the start of the game or reported for misconduct after the conclusion of the game; however, the appropriate card should not be shown at those times. In addition, coaches, assistant coaches, managers, trainers, etc., cannot be cautioned or sent off and shown a card for their misconduct; however, the referee can dismiss them from the area of the field of play. In any of these instances, the referee must submit a report to the proper authorities within the stipulated time.” If the “non-player” is a spectator, coach, or non-playing team person, then there can be no violent conduct or serious foul play, as such misconduct can only be carried out by players, i.e., people who are legally on the field of play. Serious foul play may be committed only on the field, when the ball is in play, against an opponent, while both players are contesting for the ball. Violent conduct may be committed at any time, at any place on or off the field, and against anyone, be it opponent, teammate, referee or assistant referee, or one of the non-playing persons noted earlier. The restart for all misconduct committed on the field of play by a non-player (in this case, anyone who is not a “player”) is a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when play was stopped, unless the ball was within the goal-area at that time, in which case it shall be dropped on that part of the goal-area line which runs parallel to the goal-line at the point nearest to where the ball was when play was stopped. If it was a substitute who committed the act, the substitute will not be allowed to take any part subsequently in the match and must also be reported to the appropriate authority. A non-substitute non-player will be dismissed from the area of the field of play and must also be reported to the appropriate authority.

Question:

Law XII states (in part) “5. When playing as a goalkeeper and within his own penalty-area: (a) from the moment he takes control of the ball with his hands.......(b) having released the ball into play before, during or after the 4 steps, he touches it again with his hands......shall be penalized by the award of an indirect free-kick..... A ball is kicked at the keeper. With an outstretched hand, he manages to tap the ball to the ground. It lands by his feet so he dribbles several steps forward then picks the ball up and punts it out. Is he guilty of playing the ball twice with his hands, or was the initial tap not enough “control” to put him in jeopardy of a call?

Answer (April 17, 1997):

Guilty as charged, provided your description of the goalkeeper managing to “tap” the ball to the ground means that he parried it, i.e., that he put the ball where he wanted it to be able to play it again. If your word “tap” means that the goalkeeper was acting defensively and making a true save of a shot by an opponent, and the ball just happened to fall conveniently at his feet, then there was no infringement of the Law. If the ball was deliberately kicked by a teammate, then we have a violation of Law XII, 5 ©.

Question:

A goalkeeper runs out and picks up a slow-roller just outside of the penalty area. The referee blows his whistle for the handball. An attacking player asks for, and receives, the ball that the keeper is>holding. Attacking player then promptly puts the ball on the ground and shoots a goal. There was some confusion over whether or not the play had to be restarted with a whistle. Could you please clarify this? When MUST a whistle be used for a restart?

Answer (April 14, 1997):

Never. The referee and the kicking team are under no obligation to wait for the defenders to “get ready” for the kick. If the goalkeeper was naive enough to hand the ball to the opponent, instead of tossing it to the referee or casting it NOT TOO FAR ASIDE and quickly taking up a position for the free kick, then that is hard luck. (I stress NOT TOO FAR ASIDE, as we would not want to see the ‘keeper cautioned for ungentlemanly conduct—soon to be “unsporting behavior”—for throwing the ball away to waste time and allow his/her team time to set up a defense against the kick.) The word “whistle” does not occur in the Laws of the Game themselves nor in any International Football Association Board decisions. The only requirement is that the referee give a “signal.” “Whistle” occurs once in the section on “Signals by Referee and Linesmen” (paragraph 8, “The proper use of the whistle . . ..”), which goes on to say: “All signals given by the referee should be simple, clear and instinctive. They should be designed to control the game efficiently and to ensure continuous play as far as possible; they are intended essentially to indicate what the next action in the game should be, not principally to justify that action.” The word “whistle” also occurs twice the FIFA Question and Answers: Law 3, Q&A 15, and Law 9, Q&A 3. That said, it is recommended that the referee uses the whistle judiciously, signaling for the kick off, the penalty kick, or infringements of the Laws, and on any occasion when s/he needs some extra time and has told the players to wait for the whistle.

Question:

In a competitive level of play . . . Is there a call and what is the call when a player is tugging on the jersey or shorts of an opposing player while scrapping for the ball?

Answer (April 13, 1997):

At any level of play, the call is either holding an opponent or pushing an opponent. If the referee believes the damage done through the pushing or holding to be negligible, then there may be no call at all.

Question:

Law XII, 5a & IBD,15 states the GK takes possession & control of the ball by touching it with any part of his hands or arms. Hands & arms ends with an S meaning plural, 2 hands or arms. A ranking Instructor/Assessor said only one (1) hand or arm is necessary to create possession. Example; the GK is on the ground with an outstretched arm and hand on top of the ball. To go a step further an attacker comes in and kicks the ball into the goal. Common sense tells me one thing but Law XII indicates another.

Answer (April 11, 1997):

Go with common sense and the ranking instructor/assessor. If the Law wanted the ‘keeper to use more than one “hand,” it would say “both hands.” In point of fact, the instructor/assessor did not go far enough: The goalkeeper has possession if s/he has the ball under control with one finger. In the case you put forward, the referee would call back the goal and should have a brief chat with the player about how the game is played.

Question:

Easy question, what are the official U.S.S.F. approved colors for referee uniforms?

Answer (April 10, 1997):

Black most of the year, fuchsia in the summer (as defined by the state association) or as the _only_ alternate.

Question:

I had a referee tell me that he was informed in a training session that when a goal kick is taken, the ball actually doesn’t come into play until it is touched by a person outside the 18 yard line (i.e.. if the ball is kicked on a goal kick and the angle is such that it crosses the 18-yard line and the touch line without being touched by a player, then the goal kick must be redone??). I have found no evidence to support this. Could you please comment....

Answer (April 6, 1997):

On a goal kick, the ball is in play as soon as it leaves the penalty area and enters the field of play. If he meant that the goal kick must be retaken if the ball goes out of the penalty area and over the goal line without having entered the field of play, then he is correct. Law XVI tells us that the ball “shall be kicked direct into play beyond the penalty-area from any point within the goal-area by a player of the defending team.” And that “If the ball is not kicked beyond the penalty-area, i.e. direct into play, the kick shall be retaken.” Further, the FIFA Question and Answers to Law XVI tell us: 3. During a goal-kick, the ball has traveled the distance of its circumference without leaving the penalty-area when an opponent enters the penalty-area and is intentionally fouled by a defending player. Can a penalty-kick be awarded? No, because the ball was not in play at the time the offense was committed. The offending player shall be cautioned or sent off, according to the nature of the offense, and the goal-kick retaken. If the ball has passed outside the penalty-area before the game is stopped, a goal-kick shall still be retaken as the player of the attacking side entered the penalty-area before the ball was in play. 4. If a player is intentionally tripped before the ball passes out of the penalty-area when a goal-kick is being taken, should a free-kick be awarded? No, the ball is not in play until it has been out of the penalty-area. The offender shall be cautioned or sent off and the goal-kick retaken. 6 1997 Date: Sun, 6 Apr 1997 14:16:21 -0400 X-Sender: [email protected] (Unverified) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: [email protected] From: Jim Allen Subject: Re: When can a player be suspended X-Status:

Question

During a recent game, one of my players received a yellow card early in the game. Later in the game, a he had a collision with another player and a foul was called on my player even though both players were going for the ball. He asked for what the call was and the referee responded by asking him to voluntarily leave the substitute himself out of the game but no second yellow card was shown. At the conclusion of the game, the referee indicated that he showed one yellow card and verbally gave the second. During the investigation, the disciplinary committee determined that only one yellow card was shown but still elected to suspend the player for an additional game because the referee report indicated the player was “not behaving appropriately” on the field. Is this situation warranted based on the rules of the game?

Answer

I cannot speak to suspensions, as these fall outside the province of refereeing. They are controlled by leagues and associations and committees. I will say that the referee appears to have failed to follow proper procedures in dealing with your player. There is also no such form of misconduct as “not behaving appropriately” on the field, whatever that may be. The Laws of the Game now specify four reasons to caution a player. Those four will turn into seven reasons as of July 1, 1997. I look forward to many creative referee reports.

Question:

Is there a law written where once the ball is placed on the ground for a goal kick, it can not be picked up and moved to another location? Example: A player places the ball on the rightside of the goal box, then picks it up and runs to the leftside and places it down.

Answer (February 23, 1997):

Law XVI (Goal-Kick) was changed in 1992 to eliminate one of the most common timewasting tactics used by players, placing the ball on one side of the goal-area and then moving it to the other side when the referee noticed that it was not in the correct half of the goal-area. The Law current reads: “When the whole of the ball passes over the goal-line excluding that portion between the goal-posts, either in the air or on the ground, having last been played by one of the attacking team, it shall be kicked direct into play beyond the penalty-area from any point within the goal-area by a player of the defending team.” [Rest of text not pertinent here.] Prior to 1992 it read: “When the whole of the ball passes over the goal-line excluding that portion between the goal-posts, either in the air or on the ground, having last been played by one of the attacking team, it shall be kicked direct into play beyond the penalty-area from A POINT WITHIN THAT HALF OF THE GOAL-AREA NEAREST TO WHERE IT CROSSED THE LINE, by a player of the defending team.” [Rest of text not pertinent here.]

Players would attempt to waste time by deliberately placing the ball in the wrong half of the goal-area, knowing that the referee would make them move the ball, thus running valuable seconds off the clock.

The same rule is applicable to every restart for the defending team within its own goal-area. The defending team may put the ball into play from any spot within its own goal-area. Once the ball has been put down, it should not be moved to another spot, but kicked into play.

Questions

1. This topic has created a lot of debate among us soccer referees: Teammate plays ball with foot to goalkeeper who is standing outside of the penalty area. Goalkeeper plays ball with foot into the penalty area and then picks ball up with his hands to punt it back into play. What’s the ruling?

2. Similarly, goalkeeper, standing outside penalty area, plays shot attempt by opponent with his feet and then plays ball with feet into the penalty area. He then uses hands to punt ball back into play. What the ruling?

Answers(February 21, 1997):

1. The goalkeeper has infringed Law XII, Section 5©, in touching “the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a teammate.” Indirect free-kick to the opponents from the spot where the goalkeeper handled the ball.

2. This is a perfectly legal play. There is no rule against the goalkeeper handling a ball that was last played by an opponent before the goalkeeper gained possession of the ball, provided the goalkeeper has not already handled and then released the ball since the last time an opponent touched it.

Question:

While the goalie is required to wear a shirt that is a different color to the rest of his team and the opponent, I see nothing in the laws that allow a goalie to wear sweat pants. But I have seen many goalies allowed to wear sweat pants, especially on cold days. Have I missed something or is this a tradition?

Answer (February 18, 1997):

Although there is nothing in the Laws themselves regarding the wearing of long pants (or of gloves or soft-billed caps, for that matter) by goalkeepers, such wear has been authorized by FIFA for years, because the role of the goalkeeper is so different from that of other players. The goalkeeper is expected to spend much of the time diving at the ground, looking into the sun, and catching quickly-moving balls. The different nature of the job requires that the ‘keeper be allowed to wear a different uniform from the rest of the players.

Question:

If a player throws the ball in but the whole of the ball never crosses completely over the touch-line, what is the call?

Answer (February 17, 1997):

As long as the thrower met the other requirements of Law 15 and the ball crossed at least partly over the touch-line (including breaking the vertical plane of the touch-line extended as high as necessary into the air), then the throw-in is legal and there is no infringement. No infringement means no call is necessary.

Question:

What is the latest official interpretation of “opponent’s half of the field” in regards to Offside? Is it any portion of the body “on” the half line or “past” the half line, or center of mass “on or past” the half line, or torso “on or past” the half line?

Answer (February 17, 1997):

I can give you an _UNofficial_ answer that you are welcome to share with the soccer community. The USSF Manager of Referee Development and Education has discussed the matter with a high-ranking refereeing dignitary of another country, who works closely with the International Football Association Board (IFAB). The response is merely that dignitary’s own interpretation, not an official proclamation of FIFA or the IFAB. It is the current _UNofficial_ guidance for USSF referees: 1.(a) If the player’s toes are on the halfway line, but not over the line, there would be no offside. (b) If the player’s feet are on the halfway line, with the toes over the line (heels on his own side), there could be offside. 2. If the player has one foot over the line and one foot completely on his own side, there could be offside. 3. If the player has both feet on his own side of the line, but his head or hands extend over the line, there would be no offside. (It would not be justifiable to count the head or hands, as we usually judge offside based on the torso. An instance of a player with both feet completely on his own side and his body over and beyond the line and still ready to take an active part in play would be improbable at best.) Please remember that this is NOT OFFICIAL POLICY and should not be quoted as such in any meetings, clinics, or on the field of play. You are welcome to use it as a rule of thumb in judging such situations, however rare they may be.

Question:

In the FIFA Question & Answers to the Laws of the Game there is a Question 3 for Law 10 that states that if a defender taking a direct free kick from in his own half of the field and outside the penalty area plays the ball into his own goal a corner kick would be awarded to the attacking team. I have searched the Law Book high and Low and can find no Law or IFAB decision that covers this situation. Where is the reference for this one?

Answer (December 21, 1996):

Try the first paragraph of Law XIII, FREE-KICK: “Free-kicks shall be classified under two headings: “direct” (from which a goal can be scored direct against the offending side), and “indirect” (from which a goal cannot be scored unless the ball has been played or touched by a player other than the kicker before passing through the goal).” The key is that a team may not score _directly_ against itself from a free-kick. Note the parenthetical phrase “from which a goal can be scored direct against the offending side.” From _any_ free-kick, someone else (of either team) must touch, play, or make contact with the ball before it enters the goal for a goal to be scored _against the kicking team. The only restart possible when the kicking team plays the ball _directly_ into its own goal from a free-kick is a corner-kick.

Question:

The goalkeeper (U10B) jumps up for ball and as he comes down his arm position is such that his elbows are pointing out. An opposing player is also rushing in at the same time and ends up getting the elbow in the face. I called a penalty kick; did I err?

Answer (December 30, 1996):

Law 12 requires that the referee punish the act as a foul you describe if s/he believes that the player (in this case, the goalkeeper) acted carelessly, recklessly, or used disproportionate force. If the opponent “ends up getting the elbow in the face,” there should be no penalty-kick if, in the opinion of the referee, the contact was accidental. If the referee believes that the goalkeeper did act carelessly, then the penalty-kick is warranted.

Question:

A player takes a throw in and the ball lands on the line and then makes its way onto the field of play. It is played by a teammate of the thrower. Is the throw legal?

Answer (January 16, 1997): Assuming all other aspects of a proper throw in are present, then the ball is in play the moment any part of the ball crosses over any part of the touchline while the ball is still in the air. It does not have to land on the ground (either on the touchline or completely inside the field of play) to be deemed in play. If any part of the ball crosses over any part of the touchline and, with the ball still in the air, it then goes back out of play (back into touch), the throw in proper, but the correct restart is a throw in to the opposite team.

Question:

The Red team has been awarded a throw-in about 10 yards from the goal line of the Blue team’s goal. The throw-in is taken and just before the ball is about the pass over the goal line and into the goal, a Blue defender (other than the keeper) deflects the ball with his hand (while standing inside the penalty area) intentionally and it goes into the goal. The referee, seeing that the ball was handled by the defender, is about ready to blow the whistle; however, the ref sees that the ball has now crossed over the goal-line and into the goal. May you then award the goal and issue a yellow card to the defender.... or must you disallow the goal, issue a yellow card and award a penalty kick? Is this a case in which either decision is the correct one?

Answer (December 3, 1996):

This is a case where the referee can apply the advantage clause and allow play to continue for a very brief interval while the ball goes into the goal. After the goal is scored, the referee can then caution and show a yellow card to the defender who handled the ball and restart with a place-kick (kick-off). If the referee had acted too hastily and blown the whistle immediately when the ball was handled, then no goal could be scored from that play, whether or not the ball went into the goal. In this case, the referee would have to send off and show a red card to the defender who handled the ball and the restart would be a penalty-kick.

Question:

Where do you draw the line on a hand ball? I had a situation where a player, relatively alone in midfield, received a pass and trapped in right where shoulder meets arm, and directed it to his feet. The ball hit mostly on his shoulder, i.e. the horizontal area above the arm. I called a handball, because I wasn’t completely certain he didn’t use part of the top of his arm. But it made me wonder about what the right call is. I assume that a clean touch with the shoulder above the arm is OK?

Answer (December 4, 1996):

The rule of thumb for referees is that it is handling if the player plays the ball, but not handling if the ball plays the player. The referee should punish only _deliberate_ handling of the ball, meaning only those actions when the player (and not the goalkeeper within his own penalty area) strikes or propels the ball with his hand or arm (shoulder to tip of fingers). This can mean that even though the player leaves his hand/arm close to his body, he may have moved the body so as to strike or propel the ball with the arm or hand, and the referee must watch for actions of that sort. The situation you describe, a clean touch with the shoulder above the arm, does not _appear_ to fit in that category and should not be punished as an infringement of Law XII(i); however, the original situation that you punished would appear to be an infringement of the Law. Handling the ball deliberately usually earns a caution for ungentlemanly conduct, but particularly so when the player does it to prevent an opponent from gaining possession of the ball or attempts to score a goal by illegal use of the hand(s). Handling the ball could also be considered serious foul play, if the player doing the handling thereby denies an opponent an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Question:

In reference to your answer to a previous question (How would you handle a coach who lights up a cigarette during a youth game?) I totally agree with your answer (I would dismiss him from the area of the field and submit a report to the competition authority); however, can you help me with the report part? When I file a report to justify a dismissal, I am supposed to be very careful to quote the specific law that was broken which resulted in the dismissal. I agree with the decision, but can’t seem to find a law I can say he broke. Ungentlemanly conduct? That only warrants a caution, not a dismissal. Is it sufficient to simply state the offense (smoking) without quoting a specific law infraction?

Answer (December 4, 1996):

Since coaches are mentioned specifically only in Law, V, The Referee, it is difficult to cite a specific reference in the Laws for you. However, as smoking would indeed be an act of ungentlemanly conduct if committed by a player or a substitute, for which you would caution and show the yellow card to that person, you can also punish the coach by dismissing him from further participation in the game and sending him away from the area of the field. Your report should cite the offense of smoking and indicate your belief that this act brought the game into disrepute. A caveat here: This is simply tradition. I am not aware of any specific USSF rule or regulation governing this situation.

Question:

May a player taking a throw-in let the ball bounce off the ground outside the field as part of the action of throwing the ball in? Yesterday I overheard a coach talking to his players about this. I have never seen it done, but wondered if it was legal.

Answer (December 10, 1996):

Law XV requires that the throw be taken from within one meter (in any direction) of the spot where the ball went into touch. Although there is no requirement that the ball actually enter the field directly at the point of throw-in, a “bounce in” would be illegal. If the ball hits the ground before going into the field, it has not been put into play properly and the throw-in must be retaken. Now, someone needs to tell me why anyone would want to coach such a strange thing; bouncing the ball off the ground would surely make the ball harder to control.

Question:

In the October 1996 issue of Referee Magazine, which goes to all members of National Association of Sports Officials, there is an article about a soccer referee who refused to allow a 12 year old boy to play because he was wearing a bandanna due to his Indian based Sikh religion’s requirement to cover his hair while in public. The magazine states “FIFA and USSF rules clearly prohibit any player from wearing a bandanna or any head covering that displays any kind of allegiance or design or isn’t of a solid color.” Really? I can’t find any such wording in my FIFA rule book.

Answer (November 20, 1996): There is _no_ USSF or FIFA rule to that effect. It is a matter of tradition and of proper observation of the Laws of the Game.

According to Law IV, “The basic compulsory equipment of a player shall consist of a jersey or shirt, shorts, stockings, shinguards and footwear.” That’s it. No mention of bandannas, yarmulkes, turbans, beads, derbies, fedoras, or shawls anywhere in the Law. However, USSF has granted dispensation in the past (see below) for various religious groups to wear appropriate head coverings, but that does not apply in this case: This boy apparently wore the bandanna for a lark, not out of any religious conviction.

Here is a letter from Vincent Mauro, USSF’s Director of Officials, to the president of the Massachusetts Youth Soccer Association, under whose aegis the match in question took place:

“To MYSA President (name deleted):

“Pursuant to our conversation about the young player who was not allowed to wear a bandanna during the Easton Classic Soccer Tournament, I respectfully inform you that the United States Soccer Federation National Referee Program has addressed the case.

“Head coverings are not generally allowed during a soccer match, and a bandanna such as the one in the incident you described (navy blue with white markings) would certainly not be allowed.

“The referee and the tournament’s director made the correct decision in not allowing the player wearing the bandanna to participate in the game. Neither the referee nor the tournament director were informed that special consideration, because of religious laws, would necessitate a variance in the laws of the game regarding the player’s uniform.

“In the past, the Secretary General of the United States Soccer Federation has given permission to various religious groups that require head coverings—usually a turban or a veil—provided the referee finds that the headgear does not pose a danger to the player wearing it or to the other players.

“I have never heard of any religion that requires a blue and white bandanna. But if it is so, consideration should be given.

“The player should bring something from the head of his religious organization that explains explicitly what is required. If the requirement is that the head be covered, a plain white cloth, nylon stocking or lightweight unpatterned plain-colored ski cap would be allowed.

“Your concern must be for the safety of the players, officials and spectators. Gang colors and/or symbols displayed during a game could endanger those present.

“Player (name deleted) could play soccer for any United States Soccer Federation organization if the head covering meets the above guidelines.”

Question:

The Red team is losing a very important game. The game is do or die for them for whatever reason. As the clock begins to tick off the final minutes of the game, the coach realizes his team is going to go down in defeat. His team has dominated the game, but they got some unlucky breaks. The coach sure would like to have a fresh start at this game. Suddenly the coach remembers the new rule which says that if the referee notices that a team has too many players on the field, but play has already commenced, the game will be terminated and replayed at a later date. So he sneaks an extra player onto the field while all the action (and all the eyes) is on the opposite end of the field, then he instructs a parent, sub, assistant, anyone, to anonymously yell, “Hey ref, Red has too many men on the field!” The ref counts the players, Red team has 12, game terminated, rescheduled, Red gets another crack at it!

This is a case where the guilty team benefited from their “punishment.” Should that be permitted to happen?

Answer (November 20, 1996):

I do not pretend to be is an omniscient and omnipotent being, so I will not guarantee that this answer is authorized by anyone other than me. It is certainly not the opinion of the U.S. Soccer Federation, but solely my own.

The rule on termination and replay is not “new,” but an old, established, and traditional rule for dealing with situations such as you describe: If the referee discovers that there are too many players on the field, he should stop the game and recommence the match, if possible. If the referee is unable to restart the game because it could not be completed under the prevailing conditions on match day, the competition (league, cup, tournament, etc.) under which the game is being played has to determine what happens next.

But let’s get a little more practical. A moderately observant referee (and his trusty team of assistant referees) will certainly have _some_ idea of when the extra player entered the game and will be able to determine (among themselves) which one it is. I leave the method to the ingenuity of the individual(s) concerned. Once the referee has determined who the guilty party is, that player must be cautioned for entering the field without the permission of the referee and made to leave the field. If a goal had been scored during his/her presence it would stand.

If the referee(ing crew) is insufficiently intelligent to find out “who done it,” any witness who was aware of what happened should be asked to report it to the competition authority. The coach should be brought up on charges of bringing the game into disrepute and suspended from all participation in soccer for a lengthy period.

Question

How would you handle a coach who lights up during a youth soccer game?

Answer:

I would dismiss him from the area of the field and submit a report to the competition authority

Question:

This weekend I watched a referee make the following call. I think it was not correct, but would like to clarify the issue so that I will make the right call if faced with the same situation. The Red team replaced their goalkeeper without notifying the referee. (I think that this took place at half time but that probably doesn’t matter.) When the goalie touched the ball the first time the ref. blew his whistle and called an indirect kick from that point (7 yd line). It seems to me that Law 3-4 is the rule that requires that a goalkeeper inform the referee, and that Punishment(a) says that play shall not be stopped for an infringement of paragraph 4. I believe that the correct call would be to have given the goalie a yellow card when the ball first went out of play after he noticed the goalkeeper change, but that there should never be a kick given to the opponents simply as a result of the failure to notify the ref.

Answer (November 18, 1996):

Your belief is correct. If the unannounced substitution did take place at half-time, then Question/Answer 16 on Law III from the FIFA Q&A applies:

“16. A player changes places with the goalkeeper during half-time without informing the referee. The new goalkeeper who then enters the field of play touches the ball with his hand during the second half. What should be the referee’s decision?

“a) Allow play to continue.

“b) Caution both players when the ball goes out of play.”

If the unannounced substitution took place at any other time, then the principle expressed in Question/Answer 15 on Law III applies:

“15. The goalkeeper (No 1), whose hand has been injured, changes places with player No 7 without notifying the referee, just a few minutes before the end of the match. Both teams have already made their three legitimate substitutions and player No 7 has been cautioned. The ball is in play and player No 1 scores the winning goal for his team just as the normal time runs to an end. Immediately after the goal is scored, the referee blows the final whistle, without having been able to carry out the kick-off and without having been able to caution the offending players. What action should the referee take in this case?

“The referee must allow the goal, caution player No 1, send off payer No 7 (second caution) and signal for the end of the game. In the event that he was unable to administer the cautions before the end of time, he shall inform a team official about the misconduct of the two players and include details in his report to the appropriate authorities.”

If there is still time left in the game, the referee would caution both players (showing the yellow card) and restart with the place-kick.

Question:

This sort of situation occurs more indoor than outdoor. Using an outdoor situation, when a team is taking a corner kick, many coaches have a player stand directly in front of the keeper. This player does not attempt to play the ball when the kick is taken, but merely stands there..is this an obstruction offense on the attacking team?

Answer (November 18, 1996):

If the player fails to play the ball and in any way obstructs a goalkeeper who is trying to play the ball, he should indeed be punished for obstruction. I have answered this sort of question in the past and can offer you a variety of approaches to the matter with those Question. I hope these contain the answers you need.

Question:

I am confused by one of the Additional Instructions included in the FIFA Laws of the Game and Guide for Referees published by the U.S. Soccer Federation. It is paragraph 3.©, on p. 36, which reads: “[It is an offense if a player] © who is standing in front of a goalkeeper when a corner kick is being taken, takes advantage of his position to obstruct the goalkeeper before the kick is taken and before the ball is in play.” I obviously can’t stop play and award a free kick, because the ball is not in play, and it seems foolish to interfere when the only punishment available to me is to caution the player who is obstructing the goalkeeper. What should I do?

Answer (February 15, 1996):

You should not interrupt the corner kick to caution the player, as this would run counter to the Spirit of the Game. What you should do is wait for a moment until the kick is taken. Then blow your whistle immediately and award the indirect free-kick against the kicking team for impeding the goalkeeper. This is fair and a good tool in man management.

Question:

In a number of corner kick situations, opposing players have stood in front of my goalkeeper, trying to screen him from the play. At what point is this interference?

Answer (April 2, 1996):

Standing in front of the goalkeeper to screen him from play is not an infringement of the Law, unless while doing so the opponents actively prevent the ‘keeper from playing the ball or moving to a position where he can play the ball. In the recently-minted words of the International F.A. Board, if the opponents move with the goalkeeper, they are “impeding the progress” of the goalkeeper to prevent him from having a chance to play the ball; we used to call this “obstruction.” If they merely take up the position and do not interfere to prevent him from playing the ball, they cannot be punished, as they have not committed any infringement. They have just as much right as the goalkeeper to play the ball—as long as that is all they do.

Question:

A player takes a throw in and the ball’s first contact with the ground is the touch line and you can assume the ball never really curved into play during its flight. Has the ball been properly thrown in? Would it matter if the player touches the ball while it is still on the line?

Answer (November 13, 1996):

As we know from Law IX, “the lines belong to the areas of which they are the boundaries. In consequence, the touch-lines and the goal-lines belong to the field of play.” If the ball’s first contact with the ground is the touch-line, then it has already re-entered the field. Provided the throw-in itself met the requirements of Law XV, it has been properly thrown in and any player (other than the thrower) can now play it immediately. The thrower may play the ball only after someone else touches it.

You asked two Questions:

First question:

I have read with interest the previous questions and answers with respect to charging the goalkeeper. The way I understand the wording of the law, the keeper may be charged if he is holding the ball or obstructing or has passed outside the goal area. To me, that says that outside the goal area a fair charge may be used on the keeper whether or not he is holding the ball and whether or not he is obstructing. A previous question indicated that the keeper cannot be charged outside the goal area if he is holding the ball. But that is not what the law says. If this is the intended meaning, then the wording should be changed to make it clear. If the wording means the keeper cannot be charged while holding the ball outside the goal area, then it must also be that he cannot be charged while obstructing outside the goal area, since both incidents are treated the same in the way the law is written. Is this the case?

Answer to Question 1 (November 12, 1996):

I hope you didn’t get the “previous question” you mention from this space, as the answer you indicate seeing to that question is _incorrect. The ‘keeper who is holding the ball or obstructing may be charged _fairly_ anywhere within his own penalty area.

Second question:

The memorandum which gives the changes in the Laws of the Game states that when a referee gives advantage, and the expected advantage does not develop within a short time, he “has to immediately stop the game and penalize the original offense, provided that the ball is still in play (if not then play must be restarted in accordance eighth the Law).” Am I correct in understanding that this means if I give advantage, and the ball goes into touch before the anticipated advantage materializes, restarting in accordance with the Law would mean a throw in, and I could not go back and call the foul and restart with a free kick?

Answer to Question 2 (November 12, 1996):

That is correct. If the ball goes out of play before the referee realizes that the original advantage has not materialized, then play must be restarted in accordance with the Law, but that does not mean that if there were a cautionable offense you would not issue the caution/yellow card—that you still must do, whether or not the advantage materializes.

Question:

If two players are contesting a ball along the touch line and both go off the field of play, temporarily, while doing so, and one of them commits a penal foul while they are both temporarily off the field, what is the restart?

Answer (November 12, 1996):

Neither of the players can commit a foul when they are both off the field of play. The requirements for an act to be considered a foul are that it be committed on the field of play, when the ball is in play, and by a player against an opponent.

If both players were off the field, the offense that one of them committed, no matter what the referee might have called if that same act had been committed on the field, could only be punished as misconduct. Misconduct requires that the referee caution/send off and show the appropriate card to the player concerned, depending upon what the player did to his opponent. The restart would depend on where the ball was when the misconduct occurred (and what the misconduct was). If the ball was on the field (and the misconduct was off the field), the restart would be a dropped ball at the spot where the ball was. If the ball was out of play when the misconduct occurred, the restart would be for the reason that the ball was out of play (i.e., throw-in, free-kick, corner-kick goal-kick, or place-kick). NOTE: This answer does not apply to fouls (or misconduct) committed on the field of play, nor to misconduct between teammates, no matter where the ball was.

Question:

Just this past Sunday (11/10/96) I was refereeing a youth soccer final tournament game (under 10 age group). It was a short-sided game (7 players per side) and a reduced size field. During the game, there was a group of 3 players (one from the RED team, and two from the BLUE team) challenging for the ball about 30 yards away from an opponents goal at the same time. One player from the RED team kicked the ball back toward his goal-line at an angle toward the corner flag. The RED team’s goalkeeper picked up the ball in the penalty area and the whole BLUE team’s sideline coaches erupted into juvenile screams and protests because they wanted an INDIRECT KICK awarded. It was clear to me the player kicked the ball in a quick reactive move just to clear the ball out of the area with no INTENT or DELIBERATION to play it back to the keeper....therefore, not subject to a IDF award. Would you kindly give me your opinion on my judgment?

Answer (November 13, 1996):

While the crux of your decision was your opinion that the player did not intend to play the ball to his goalkeeper, it is wise to remember that Law XII,5©, has been interpreted to mean that the player’s deliberate play of the ball to any spot where the goalkeeper can and does pick it up constitutes an infringement of the Law. It makes no difference whether or not the player intended for the ‘keeper to pick up the ball; it is enough that the goalkeeper took advantage of the player’s action. If the player had miskicked the ball and it had gone to a spot where the goalkeeper picked it up, the referee would not punish this act, as it would not be an infringement of the Law.

Question:

During a match a referee cautioned a player because within five minutes from the end of the match he cleared the ball from his team side of the field as far away as he could out of bound while his team was leading the game 2-1. The ref deemed that the player intentionally sent the ball far away to waste time and cautioned the player. He justified that there is a line under Law V that mention occurrences of this nature. I had a hard time finding it. What do you think? Did the referee abuse his power or is there something in the law about this?

Answer (November 7, 1996):

Yes, the referee appears to have abused his power here. The infringement he has punished is not covered specifically in Law XII. (The referee may have been thinking of Law XII, 5(d), which deals with timewasting by the goalkeeper.) While it does not violate the Letter of the Law, it _might_ be considered to fall under the label of violations of the Spirit of the Game. It certainly meets the requirement for gamesmanship, which is that the act must appear accidental, so that the player’s intent to keep the ball out of play for a certain amount of time is disguised by the fact that the ball is “legally” out of play. In other words, the player who kicks the ball far out of play and beyond the bounds of the field is trying to gain an unfair advantage for his team. Nevertheless, gamesmanship is not cheating and not a true violation of the Laws, and the referee must be careful not to punish too readily in such a case. Adding time is the way for the referee to penalize the team that is constantly wasting time by putting the ball out of play. (If you want more information on this subject, consider reading Stanley Lover’s “Association Football Match Control” for excellent coverage of the various aspects of gamesmanship and how to distinguish gamesmanship from cheating.)

Question:

Situation:A player sets up to take a cornerkick, he places the ball in the arc, then yells at his teammate for him to take the kick. As the player walks towards him he gives the ball a gentle nudge toward the approaching teammate, it rolls its circumference. The teammate acts like nothing has happened, but then takes the ball with his feet and makes a>cross toward goal.

It was obvious this was a set play which tried to catch the opponents off guard, which it may have for a few seconds. But was this ungentlemanly conduct? and worthy of penalizing. It should not make a difference, but it was an understand 16 boys play-off game.

Answer (October 21, 1996):

The desire to score a goal and win the game often produces tactical maneuvers and feints designed to deceive the opponent. These can occur either in dynamic play (while the ball is in play) or from restarts. Those tactics used in restarts are just as acceptable as they would be in the normal course of play, provided there is no action that qualifies as ungentlemanly conduct. The attacking team is allowed more latitude by the Laws than its opponents. This is illustrated perfectly in a question on free-kicks in the FIFA Question and Answers (Q&A, Law XIII):

7. All the defenders are properly lined up at the stipulated distance of 9.15m. (10 yards). The referee signals for the free-kick to be taken and the attackers (three for instance) apply tactics devised to break up the wall. Very quickly the first attacker runs over the ball without touching it, a second attacker does exactly the same immediately after, which has the effect of making one or two of the defenders move forward, whereupon the third attacker kicks the ball which is parried by one of the defenders who is no longer at the stipulated distance. Should the referee consider that, by employing these tactics, the attacking players took the risk of playing for a surprise and allow play to continue without intervening? Or, on the contrary, for this particular case, should he intervene by cautioning the defending players for approaching before the ball had traveled the distance of its own circumference and have the free-kick repeated?

The free-kick carried out in this manner is correct and the players who have formed a wall at 9.15m distance from the ball must not come forward. The referee could have the free-kick retaken if the ball struck one of the players who had advanced from the wall and thus failed to adhere to the stipulated distance before the ball had traveled the distance of its circumference or he could choose to allow advantage to the attacking team. The player or players guilty of encroachment should be cautioned.

Although it did not occur during a “free-kick,” the corner-kick tactic used in your example meets the requirements of this decision by the FIFA Referee Committee. The tactic you describe is perfectly legal and there is nothing that even hints at ungentlemanly conduct.

Question:

First, what is the proper restart if an indirect free kick is taken and goes directly into the goal?

Second, in an u13b game last weekend a ball was played forward by an attacker and deflected off another attacking player into the goal. Neither player was in an offside position. The ball deflected off the second player’s shoulder from behind. The second player neither saw nor attempted to play the ball. I let the goal stand, which the opposing coach didn’t appreciate. Who’s right?

Answers(October 19, 1996):

Question 1: It depends on whose indirect free-kick it was and from where it was taken. If it was a kick by the attacking (i.e., opposing) team, then the restart is a goal-kick, no matter where the kick originated. If it was a kick by the defending team from inside the penalty-area (and never left the penalty-area), the restart is to retake the indirect free-kick. If it was a kick by the defending team from outside its own penalty-area (or that started inside its own penalty-area, went out, and then returned to the same penalty-area and entered the goal), the restart is a corner-kick. Question 2: You are right.

Question:

A more experienced referee (who is also a coach) claims that it is fair (no foul) if a player who is charging an opponent with his shoulder (with the ball within playing distance) also adds a hip-level nudge. His arguments are that:

a) such an action is taught by coaches all over

b) done at the same time of the shoulder charge (which is allowed)

I believe he is wrong, and what is illegal by itself (the hip push) does not become legal when it is simultaneous with another legal action (the shoulder charge). Your opinion?

Answer (October 16, 1996):

One of the silliest reasons given for the commission of any foul is that “such an action is taught by coaches all over.” Just because something is taught by coaches does not make it legal under the Laws of the Game. Strictly under the Laws, the nudge with the hip is _not_ legal; however, very few referees ever make the call, as it occurs so commonly. My advice is for the referee to judge the severity of this sort of charge and to determine whether or not the person who has been charged has been distracted by it or accepts it as part of this particular game. The action is certainly illegal, but, if the player thus charged does not mind, then it is also a trivial foul and the referee is better off not calling it.

Question:

A ball is taken away from an offensive player by a defensive player. Both players are rushing TOWARD the goal, when the defense player sticks a foot in, kicking the ball forward. The goalie stops the ball, in the goal box area, with his FOOT. After stopping the ball, the goalie picks the ball up to kick the ball. Is this a ‘pass back to goalie’ situation?

Answer (November 21, 1996): It is not a violation of Law XII, Section 5©, _if_ the referee is satisfied that the ball was not kicked deliberately to the goalkeeper by his teammate. The Law was not changed to prevent skillful defensive play, but to eliminate timewasting tactics from the game.

Question:

The ball is deliberately kicked to the goalkeeper by a teammate. The goalkeeper attempts to play the ball by kicking it upfield, but miskicks and sends the ball off the goal-post. An opponent, seeing the goalkeeper’s problem, comes running to play the ball. The goalkeeper, seeing the onrushing opponent, dives and takes the ball into his arms. What should the referee do?

Answer (November 21, 1996):

The referee should call the infringement of Law XII, Section 5©, by the goalkeeper, who touched the ball with his hands after it had been deliberately kicked to him by a teammate. If the ball had been miskicked by the teammate, rather than by the goalkeeper himself, the goalkeeper could have touched the ball with his hands without infringing the Law.

Question:

In calling “handling,” what is considered in determining whether the ball was played by the hand? I have heard that it is all right if the player’s action is an instinctive reaction by a male player to protect face, groin or by a female player to protect the breast, and that these should not be considered as deliberate handling. I have also heard the entire arm, from the finger tips to the shoulder should be considered as part of the hand when making your decision. I always considered the shoulder as legal but starting at the arm pit and lower as illegal.

Answer (November 6, 1996):

Everything you state is correct, except for the last sentence. Any use of the shoulder in playing the ball is considered to be using the hand. Obviously we consider the deliberateness of the act in making our decision.

Question:

During an U8 girls game that I was centering, the goalkeeper’s big brother was standing on the sideline watching the game. He happens to be one of our own referees in our soccer club. As the game progressed, he started to question some of the calls I was making. At first I ignored him but as he continued, his sister’s coach started doing the same thing. Just before the end of the first half I went over to the coach and warned him not to be questioning my calls and to let me call the game. I also told the “big brother referee” to stop what he was doing. He proceeded to tell me that he had eight years experience and that I was doing a terrible job. I told him that if that was true, he should know that there is such a thing as a “code of ethics” for us referees whether we are off the field or on the field and especially towards other referees. How should I have handled this situation?

By the way, I think about the game and really believe I was making the proper calls. I believe he and the coach were upset/frustrated since their team was losing by a wide margin.

Answer (October 23, 1996):

I agree with your analysis and with your approach to the problem and particularly with the actions you took. They were absolutely correct. You showed excellent maturity for a newer referee. The “big brother referee” was violating several items in the Code of Ethics for Referees:

2. That I will conduct myself honorably at all times and maintain the dignity of my position.

6. That I will always be loyal to my fellow referees and linesmen [now “assistant referees”]. and never knowingly promote criticism of them.

7. That I shall do my utmost to assist my fellow officials to better themselves and their work.

10. That I shall not make statements about any game except to clarify an interpretation of the Laws of the Game. [Usually reserved for the officials on the particular, but apropos in this case.]

Question:

Situation:A player sets up to take a cornerkick, he places the ball in the arc, then yells at his teammate for him to take the kick. As the player walks towards him he gives the ball a gentle nudge toward the approaching teammate, it rolls its circumference. The teammate acts like nothing has happened, but then takes the ball with his feet and makes a cross toward goal.

It was obvious this was a set play which tried to catch the opponents off guard, which it may have for a few seconds. But was this ungentlemanly conduct? and worthy of penalizing. It should not make a difference, but it was an understand 16 boys play-off game.

Answer (October 21, 1996):

The desire to score a goal and win the game often produces tactical maneuvers and feints designed to deceive the opponent. These can occur either in dynamic play (while the ball is in play) or from restarts. Those tactics used in restarts are just as acceptable as they would be in the normal course of play, provided there is no action that qualifies as ungentlemanly conduct. The attacking team is allowed more latitude by the Laws than its opponents. This is illustrated perfectly in a question on free-kicks in the FIFA Question and Answers (Q&A, Law XIII):

7. All the defenders are properly lined up at the stipulated distance of 9.15m. (10 yards). The referee signals for the free-kick to be taken and the attackers (three for instance) apply tactics devised to break up the wall. Very quickly the first attacker runs over the ball without touching it, a second attacker does exactly the same immediately after, which has the effect of making one or two of the defenders move forward, whereupon the third attacker kicks the ball which is parried by one of the defenders who is no longer at the stipulated distance. Should the referee consider that, by employing these tactics, the attacking players took the risk of playing for a surprise and allow play to continue without intervening? Or, on the contrary, for this particular case, should he intervene by cautioning the defending players for approaching before the ball had traveled the distance of its own circumference and have the free-kick repeated?

The free-kick carried out in this manner is correct and the players who have formed a wall at 9.15m distance from the ball must not come forward. The referee could have the free-kick retaken if the ball struck one of the players who had advanced from the wall and thus failed to adhere to the stipulated distance before the ball had traveled the distance of its circumference or he could choose to allow advantage to the attacking team. The player or players guilty of encroachment should be cautioned.

Although it did not occur during a “free-kick,” the corner-kick tactic used in your example meets the requirements of this decision by the FIFA Referee Committee. The tactic you describe is perfectly legal and there is nothing that even hints at ungentlemanly conduct.

Question:

A player taking a throw-in throws the ball long so that it goes over the defending goalkeeper. In spite of jumping the keeper does not touch the ball. A defending player behind the goalkeeper guides the ball with a hand over the cross-bar. What action should the referee take?

Answer (September 30, 1996):

If the defending player had handled the ball in the penalty-area before it left the field over the cross-bar from a free-kick or during dynamic play, the referee would award a penalty-kick to the thrower’s team and send off the defender for serious foul play. However, as the ball was handled directly from a throw-in by an opponent, there was no obvious goal-scoring opportunity, so the defending player must be cautioned and the referee should award a penalty-kick to the opponents.

Question:

Suppose player A is in an offside position when his teammate B plays the ball. A is not involved in the play. Defender C intercepts the pass and begins to dribble up field. Player A sprints after C from behind, and steals the ball from him. It seems to me that, technically, A should be called offside because 1) he was in an offside position when his teammate last played the ball, and 2) he is now interfering with an opponent. However, there seems to be a custom not written in the rules anywhere that when the possession changes, a player such as A is no longer in an offside position. How do experienced refs handle this?

Answer (October 8, 1996):

The answer to Question lies in a recent USSF publication, “Offside: Guide for Players, Coaches, Administrators and Referees.” Here is a direct quote from a study on the “Historical Perspective of the Offside Law,” by Ulrich Strom, a USSF National Instructor. “The next logical question is, how does a player who is offside return to an “on-side” position? There are four ways . . .. the four ways are (1) the player is _not in front_ of the ball when it is next played by one of his team, (2) the position of the opponents change so the player is no longer in an offside position when the ball is next played by one of his side, (3) an opponent intentionally plays or gains possession of the ball, and (4) the ball is out of play. The key point for all these, other than the obvious case (4), is that someone else, other than the offside player, has to play the ball. The offside player cannot put himself on side.

Question:

I am confused about the rights of keepers v. others. In Fouls and Misconducts, it says that

4. Charging the keeper, except when he is (1) holding the ball

is a foul punishable by an indirect kick. (Right?) This seems to me to say that it is OK to charge the keeper if he has the ball, but not if he doesn’t have the ball. Am I reading this right?

If a keeper and an opponent are scrambling after a ball, what call would you make if there is a fair shoulder charge?

Likewise, I see a lot of cases where the keeper comes out and slides, deflects the ball with his body just as the speeding attacker tries to kick it (usually through the keeper 8-) and then the attacker goes down in a heap over the keeper. What’s the call? Tripping or obstruction on the keeper, or kicking or charging on the attacker, or play on?

Answer (October 8, 1996):

First, the ‘keeper may be charged _fairly_ if he is holding the ball or has passed outside his goal area and is attempting to play the ball (which must be within playing distance), but may not be charged at all if he is not. Second, if both the ‘keeper and an opponent are scrambling for the ball (which is within playing distance), then a fair shoulder charge is a fair charge is not a foul. (Thank you, Gertrude Stein.) In either of the cases above, if the ball is not within playing distance, then you have a problem with whichever player initiated the charge, resulting in an indirect free kick for the other team. Finally, if all the actions you describe in the last part of Question are done fairly and cleanly, then there is no call to make.

Question:

While refereeing a U14 girls travel team, I overheard the Blue team’s coach instruct one of his players from the sideline that if she should get her “elbows locked” with an opponent while playing the ball, she should “jab” (motion included) her opponent in the ribs. I was shocked and at the time decided that if I saw this happen, a yellow card would be issued immediately. Luckily, it didn’t happen. However, after thinking about it now, I wonder if I should have given the coach a yellow card for “ungentlemanly conduct” upon hearing him. What do you think?

Answer (October 7, 1996):

The coach was certainly in the wrong and your decision to act against such an infringement of the Laws, if it occurred, was entirely correct. The player who commits such an act must be cautioned and shown the yellow card, as the act is beyond the normal level of foul (“careless”) and is considered to be a cautionable offense (“reckless”). Dealing with the coach is another matter. Unless the rules of the competition specifically allow it, you cannot caution/yellow card or send-off/red card a coach for anything. Where there is no specific permission from the competition, your choices are very limited. One option is to wait for the infringement to occur and then punish the player, simultaneously speaking with the coach about the consequences of other players doing the same thing. A second option is to speak with the coach immediately, warning him what the consequences will be for any player caught doing what he has suggested (whatever it may have been), and then hope that he will moderate his instructions to the player. A third, more draconian, option is to dismiss the coach for bringing the game into disrepute. (Don’t forget that you cannot display a card to the coach unless the rules of the competition allow it.) The third option is probably not useful or reasonable in this case. There are, of course, other possibilities, given match conditions, and perhaps you can tailor yet another way to suit the particular circumstances of the game you are working.

Question:

I referee a number of different AYSO divisions (levels 6, 5, and 3 boys). Can you recommend a number of book, video etc. that would help both myself and the other officials in my town to become better referees and linesman. Most of the material available from AYSO i.e.: the referee’s book is very rudimentary as does not adequately address the dynamics or positioning required to adequately ref a match.

Answer (October 7, 1996):

I am not aware of any general videos other than several published by the English FA, which are available in this country through Soccer Learning Systems, a firm in California whose address and telephone number escape me at the moment. The USSF also has published some useful videotapes on offside and man-management. Call the National Referee Development Program Office at 312/808-1300 and ask about prices and availability. There are very few books on refereeing that are _really_ worthwhile. The Harris’ book, “Fair or Foul,” is useful for a philosophy of the game. The best books on “how to” for referees are those by Sir Stanley Lover: “Association Football Match Control” and “Association Football Laws Illustrated.” Something that might be of more help to you is to study how teams are coached to play. There are several older books that are extremely useful and should be part of every referee’s library. First and foremost is “Understanding Soccer Tactics” by Conrad Lodziak, published by Faber & Faber in the U.K. Next are two books by Eric Batty, also published by Faber & Faber: “Coaching Modern Soccer—Defense” and “Coaching Modern Soccer—Attack.”

Question:

During a U14 boys game the attacking team took several shots in a crowd from the top of the goal area. On a shot the ball was deflected by a defenders hand and arm and went across the goal line for a goal. Since I did not see who had handled the ball I just applied advantage and awarded the goal. (Later my assistant referee said he thought the player handled the ball deliberately) I know that if a defender denies a goal or goal scoring opportunity by handling the ball he/she should be red carded and a penalty kick given. But in this case the goal was scored so I took no action, especially since I did not see which player handled the ball. If I had seen which player handled the ball should I have red carded them and awarded a penalty kick, or yellow carded them, letting the goal stand? Or was my decision appropriate? I think I made the right choice, and if I had seen the player I should have cautioned him letting the goal stand.

Answer (October 1, 1996):

You made the right decision. However, if you had seen the handling before the goal was scored, your choice of letting the goal stand and cautioning the player who handled the ball would have been absolutely correct. You would only send off the player who handled if he/she had prevented the goal. Also, please remember that it is always a good idea to look to your assistant referee after any goal, just to see if there are any problems that need to be solved before you move to signal the goal and restart.

Question:

A player taking a throw-in throws the ball long so that it goes over the defending goalkeeper. In spite of jumping the keeper does not touch the ball. A defending player behind the goalkeeper guides the ball with a hand over the cross-bar. What action should the referee take?

Answer (September 30, 1996):

If the defending player had handled the ball in the penalty-area before it left the field over the cross-bar from a free-kick or during dynamic play, the referee would award a penalty-kick to the thrower’s team and send off the defender for serious foul play. However, as the ball was handled directly from a throw-in by an opponent, there was no obvious goal-scoring opportunity, so the defending player must be cautioned and the referee should award a penalty-kick to the opponents.

Question:

I was working at a U14 Girls Rec game a few weeks ago and the following situation occurred: Player A on the attacking team was in an offside position near the mouth of the goal but not obstructing the goalie (or anybody on the defending team for that matter) who had been pulled way out of position by a previous play. Player B on the attacking team kicked a ball that passed about 3 feet to the left of Player A and well over her head, going into the top of the wide open goal. I allowed the goal, reasoning that Player A was not active in the play, did not receive the pass, and did not obstruct the goalie (or anybody on the defending team) so did not gain an advantage by being in that position. After the game was over one of the coaches told me that the same situation had occurred in one of her Indoor games but the referee disallowed the goal and whistled the offside. Should I have allowed the goal? Are the rules and the interpretation of the offsides rule different for indoor and outdoor soccer?

Answer (September 29, 1996):

I have next to no knowledge of the rules of indoor soccer, which are as various as the sands of the desert and the rules of soccer as played in college and high school in the United States. Nonetheless, I can tell you with some authority that your decision was absolutely correct for outdoor soccer as played throughout the rest of the world, based on what you described in Question. As long as the player in the offside position is not in active play and does not interfere with play or with an opponent or gain an advantage by being in the offside position, she cannot be called offside.

Question:

I cannot find a reference for these, but I seem to remember it mentioned in training that a yellow card would be issued for these infractions. Am I mistaken? 1) Attacker shoots for goal and scores/misses. (doesn’t matter). He continues toward the goal, and jumps up and grabs & swings on the crossbar. 2) Corner kick. Player taking the kick starts to take the kick, and just before kicking, grabs the corner flag to pull it out of the way.

Answer (September 3, 1996):

I can’t quote a particular reference, but it is certainly _traditional_ that the action in case 1 is ungentlemanly conduct. At one time there was a reference in the Law to the goalkeeper swinging on the bar as well, and that was definitely ungentlemanly conduct. Ditto the corner kick question. By tradition, players are not allowed to move any of the appurtenances of the field, such as flags or posts, just as goalkeepers are not allowed to mark their areas to help them judge where they are within the area. None of it is written down in the Laws, it is just known. One reason we miss out as a culture on much of the soccer tradition is that soccer is not (yet) the principal sport here.

Question:

A throw in is taken from Team A. A player from Team B stands in front of the thrower, but in a legal manner, i.e. not throwing arms, distracting player, etc. The player from Team A taking the throw in throws the ball forcefully into Player’s B stomach. The player taking the throw-in is cautioned for ungentlemanly conduct. What is the proper restart? (i.e., was the throw-in actually legally put into play?)

Answer (September 8, 1996):

The solution to your problem can be found in the FIFA Question and Answers, Law XV, Question 3, which, although it pertains to a ball thrown at an opponent’s head, applies here: “If, in the opinion of the referee, the player is guilty of ungentlemanly conduct, he shall be cautioned (or sent off for violent conduct). Play should be resumed by a direct free-kick to the opposing team from the place on the touch-line where the throw-in was taken.”

Question:

Some players can’t seem to ever learn. Blue team forward places himself repeatedly in offside position and his teammates push the ball forward to him. Does the intelligent referee ever decide that the repeated offside offenses are covered by Law 12 provision against persistent infringement, especially because of the incessant interruptions of play?

Answer (September 16, 1996):

The intelligent referee knows there is no legal way he can do that, as offside does not fall under the rules of persistent infringement—much as we would like them to. Therefore the intelligent referee merely “suggests” to the player who is persistently offside that he could possibly get in trouble if he continues to violate the Law. As I said, there is no _legal_ way to stop it.

Question:

Blue team commits an offense and the referee awards Red team a free kick. A blue player walks past the point of infraction and is moving toward the 10-yard distance. The red player, seeing blue with his back to the ball and apparently moving to comply with the Laws in a sportsmanlike fashion, tries to kick the ball back into play and to a teammate. Blue suddenly sticks out his leg and blocks the kick with his heel, at about 6 or 7 yards from the point of the kick. Does the referee judge encroachment, or does red forfeit his right to the judgment when he kicks the ball before blue can reach 10 yards?

Answer (September 16, 1996):

If more referees would deal quickly and firmly with the “casual stroller,” there would be less problems with encroachment and interrupted “free” kicks. In this particular case, the Red team does forfeit any hope it might have had for a truly “free” kick when its player kicks the ball before the Blue player has reached the ten-yard distance. My advice to referees: On the first occasion, have a firm and public word with the player who strolls past the scene of the free kick, slowing down the process until his teammates have set up their defense. Next time it occurs, nail the offender with a caution/yellow card without hesitation. It should cure the problem very quickly.

Question:

This is a question on whether to call offside for situations where the attack is clearly offside yet the defense gains control of the ball. Consider the following cases for examples. A). A pass is made toward an attacker in an offside position but a defender intercepts. B). A long pass towards an offside attacker which passes him and is picked up by the keeper. My question is should a play be allowed to continue to see if situations as the above arise (and then call if not realized) or should the offside be called as soon as offside situation is evident?

Answer (September 17, 1996):

Our aim as referees should always be to do what is most fair for both teams and best for the game. In Situation A, the assistant referee should not flag and the referee should not whistle for the offside if it is clear that the defending team can play the ball without interference from the player in the offside position. The same applies to Situation B. If there is clear possession by the defending goalkeeper and no interference from the player in the offside position, then there should be no call. If there is no interference, then the officials do not have to take any action and intrude into the game.

Question:

An opposing player kick’s the ball into the box and the keeper, seeing that s/he is not under any pressure, stops the ball with their hands without actually catching the ball and then proceeds to dribble to a corner of the box. Once getting to the corner of the box, without actually going out of the box, can the keeper pick up the ball to punt it? Or does stopping the ball with their hands constitute a possession which would mean that the keeper could not touch the ball again with his/her hands?

Answer (September 2, 1996):

What the ‘keeper did is called “parrying” the ball. This is considered to be a form of controlling the ball, i.e., possession. If the goalkeeper then picks up the ball without another player having played the ball (any opponent anywhere or a teammate outside the penalty area), that is a violation of Law XII, section 5(a), and the ‘keeper should be punished through the award of an indirect free-kick to the opponents at the spot where the goalkeeper played the ball again with the hands (subject to the overriding conditions of Law XIII). (See Law XII, IBD 15.)

Question:

If a keeper bounces the ball while standing in his own goal area, may an attacking player kick the ball at the _bottom_ of the bounce? I think that, since the ball is considered to be in the keeper’s possession, the act of actually kicking the ball is foul. Is this correct?

Answer (August 29, 1996):

If the referee believes that the goalkeeper is in the act of distribution, i.e., preparing to deliver the ball to another area of the field for play, then the goalkeeper remains in possession and the attacking player may not interfere with this act of distribution in any way. On the other hand, if the referee believes that the goalkeeper is releasing the ball by dropping it, rather than retaining it for further distribution, then the attacking player should not be punished for attempting to play the ball. It is up to the discretion of the referee and how he or she chooses to apply The Seven Magic Words: “If, in the opinion of the referee.”

Question:

Situation: A PK is awarded and players take up their proper positions. At the sound of the whistle, a teammate of the kicker runs forward OUTSIDE of the penalty area but now AHEAD OF THE BALL. The kick is taken before the referee can do anything and the ball goes into the goal. Question: Should there be any sanction for the teammate being ahead of the ball at the time of the kick, and if so, what?

Answer (August 27, 1996):

This situation should be treated just as any other encroachment by a teammate of the kicker during a penalty kick would be if a goal were scored: The player must be cautioned and the kick retaken. Despite the fact that the player was outside the penalty area, he or she has violated both the letter and the spirit of the Law through this encroachment.

Question:

I am beginning to doubt foot position on TIs, as I was taught. Is the following foot position legal for TIs?

| |

( | | )

| |

( | | )

| |

Law XV says “...part of each foot shall be either on the touch-line or on the ground outside the touch-line.” I was taught “...as long as part of each foot is in contact with touch...” at the release. What is your view? Any other citations of authority besides the Law?

Answer (August 16, 1996):

Just as long as we stick with the Laws of the Game, we are—if you will pardon the expression—on solid footing. Although in some countries the authorities say that the foot cannot extend over the line at all, the letter of the Law is hard to ignore. If any part of the foot is in contact with any part of the touch line at the time of the throw and all other requirements for proper delivery are met, then there is no infringement of the Law. However, a word of caution is necessary here: The referee cannot forget that the farther a thrower’s foot extends into the field, the less likely it is that the back portion of the foot is still truly in contact with the line.

Question:

I was playing sweeper in a game recently. One of my opponents cleared the ball from his half. The ball ended up near our penalty area. The goalkeeper came out of his area, played the ball with his feet into his area and picked the ball up. The referee awarded an indirect freekick to the opposition, stating that the goalkeeper cannot play a ball from outside his area, then bring it into his area and play it with his hands. I disagreed with this, since the ball had been last played by the opposition. What’s the correct action?

Answer (August 15, 1996):

It would appear that the referee made a mistake. The action you attribute to the goalkeeper is perfectly legal.

Question:

Recently I was doing an under 17 girls game in a tournament with 35 minute halves. The game was going well until the second half when I ran into a problem that I was tentative to handle. In the 44^th minute of the game play had cleared out from just behind me and was progressing towards the corner in blue’s defensive half. Being that play (so I thought) had cleared out I watched the play develop. Right after I turned for the play a player from the blue team made hard contact with a player from the white team. I heard the contact being made but did not see it occur. After hearing the incident I turned back to find the white player now holding the left side of her face. In this instance I took immediate action in the situation and talked with the guilty player. I decided not to issue red being that I did not actually see the contact but I knew that at least a caution was warranted. The yellow card was issued for ungentlemanly conduct and play then continued. After the game the coach from the white team asked why I did not issue the red for an intentional elbow to the face. My response to him was that I did not actually see the contact so I could not justify giving red. My question is that if you hear contact such as this can you issue the red even though you may never have seen the incidence occur? I appreciate your response as it potentially could help me in the future in a similar situation.

Answer (August 15, 1996):

The referee should use every asset, tool, and resource available to him or her to solve the problems that occur on the field. Hearing (the proper things) is one of your greatest assets as a referee. (Of course, so is an attentive and intelligent assistant referee, whom you should always consult in time of need—or if you just need a few moments to think about what needs to be done.) Obviously you knew contact had been made and that it was violent in nature, involving the use of disproportionate force. That is sufficient cause to dismiss the player and show the red card.

Question:

A defender making a tackle appears to be injured. However, the referee says play on (apparently deciding that the injury is not serious). Should the assistant referee (linesman) stay even with this person who is on the ground when judging offside? In the same sequence as above, the defender crawls over the goal line and is being attended to by a coach or trainer, should the assistant referee stay on the goal line in judging offside, since a defender may not exit the field in order to eliminate the offside call? What if the player leaving the field of play is simply replacing a shoe which has come off their foot—are they still part of play?

Answers(August 13, 1996):

1) The assistant referee should continue with his or her primary task, which is to assist the referee in enforcing the Laws. 2) The intelligent referee and assistant referee will not worry overmuch about the injured defender who crawls off the field for medical attention. This is an extremely trifling offense in the greater picture of the game and the player must ask for permission to return to the field in any event. The linesman has more important things to worry about. 3) If the player leaves the field to replace a shoe, he or she must ask for permission to go off and to return. However, it is another case of a very trifling matter and the assistant referee should merely keep track of where the player is and when he/she wants to come back on. The referee and assistant referee should not try to complicate their jobs by doing too many things at once. Keep everything simple and enjoy the game.

Question:

The following incident occurred at a Senior Men’s game recently. Team Red was awarded a goal kick. The ‘keeper placed the ball in the 6 yard box, and in his haste to get it into play, kicked the ball over his own goal-line, (not in the goal net.) The ball had not gone beyond the penalty area before going out of play. A corner kick was given. Since the ball had not been “kicked direct into play beyond the penalty-area,” should it not have been a retake? What would have happened had it been kicked into the net?

Answer (August 11, 1996):

The answer in both cases is to retake the goal-kick. A ball is not in play from a goal-kick unless it is “kicked beyond the penalty-area, i.e., direct into play.” If this does not happen, in other words if the ball goes elsewhere than into the field of play, “the kick shall be retaken.” The ball must clear the penalty-area and go into the field of play before it is in play. A ball that goes over the goal-line (whether into the goal or not) before leaving the penalty-area has never been in play and a different restart cannot be given.

Question:

Defender A passes the ball with his foot to defender B. As the ball moves, the keeper runs between them (or shouts “Leave”) and picks up the ball. One opinion is that this is legal, since the ball was not intended for the keeper. Another opinion is that it is not, since the ball was played intentionally with the foot and went to the keeper. Part of the question is how actively we should read the minds of the players.

Answer (July 1, 1996):

No mind reading required. It makes no difference whether or not Defender A played the ball deliberately to the ‘keeper or to Defender B. What matters is that s/he played the ball deliberately, rather than unintentionally. In such a case, the goalkeeper is not allowed to play this ball with his/her hands under any circumstances.

Question:

A Goalkeeper saves a shot on the goaline within his goal. In the process he is struck in a very painful area of the body. He (It would have to be “He”) collapses on the ground clutching the ball in severe pain. The referee decides that the ‘Keeper must receive treatment. When the treatment is carried out and the player is ready to resume, how should the game be restarted bearing in mind the position on the field of play where the game is to be restarted and the maintenance of fairness in the restart.

Answer (July 1, 1996):

The intelligent referee will engineer the dropped ball in such a way that only the goalkeeper’s team has an opportunity to play the ball.

Question:

Attacker A takes a shot on goal. The ball deflects off the goalkeeper and ricochets to Attacker B, who was in an off-side position (though not interfering) when the original shot was taken. Attacker B shoots the ball into the net. Should the goal be disallowed? If Attacker A’s shot goes into the net directly, should it be allowed?

Answer (July 4, 1996):

In your scenario Attacker B is in active play and gains an advantage from being in the offside position at the time of the shot deflected by the goalkeeper. Whether or not Attacker B interferes with play or with an opponent, he must be declared offside and the goal must be disallowed because of his involvement in active play. If Attacker A had put the ball directly into the goal, then B would not have been involved in active play and the goal would be allowed.

The U.S. Soccer Federation National Referee Development Program has published an excellent paper on this and other aspects of the topic: “Offside: Guide for Players, Coaches, Administrators, and Referees.”

Question:

May a player be declared offside merely for running in an offside position, which would give him an advantage, whether or not he ever got the ball?

Answer (July 12, 1996):

No.

Paragraph 2 of Law XI declares: “It is not an offense in itself to be in an offside position.” There is nothing in Law XI to prevent players from standing or running in offside positions for the entire game. It is not against the Law, it is not unfair, and it cannot (legally) be punished by the referee.

The player in the offside position must, in the opinion of the referee, be involved in active play by interfering with play or with an opponent, or by gaining an advantage by being in the offside position.

The Law requires that a teammate pass, touch, or play the ball (to release the ball as a shot or for a teammate to play), as we can see from International Board Decision 1 to Law XI: “Offside shall not be judged at the moment the player in question receives the ball, but at the moment when the ball is passed to him by one of his own side,” and the passage in paragraph 2 that requires involvement in active play of the player in the offside position “at the moment the ball touches, or is played by one of his team.”

Question:

Can a referee ever take back a card once given. In one match I heard foul language and was sure from the direction and voice that I knew the culprit, so showed a red card to send the player off. I was wrong to do so as quickly as I did, because the linesman, who was standing within a few yards of the now carded player, said it was not him. When I asked who it was the linesman said he did not know, but did know it was not the player I carded. Knowing that the player was not guilty, I did not feel I could send him off, so rescinded the card. Since I did not see him say the words I should have conferred with the linesman before showing the card, but at the time I was sure I knew who the guilty party was.

Answer (July 15, 1996):

This is strictly a personal opinion, not “the word” from USSF, but in my opinion you can rescind your card if you find you were wrong, provided you remember the big HOWEVER that follows. Once you pull the card out and display it, you _have_ to card somebody before you put it away—just like the Gurkhas, who must get blood on them once they pull their knives out of their scabbards—so you had better find the right person _before_ you pull out any card. The HOWEVER is that you must rescind the card before restarting and you must make it clear to all the participants that you made a mistake, you recognized your mistake, and you rectified it. Players appreciate honesty above else in a referee and will forgive minor things if they believe the referee is making an honest effort to call a proper game. Now, what do you do if you can’t find the proper person? It goes back to what you suggested yourself: You have to _know_ who it was before you pull out the card. It never hurts to consult with the linesman, even if you do not follow his/her advice. It gives you some breathing space and thinking time before taking disciplinary action, and that is often good.

Question:

A player’s studs are an integral component of his/her equipment and as such should be continually checked by the player, but what criteria does a referee consider when deeming a player’s studs playable or not?

Answer (July 30, 1996):

There used to be a complicated series of items to check off, such as length, breadth, composition, etc., but, because most manufacturers knew that their boots would not sell without meeting the requirements set by the International FA Board, this checkoff list was dropped some years ago in favor of common sense. Now the only requirement under the Laws of the Game is that the studs are not dangerous. Obviously this is where the Seven Magic Words come in: “If, in the opinion of the referee . . ..”

Question:

Please clarify exactly what contact with the keeper is allowed. Law XII’s statement concerning: 4.Charging the goalkeeper except when he:-

(a) is holding the ball;

(b) is obstructing an opponent;

(c) has passed outside his goal-area;

This seems unclear.

It would seem to be OK to legally charge the keeper if he is a) holding the ball (assuming he’s in his goal area), b) obstructing, or c) not holding the ball but outside his goal area. So, assuming the keeper just caught the ball and is standing within the goal mouth, it would seem that an attacking player could legally charge the keeper. Isn’t this a conflict in that such action would prevent the keeper from putting the ball into play?

Second part: what if the keeper is on the ground, arm outstretched, with his hand on top of the ball. May an opposing player (gently) kick the ball—assume non-dangerous, no contact with the keeper.

Lastly: isn’t there a vast difference between what the Laws stipulate concerning goalkeeper contact and what is actually practiced? Goalkeeper protection seems to be a priority in the minds of most refs that I have observed.

Answer (August 8, 1996):

To your first question: Your first several conclusions are absolutely correct. Where you depart from the Laws is in assuming that the goalkeeper can just stand around holding the ball and looking cute without putting it into play immediately. If the keeper is indeed in the act of putting the ball back into play, then a charge would be illegal, but if he/she is just wasting time, then a fair charge is fully justified. To your second question: Easy answer—in no case is it legal for a player to kick a ball in the possession of the ‘keeper. This is the same as if a player were to kick the ball out of the ‘keeper’s hands. That is ungentlemanly conduct and must be punished by a caution and the showing of a yellow card.

To your third question: Yes, but that does not make it correct. Under the Laws, the goalkeeper is given only the protection you spelled out above, as well as the reasonable expectation that the referee will call the game correctly and keep him or her from undue harm. Too many referees try to rewrite the Laws to suit themselves. They need to read and try to understand the logic of the Laws and to study their application by top referees, rather than calling the game by their own inaccurate standards.

Question:

Before the “pass back” rule change, teams would sometimes take a goal kick by having a player pass the ball to the goalkeeper, who collected the ball with his feet just outside the area and then dribbled the ball into the area in order to pick the ball up with the hands and then punt it. I take it that this is no longer allowed (I don’t see it anymore). 1. What should the punishment for this be? Is this a “pass back” or is it “timewasting”?

2. Can a keeper play the ball with the feet inside the area after it has been kicked by the opposing team, proceed to dribble it outside the area with the intention of kicking it away and then bring it back inside the area in order to play it with the hands --- is this a “pass back” (indirect kick offense) or is it “time wasting” (cautionable offense).

Answers(August 9, 1996):

First a political statement: There is no such thing as a “pass back” to the ‘keeper. The ball is either passed to the ‘keeper or it is not. Article 4© of Law XII, which defines how the goalkeeper infringes the Law when he “touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate,” answers your first question. The punishment is an indirect free-kick for the opposing team. According to article 4(b) of Law XII, the ‘keeper can touch the ball with his hands (after having released it) only if it was last “touched or played by a player of the opposing team either inside or outside the penalty area, or by a player of the same team outside the penalty area, subject to the over-riding conditions of 5©.” If the ‘keeper never had possession and therefore did not release the ball, he can pick it up immediately after it is played by an opponent—or by a team-mate who has not kicked the ball or attempted to circumvent article 5© (see IBD 16 to Law XII). It is possible that the referee could consider the actions in the scenario you put forward to be time wasting. Much depends on the circumstances of the particular game.

Question:

If somebody on the other team is throwing in, can you get right in front of them so it will be hard to throw in.

Answer (August 7, 1996):

A player is allowed to stand at the touchline as the other player is taking the throw, but he (or she) may not interfere with the thrower in any way, such as by gesticulating, dancing about, or moving to disrupt the throw. (Don’t forget that the thrower must take the throw from within one meter of the spot where it left the field, so the thrower is permitted to move one meter in either direction to avoid the player who is standing at the line.)

Question:

The goalkeeper is in his penalty-area and catches the ball. He then places the ball on the ground. On noticing that an opponent is very near and rushing toward the ball, he picks up the ball again with his hands, thereby denying the opposing team a goal scoring opportunity. What is the appropriate penalty?

Some of the referees in our league feel that once the goalkeeper puts the ball on the ground, the goalkeeper becomes like a field player, and is subject to the same rules and penalties as apply to field players. Hence, these referees think the opponents should receive a penalty kick if the goalkeeper’s illegal handling denied the opponent a goal-scoring opportunity. Are they right? If not, is there ever a situation where illegal ball handling by the goalkeeper can be penalized by a penalty kick? Is there ever a situation where illegal ball handling by the goalkeeper can be penalized by a red card? (e.g., suppose the goalkeeper has already been cautioned for the same or some other offense).

Answer (June 17, 1996):

For an authoritative, official answer, you should consult your State Director of Instruction, but I will give you an educated guess as to what the essence of his or her answer will be. The goalkeeper is entirely within his or her rights to pick up the ball at any time when it is within his or her own penalty-area. That is what the goalkeeper’s job description is all about—picking up the ball with the hands. He or she is the only person on the team who is allowed to do that while the ball is in play. In this particular case, there is a punishment attached to the act. That punishment is an indirect free-kick for the opposing team, taken from the spot where the infringement occurred (unless Law XIII dictates otherwise). THERE IS IN THIS ACTION NO VIOLATION OF ANY PORTION OF LAW XII THAT REFERS TO SERIOUS FOUL PLAY. The goalkeeper is _specifically exempted_ from the restriction placed on other players by International Football Association Board Decision 14 to Law XII. In IBD 14 we read that the goalkeeper _is_ allowed to intentionally handle the ball (within his own penalty-area) in what would otherwise be regarded as an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, for which the referee would send off one of the goalkeeper’s teammates who did the same thing. The goalkeeper has simply infringed on paragraph 5(b) of Law XII, in which he or she becomes subject to punishment, “having released the ball into play before, during or after the 4 steps, he touches it again with his hands, before it has been touched or played by a player of the opposing team either inside or outside of the penalty area, or by a player of the same team outside the penalty area, subject to the over-riding conditions of 5©”—which do not apply in this particular example and would also be punished only by the award of an indirect free-kick to the opponents in any case.

The addendum to the original question puzzles and frustrates me, as I cannot understand how any referee could believe that a goalkeeper _within his or her own penalty-area_ would at any time be regarded as having no more rights than a field player. The goalkeeper is allowed to use the hands (but only) to play the ball at any place in the penalty-area. A goalkeeper within the penalty-area cannot lose or forfeit this right. The moment the goalkeeper leaves the penalty-area, he or she then has no more right to handle the ball than any other player and, if he/she does so, must be punished in exactly the same way as any other player—but NOT WITHIN THE PENALTY-AREA.

Question:

The goalkeeper is in his penalty-area and catches the ball. He then places the ball on the ground. On noticing that an opponent is very near and rushing toward the ball, he picks up the ball again with his hands, thereby denying the opposing team a goal scoring opportunity. What is the appropriate penalty?

Some of the referees in our league feel that once the goalkeeper puts the ball on the ground, the goalkeeper becomes like a field player, and is subject to the same rules and penalties as apply to field players. Hence, these referees think the opponents should receive a penalty kick if the goalkeeper’s illegal handling denied the opponent a goal-scoring opportunity. Are they right? If not, is there ever a situation where illegal ball handling by the goalkeeper can be penalized by a penalty kick? Is there ever a situation where illegal ball handling by the goalkeeper can be penalized by a red card? (e.g., suppose the goalkeeper has already been cautioned for the same or some other offense).

Answer (June 17, 1996):

For an authoritative, official answer, you should consult your State Director of Instruction, but I will give you an educated guess as to what the essence of his or her answer will be. The goalkeeper is entirely within his or her rights to pick up the ball at any time when it is within his or her own penalty-area. That is what the goalkeeper’s job description is all about—picking up the ball with the hands. He or she is the only person on the team who is allowed to do that while the ball is in play. In this particular case, there is a punishment attached to the act. That punishment is an indirect free-kick for the opposing team, taken from the spot where the infringement occurred (unless Law XIII dictates otherwise). THERE IS IN THIS ACTION NO VIOLATION OF ANY PORTION OF LAW XII THAT REFERS TO SERIOUS FOUL PLAY. The goalkeeper is _specifically exempted_ from the restriction placed on other players by International Football Association Board Decision 14 to Law XII. In IBD 14 we read that the goalkeeper _is_ allowed to intentionally handle the ball (within his own penalty-area) in what would otherwise be regarded as an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, for which the referee would send off one of the goalkeeper’s teammates who did the same thing. The goalkeeper has simply infringed on paragraph 5(b) of Law XII, in which he or she becomes subject to punishment, “having released the ball into play before, during or after the 4 steps, he touches it again with his hands, before it has been touched or played by a player of the opposing team either inside or outside of the penalty area, or by a player of the same team outside the penalty area, subject to the over-riding conditions of 5©”—which do not apply in this particular example and would also be punished only by the award of an indirect free-kick to the opponents in any case.

The addendum to the original question puzzles and frustrates me, as I cannot understand how any referee could believe that a goalkeeper _within his or her own penalty-area_ would at any time be regarded as having no more rights than a field player. The goalkeeper is allowed to use the hands (but only) to play the ball at any place in the penalty-area. A goalkeeper within the penalty-area cannot lose or forfeit this right. The moment the goalkeeper leaves the penalty-area, he or she then has no more right to handle the ball than any other player and, if he/she does so, must be punished in exactly the same way as any other player—but NOT WITHIN THE PENALTY-AREA.

Question:

Here is a situation that I observed while assisting in a BU12 play off match: Attacker has the ball and dribbles into the penalty area. At about 14 yards out the attacker takes a shot on goal. A defender on the goal line sees the ball heading toward goal and uses his hand to deflect the ball out of the goal. The ball then lands at the feet of another attacker who strikes the ball directly into the net. The referee on seeing the hand to ball contact does not blow the whistle initially, and does not indicate advantage. After the ball is fully in the net the referee awards the goal and sends off the defender for serious foul play. Is the send-off correct in this case, or should this be a caution in accordance with serious foul play diagram 7? Is there a USSF document/video that addresses this situation?

Answer (June 20, 1996):

The referee may not have had time to indicate the advantage, given the quickness with which the action took place. All that is required in such a case is that he/she be aware of what is going on. The referee’s action was correct. The defender prevented an obvious goalscoring opportunity and thus committed serious foul play. The referee is permitted to invoke the advantage clause in such situations and then to send off the offending party. The USSF Memorandum of 1991 on the changes in the Laws of the Game provided this information, and there is a Scottish FA videotape that covers the point. It came out in 1991 to provide graphic illustration of the (then) new International Football Association Board Decisions 15 and 16 (now 13 and 14).

The third paragraph of Serious Foul Play Diagram 7 describes a different situation, in which the defender handles the ball _in attempting_ to prevent it from entering the goal, but is not successful in his attempt. Because he was unsuccessful in his attempt and the ball did enter the goal, there was no violation of (now) International Football Association Board Decision 14 and the defender is not sent off; however, he must be cautioned for ungentlemanly conduct.

Question:

In answering a previous question, you mentioned that a team cannot score against itself from a free kick. I have looked through the Laws of the Game several times, and if there is a direct statement forbidding own goals from FK’s, I have overlooked it. (I only very recently certified as a referee, and during the class I asked the proverbial ‘Why not?’ on this point. Our instructor [citing a lack of adequate time] responded with the proverbial ‘Because that is the way it is’. He was a very good instructor, but kinda left me hanging on this one.

Answer (June 7, 1996):

If I gave the impression that a team cannot _ever_ score against itself, I was wrong. What I hope I said was that a team cannot score _directly_ against itself from a free-kick. That point is covered in the first paragraph of Law XIII: “Free-kicks shall be classified under two headings: “direct” (from which a goal can be scored direct against the _offending_ side [JA Note: Emphasis added]), and “indirect” (from which a goal cannot be scored unless the ball has been played or touched by a player other than the kicker before passing through the goal.” Obviously a team taking an indirect free-kick _can_ score against itself if a player takes the kick toward his own goal and the ‘keeper, attempting to keep the ball out of the goal, touches it but cannot prevent the ball from entering the goal. (And if the ball does _not_ enter the goal after this, we then award an indirect free-kick for the opponents from the spot where the ‘keeper touched the ball—remembering the conditions of Law XII, Punishment—unless the kick was taken from inside the penalty-area, in which case the kick must be retaken. As for the instructor, his most appropriate response would have been to say that he would look into it and come back to the class with the answer.

Question:

How much attention should be paid to the movement of the goalie’s feet during a PK or during kicks from the mark?

If the referee is keeping the responsibility for the goalie’s feet during the taking of the kick and also watching the kicker to ensure that the kick is taken properly (as well as possibly for encroachment) he/she will have to use peripheral vision to monitor the goalie’s feet. I have been told recently “not to worry too much” about the goalie’s feet because “generally” a goalie will guess one way and commit to a dive to that side of the goal.

If that’s the case (one should not worry too much about the goalie’s feet) then what would constitute “gamesmanship” on the part of the goalie during the taking of the kick?

Answer (June 8, 1996):

Book response: Retake the kick if the goalkeeper moves his/her feet or leaves the line early and a goal is not scored during the taking of a penalty kick or a kick from the penalty mark. Practical response: There is a (growing) tendency among referees to overlook the movement of the ‘keeper’s feet if it is minimal. I do not condone this, but must acknowledge that it does occur. We can go as far back as the 1986 World Cup for splendid examples of FIFA referees allowing ridiculous amounts of movement by the goalkeepers. If you are fully satisfied that the ‘keeper’s movement had little effect on the shot or the shooter, let it go.

Gamesmanship on the part of goalie would include talking trash to the shooter, taking too much time to assume his/her position on the goal-line, or stepping forward prior to the shot to wish the shooter good luck, as well as any other psychological tricks of that sort. Anything calculated to break the concentration of the shooter could be considered as gamesmanship on the part of the goalkeeper.

Question 1:

A player commits a hard tackle worthy of a caution after the ball has been played away. The referee applies the advantage, and the same defender tackles the next player after he makes his pass, also worthy of a caution. The advantage continues to be realized and the shot goes awry. Now the referee comes back to deal with the defender who has committed a cautionable offense, and before the referee can issue the caution he commits a second cautionable offense. The question is: Is the proper mechanic here to show the yellow and then the red, or just show the red?

Answer (June 2, 1996):

In this particular sequence of events, the referee must account for both cautionable offenses: caution/show yellow card for the first offense, caution/show yellow card for the second offense, and then send off/show red card for the second cautionable offense. (This action would always have been correct, but was clarified in the changes to the Laws for 1996 by the IFAB during their meeting in Rio in March.)

Question 2:

A defender gains possession of a bouncing ball and comes under pressure from an attacker. The ‘keeper calls for the ball. In a panic, the defender intentionally kicks the ball back to his keeper to use his feet to clear the ball. Because the ball is bouncing and he is under pressure, the defender makes a poor pass to his ‘keeper. The ‘keeper is off his line, and the ball goes over his head, however the ‘keeper does get a hand to it. Nonetheless, the ball continues into the goal. The question is: Can the referee apply the advantage and award the goal or must he award an indirect free kick for the pass back?

Answer:

The referee should apply the advantage and award the goal. (You can’t award an indirect free-kick for the _pass_ to the ‘keeper. The infringement occurs when the ‘keeper handles the ball deliberately passed to him/her by a teammate. In this case, the referee should play the advantage.)

Question 1:

During an under 14 game, the goalie was given a red card for touching a ball while he was clearly outside the penalty area. This infraction happened just seconds before the half. The goalie left the field and was replaced by a player already on the field. When the second half started, the team which should have been playing short sent 11 players onto the field. The team scored two goals before someone noticed that the team was not playing one player down. The referee asked the coach to identify the last substitution. He then cautioned the player and allowed the two goals to stand.

Answer (June 2, 1996):

The referee’s action was inappropriate. No caution. The goals cannot be allowed to stand. The game must be abandoned and replayed another day. In addition, the referee (and assistant referees, if there were any) should be stoned, suspended for a minimum of one year for inability to count, and sent to school for retraining in basic mathematics.

Question 2:

Prior to the start of an under-12 game, a coach had just 11 players. However, one player arrived at the field just before the whistle blew. He took a position on the field. The team played with 12 men on the field for most of the game. They had a 5 - 2 advantage until a parent noticed that there were too many players on the field. The referee stopped the game, cautioned the player, and let all five goals stand.

Answer (June 2, 1996):

The game must be abandoned and replayed another day. No caution. Once again, the referee (and any assistant referees) should be suspended and sent back to school for remedial arithmetic.

Question 3:

At an under-10 game, one team played with 10 men on the field instead of the maximum 9 during the third quarter. Under-10’s play quarters and no substitutions are allowed during the quarter. The team with the man advantage scored twice during the quarter. The referee disallowed the two goals and cautioned the coach.

Answer (June 2, 1996):

Where do you get these officials? You must be making these Question up! The coach cannot be cautioned unless the rules of the competition allow it. The game must be abandoned and replayed another day. Remedial training in all aspects of the game (and arithmetic) for all officials concerned.

Question:

During a recent Youth game the goalkeeper for Red was judged by the Referee to have deliberately attempted to stop the attacking Blue player on an obvious goalscoring opportunity. The Red goalkeeper was also injured on this play. The Referee, fearing additional injury to the Red goalkeeper, whistled the play quickly dead, even though the ball did enter the net. The question here is regarding the Referee’s allowing the Red team to remove a field player and substitute for the keeper who was sent off as per instructions for these circumstances, a goal keeper from the bench for the taking of the penalty kick which he awarded.

Answer (May 31, 1996):

The referee’s action in allowing Red to bring on a new ‘keeper in exchange for the field player was absolutely correct. Red is required by Law III to have a goalkeeper. Because the original goalkeeper was sent off, Red would have to sacrifice one of the field players to bring on a new ‘keeper. The only action that _might_ have been better left undone was the sudden stoppage, taking away the opponents’ goal, but you didn’t ask that question .

Question:

Team A was giving a direct free kick and asked for the ten yards for Team B. The wall was set and team A approached the ball to make the kick, feigned the kick and stopped at the ball, at the same moment team B had a player run forward expecting the ball to be kicked. Team complained of encroachment and wanted the player carded. In the spirit of the game I felt that team B would not actually be encroaching if the ball had been kicked and that team A was using trickery in trying to draw them into a position of encroachment. In this light, although the laws say that encroachment is a caution, I simply told team B not to move forward until the ball has been played and also told team A to quit horsing around and get the ball in play. This occurred in a 14 yr. youth game. Was this the correct action to take or should I have carded the player as the law states.

Answer (May 22, 1996):

Yes, you should have cautioned and shown the yellow card to the player for encroachment. This tactic is not considered to be trickery, but a natural part of the game. The answer is found the FIFA Q&A, Q. 7 regarding Law XII: “7. All the defenders are properly lined up at the stipulated distance of 9.15 m (10 yards). The referee signals for the free-kick to be taken and the attackers . . . apply tactics devised to break up the wall. Very quickly the first attacker runs over the ball without touching it, a second attacker does exactly the same immediately after, which has the effect of making one or two of the defenders move forward, whereupon the third attacker kicks the ball which is parried by one of the defenders who is no longer at the stipulated distance.”

Answer:

“The free-kick carried out in this manner is correct and the players who have formed a wall at 9.15 m distance from the ball must not come forward. The referee could have the free-kick retaken if the ball struck one of the players who had advanced from the wall and thus failed to adhere to the stipulated distance before the ball had traveled the distance of its circumference or he could choose to allow advantage to the attacking team. The player or players guilty of encroachment should be cautioned.”

Question:

In an extreme case, player A is in an offside position, 20 yards ahead of the second-to-last defender. His teammate passes the ball to player A and the offside call is made. Where is the proper placement for the free kick, where the pass was made, at the second-to-last defender, or where player A was when the pass was made?

Answer (May 20, 1996): The indirect free-kick must be taken at the place where the attacking player was when the ball was last played by his teammate. In this case, it will be at the spot 20 yards ahead of the second-to-last defender.

Question: When may substitutions be made? I have found no reference in the laws. If I have missed them, please direct me.

Answer (May 22, 1996):

Some competitions place restrictions on substitutions, limiting them to certain stoppages, but the Laws of the Game specify merely that substitutions will occur during a stoppage in play. You will find the reference in Law III, paragraph (5)©, which says: “[the substitute] shall enter the field during a stoppage in the game, and at the halfway line;” In the LOTG the section in Law XII that refers to the goalkeepers seems somewhat unclear to novice referees. One instructor I questioned said, “Don’t worry about that, you’ll probably never ref at that level.” Please help to clarify: 1. A player may not charge a goalkeeper except when the goalkeeper is holding the ball. 2. Exactly what is a parry. 3. When is the ball considered to have been put in play by the keeper? 4. If the Keeper sets the ball on the ground and pushes it forward with his hands, is it then playable by the other team?

Answers(May 22, 1996):

1. Precisely what Law XII, 4 says: The ‘keeper may be charged when he (or she) is holding the ball—or has passed outside his goal-area or is obstructing an opponent. In all cases, that means that the charge must be fair.

2. A “parry” literally means that the goalkeeper was able to prevent the ball from going into the goal by pushing it away, but that is not precisely what is meant in the Law. In 1991, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) rewrote what was then IFAB Decision 12 to Law XII (now IFAB Decision 15) to include “parrying” the ball as possession on the part of the ‘keeper. Under the Law it means that the goalkeeper pushes the ball down to a spot where he or she can then play it, rather than making a true defensive save of a shot. If the ‘keeper plays the ball again with his hands after parrying it, the referee must award an indirect free-kick to the opponents from the spot where the ‘keeper touched the ball (with the exceptions noted in Law XIII).

3. The ball is considered to have been put in play by the goalkeeper when he releases it from his hands. It may then be played by any other player.

4. Yes—or by a teammate.

Situation: An IFK is awarded to the blue team outside the red team’s penalty area. The first blue team member approaches the ball and gently taps the ball to a second member of his own team, who then kicks the ball into the net. The “tap” had not caused the ball to travel the distance of its own circumference before the second player kicked the ball. The ball was untouched by any other player after the second player made the kick.

Question:

a. Does this goal count or does the ball have to travel the distance of its own circumference before the second player’s kick can count? b. Further, if the second blue player had kicked the ball into another player (either blue or red) and then the ball had entered the net, would that count since the initial kick/pass did not travel the distance of its own circumference?

Answers(April 29, 1996):

a. The goal does not count. The ball must be put into play properly, i.e., have traveled the distance of its own circumference from the first blue player’s touch, before the second player’s kick can count. b. Even if a “third” person had touched the ball before it went into the goal, it would not have counted in this case because the ball had been moved illegally and was not in play (had not traveled the distance of its own circumference) and the kick by the second player was not taken from the proper spot. However, if the second player had moved the ball _back to the original spot_ and then taken the kick legally, the goal would count. (Obviously, the alert referee would have recognized what was happening and would not have punished the second player for an infringement of any sort for putting the ball back in the proper position for the indirect free-kick.)

Question:

When is the ball in play on a throw-in? Some think the entire ball must pass entirely over the line into the field of play and others say if the ball breaks the plane it’s in.

Answer (April 22, 1996):

The whole of the ball does not need to cross the touch-line into the field for the ball to be in play. The ball is in play the moment any portion of it breaks the vertical plane of the touch-line. If it then curves back out again, then the referee should award a throw-in to the other team. Practically speaking, however, many referees seem to lack the courage to do this; they merely have the throw taken again.

Question:

Can you provide guidance on how to determine when the contact passes from your answer of March 20 regarding a “fair charge” of the goalkeeper a response by Vinnie Mauro given to the following question: The keeper has made a save in the goal area and is then fairly charged into the goal by an attacker who is shoulder to shoulder with the keeper. Mr. Mauro’s response was that the referee should award an indirect free kick to the goalkeeper’s team.

Answer (April 18, 1996):

Answer assumes that you are referring to this response of March 20:

“Question:

“The meaning of Law XII 4a continues to baffle me. It seems to be generally accepted that once a goalkeeper takes possession of the ball, an opposing player may not attempt to dislodge it or otherwise interfere with the goalkeeper’s attempt to put the ball back in play. So under what circumstance can an attacker charge the GK legally while he is “holding the ball”? Can you describe such a circumstance?

“Answer (March 20, 1996):

“As long as the goalkeeper merely stands with the ball in his possession, he is fair game for a fair charge by an opponent. It is only when the ‘keeper begins to put the ball in play and an opponent charges or otherwise interferes with the attempt that an infringement would occur.”

Answer is technically correct, provided that the opponent does not charge the ‘keeper carelessly, recklessly, or with the use of disproportionate force. However, _despite its correctness under the terms of Law XII_, Answer does not reflect the reality of the way in which soccer is called today. Each of us would acknowledge that it is next to impossible to fulfill the requirements for a fair charge of the goalkeeper in any case, as he/she usually moves fairly quickly to get rid of the ball after collecting it or is on the ground, making any sort of charge an infringement of the law. Because of this, many referees, even at the highest levels, deem any charge of the goalkeeper an infringement. I would not be surprised to see some change of Law XII in the near future to reflect this reality. This would be entirely in line with the recent change of the International Board’s change on advantage, which merely puts into practice what top referees have been doing for many years.

Question:

Do we penalize a player in the offside position if he receives the ball from a team-mate via a deflection off of an opposing player? What if the opposing player is attempting to play the ball? What if he is not? My “take” on the current philosophy is that the contact with the opposing player does not excuse the advantage gained by the player in the offside position. Is this a correct interpretation?

Answer (May 9, 1996):

Your “take” is correct. The referee should punish the player in the offside position for offside if he was in an offside position and involved in active play when the ball was played by his teammate. The deflection by the opponent has no effect on the decision.

Question:

How does the referee regard players inside the net or on the goaline in judging the offside and the scoring of a goal? During corner kicks defenders take positions up at the posts. These players may be on the field, on the line or in the goal. Keeping in mind that a defender may not place an opponent in an offside position by leaving the field, do we consider them to be on the field when judging offside? Also, what if a player were in the net, his feet outside the goal line, and were to prevent the ball from entering the goal (not using the arms or hands)? Is this an example of serious foul play? Do they become outside agents for purposes of restart; do we award the penalty or do we drop the ball subject to the Laws of the Game?

Answer (May 9, 1996):

A complicated question, which I will answer in two parts. (a) The referee should not be too concerned about punishing players for “leaving” the field of play at corner kicks or in any other situation unless it is obvious that the player means to place an opponent in an offside position. (For punishable infringements of this sort, see the FIFA Q&A for Law XI, No. 4.) Players are allowed to leave the field during dynamic play to keep the ball in play or to avoid or get around an opponent while playing a ball close to the touch- or goal-line. (b) A defender who goes slightly off the field to play a ball that remains on the field should not be punished if his/her act does not otherwise infringe the Laws. That applies to defenders who stand at or near the post during a corner kick or during a free-kick. If such a defender plays the ball legally, i.e., without using the hands or arms, there is no infringement. This should certainly not be considered serious foul play and the players do not become outside agents, and no free-kick or other punishment should be meted out.

Question:

1. For a goal kick, must the ball be wholly placed within the goal box? 2. For a place kick to be in play, can a part of the ball be vertically over the half field line? Is that line part of both halves of the field?

Answers(May 7, 1996):

1. No. As long as a portion of the ball is still within the line marking the goal-area, the requirements of the Law are met. 2. No. On a place-kick, the ball must move across the halfway line into the opponents’ half of the field and travel at least the distance of its circumference to be in play. Yes, the line is part of both halves of the field.

Question:

A. Is there a specific section of the Laws that provides for the dismissal of a coach (or other team official)? B. How specific can the referee be in the dismissal? For example, can the referee dismiss the coach to the parking lot, or from the soccer complex? It would seem that if the referee isn’t specific, the coach could remain in the area (and further disrupt the game) until the referee dismissed him/her some more.

Answers(May 7, 1996):

A. The coach and other team officials are referred to in only one portion of the Laws, International Board Decision 14 of Law V, which says: “The coach may convey tactical instructions to players during the match. “The coach and other officials, however, must remain within the confines of the technical area, where such an area is provided and they must conduct themselves, at all times, in a responsible manner.”

The referee’s power to dismiss coaches or team officials is not explicitly stated in the Laws of the Game, but is implicit in the statement that these people “must conduct themselves . . . in a responsible manner.” If they do not, they may be dismissed. This is further bolstered in the FIFA Question and Answers, Q6 of Law V: “Is the referee empowered to order team officials away from the boundary lines of the field of play? “Yes, the referee has the right to take such measures even if the match is being played on a public ground.”

B. When the coach or other team official is dismissed, that person must move to such a distance that he or she will not be able to interfere in any way in the further conduct of the game. That is why you will see coaches being escorted out of stadiums under the eye of security guards in professional games—to ensure they will not create any further disruption. If the coach does not move away, then the referee has the power to terminate the game and must report everything in full to the authorities. (Of course he or she would have to report the dismissal of the coach or anyone else in any event.)

Question:

In a recent U-18 one of my forwards was called offsides when at the time the ball was played he had both feet on our side of the halfway line. The linesman said that even though both feet were on our side of the field, he was leaning forward and his head had broken the imaginary plane of the halfway line and was thus offsides. Apparently, this is an extension of the interpretation that when two players are “even” but the offensive player’s upper torso is visible beyond the defensive player, the offensive player is in an offside position. Is this correct?

Answer (May 1, 1996):

The linesman was _not_ correct in his application of the Law, at least insofar as it involves offside at the halfway line. What follows is an _unofficial_ interpretation that will become _official_ in the very near future for all USSF referees:

1.(a) If the player’s toes are on the halfway line, but not over the line, there would be no offside

. (b) If the player’s feet are on the halfway line, with the toes over the line (heels on his own side), there could be offside.

2. If the player has one foot over the line and one foot completely on his own side, there could be offside.

3. If the player has both feet on his own side of the line, but his head or hands extend over the line, there would be no offside. (It would not be justifiable to count the head or hands, as we usually judge offside based on the torso. An instance of a player with both feet completely on his own side and his body over and beyond the line and still ready to take an active part in play would be improbable at best.)

Question:

Is the law supposed to be enforced when ANY attempt is made to slide tackle from behind or only when the player trips an opponent? More specifically, if the defender slides from behind but gets the ball without making contact with the attacker, and the attacker then falls over the defender, would the law be enforced at this point? Also, when it is enforced, is it ALWAYS a mandatory send off or are there instances when only a caution should be applied?

Answer (April 29, 1996):

This answer comes straight from the USSF Memorandum addressed to all referees, assistant referees, coaches, and players who will participate in youth, amateur, or open cup competitions this year. I hope it answers Question.

(a) A sliding tackle with one or both legs is permissible if, in the opinion of the referee, it is not dangerous. If, however, the player making the tackle, instead of making contact with the ball, trips his opponent, the referee shall award a direct free kick to the opposing team and shall caution the offending player.

(b) A tackle from behind which is violent, with little or no attempt to play the ball, is prohibited and will be punished by a direct free kick and an ordering off.

Question:

Team A is setting up the wall for a free kick by Team B. A player on Team A stands on his hands (unsupported by any of his teammates). This of course, effectively makes him a bit taller. There is nothing explicitly prohibiting his actions in the Laws of the Game. What should the referee do?

Answer (April 12, 1996):

It is difficult for me to imagine a player who would be so stupid as to stand on his hands at a free-kick, or to imagine teammates who would let their attention and energies be diverted to holding him up. It would prevent any of the players involved from reacting quickly once the kick was taken, which would certainly be to their detriment. Nevertheless, I am sure it could happen.

The solution is easy: Because the player is assuming a ludicrous position, not in keeping with the normal standards of the game, the referee should caution him immediately, before the kick is taken, for ungentlemanly conduct. The reason to be written in the referee’s report would be that the player put the game into disrepute through his action. (This preventive action also keeps the referee from having to make difficult decisions later if the ball hits the player’s hand or arm.)

Question A, B, and C:

A) Law XII Q&A #18 appeals to Law XII 5(b) in the answer, but this does not seem to be pertinent. Should it really reference 5(d)? If yes, I would like to have this explained further because Law XII 5 starts with the phrase “When playing as a goalkeeper..”. Is it not true that a goalkeeper(even in the penalty area) passing the ball back and forth with another player with his feet is playing as a field player and not as the goalkeeper and thus should not be penalized for wasting time?

B) What is the call if a goalkeeper (under pressure from an attacker) goes outside the penalty area, dribbles the ball with his feet into the area, and then picks it up? What is the call if there is no pressure from the opposing team?

C) Does the age level of the players affect the call?

Answers(April 9, 1996):

A. The Q&A desperately needs to be reworked and updated. One of the people responsible says it is a project for 1996-1997, so we shall have to live with what we have for another year or so. Meanwhile, you are absolutely correct—the reference should be Law XII 5(d), rather than 5(b). The Law was rewritten in 1993 and new paragraphs 5(b) and © were inserted, but the Q&A has not been updated since November 1990. Further to Question. The answer to Question 18 still applies: If the referee deems that the action of the goalkeeper is deliberately intended to waste time, then the referee should award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.

B. As long as the goalkeeper has not previously had possession of the ball with his hands and then released it into play—and as long as the referee does not deem the action to be deliberately intended to waste time—then the goalkeeper may dribble the ball with his feet out of the area and back in again and then pick it up. It makes no difference whether there is pressure from the opposing team; however, most teams love to catch the opposing goalkeeper in a situation where he has to dribble rather than pick up the ball. The critical point will be the referee’s opinion as to whether or not the goalkeeper is wasting time. My opinion would be that a goalkeeper not under pressure who did as you describe would probably be wasting time.

C. No, the age level of the players does not affect the call.

Question:

I play soccer, and it is my favorite sport, but I don’t know all the penalties. How can you tell if someone jumps in (charges)?

Answer (April 12, 1996):

You have asked me to describe two different actions. Let’s give it a try. “Jumping at” means the player doing the jumping has left his (or her) feet and launched himself through the air toward the person who is being jumped at. In doing this, the jumper is paying no attention to the ball, but is jumping to distract (or possibly to hurt) the opponent. This should only occur high on the opponent’s body. The referee will be watching the jumper’s eyes and the direction of the jump to see whether it is a legal action or not. If the impact of the jumper’s body on the opponent is low, at the waist and below, this is probably serious foul play, which should be punished with a sending-off and the showing of a red card. “Charging” is another set of actions altogether. A player may be charged fairly if the ball is within playing distance and the two players are contesting for the ball. That means that the charging player may put his shoulder into the shoulder and upper arm of the opponent when both have at least one foot on the ground, provided it is done at normal contact speed and with normal force. The charge cannot be dangerous or violent. If it is, then the referee should punish it with a caution/yellow card or send-off/red card.

If you need more information, please feel free to ask.

Question:

How do we deal with a soccer goal which is integrated into the uprights of the goalposts for (American) football? There is a parallel bar above the 8’ bar, plus a few vertical bars in between, and of course the extended uprights. What’s appropriate when the ball strikes any of these “extras” and returns to the field of play?

Answer (April 12, 1996):

Goal-kick or corner-kick, as appropriate.

Question:

I do have a question regarding the mechanics of 10 yards on a free kick. In a previous question you stated that if someone is encroaching on a quick free kick the referee must stop play, caution the encroaching player and properly restart.

In the FIFA handbook “Question and Answers to the Laws of the Game” LAW XIII, Question 9, regarding a player playing “a free-kick quickly, with an opponent being only 4.5m from the ball. Should the referee allow this? A. Yes, and even if an opponent intercepts the ball, play shall be allowed to continue.” Is the FIFA handbook outdated, or is your response specific to USSF situations?

Answer (March 18, 1996):

It is the referee’s responsibility and obligation to ensure that the kicking team is able to act without undue interference. I hope the earlier question and Answer indicated that the referee should stop play for encroachment only if it is obvious that the kicking team does not want a quick kick. If not, I must correct that now. The referee is released from his responsibility and obligation to provide the ten yards when it is obvious that the kicking team sees some advantage to itself in putting the ball into play quickly. If they choose to take a quick kick, the kicking team cannot then claim that the opponents encroached if the kick is unsuccessful, nor can the referee do anything but allow play to continue. The referee must judge the actions of the kicking team to determine their intent. The ability to make quick and accurate decisions is one of the primary skills of the successful referee.

Question:

The meaning of Law XII 4a continues to baffle me. It seems to be generally accepted that once a goalkeeper takes possession of the ball, an opposing player may not attempt to dislodge it or otherwise interfere with the goalkeeper’s attempt to put the ball back in play. So under what circumstance can an attacker charge the GK legally while he is “holding the ball”? Can you describe such a circumstance?

Answer (March 20, 1996):

As long as the goalkeeper merely stands with the ball in his possession, he is fair game for a fair charge by an opponent. It is only when the ‘keeper begins to put the ball in play and an opponent charges or otherwise interferes with the attempt that an infringement would occur.

Question:

If an attacking player is dribbling the ball within the opponents’ penalty area and is about to score, and an opponent outside the penalty area throws a rock at him, why is the penalty a free kick from outside the area? I know according to the rules it is, but wouldn’t you think that a more applicable solution to the problem would be a penalty kick, especially being that he was about to score?

Answer (March 20, 1996):

Go figure! Sometimes the Law seems unfair, but it is always consistent. The reason is that the offense is deemed to be committed at the place where the guilty player started the action. In this case, that was outside the penalty area. If the reverse were true, and the guilty player had thrown the stone from within the penalty area at an opponent outside the area, the result would be a penalty kick. These two answers are found in the FIFA Question and Answers under Law XII, Question 16 (throw from inside) and 19 (throwing an object at an opponent).

Question:

1. As I understand the Laws, cards are to be displayed to players, not substitutes, and certainly not technical delegations, physicians, coaches, etc. Is this correct?

2. Further, although the referee must deal with and report misconduct from the time he enters the field of play until he leaves the field of play, is it really appropriate to show a card before or after the game?

Answers(March 20, 1996):

1. The Law requires the showing of the red or yellow card for the expulsion or caution so that everyone is aware of what has happened. This extends to substitutes, who may be cautioned or ordered off (dismissed) for their actions prior to actual legal participation in the game. The referee must shown them the appropriate card. You are absolutely correct about members of the technical delegation, physicians, coaches, etc.

2. No, it is not appropriate to caution or send off a player either before or after the game. Obviously enough, if there is no caution or sending-off, there can be no card. For actions that require punitive action before or after the game, the referee informs the player that the player’s actions are inappropriate and the he/she will report it to the proper authorities.

The cards exist for communication purposes, and such communication is not needed or desirable either before or after a game. The action cannot serve the referee and may indeed create some very real problems.

Question:

A penal foul is called in the box at the end of the half. As the penalty kick is taken time runs out. The keeper blocks the shot but it goes straight up with a lot of spin. The referee calls time expiring as the ball hits the ground and spins into goal. Time is extended for the taking of a penalty but what about the finishing of a kick taken before time has expired.

Answer (March 20, 1996):

The goal should be awarded, as the penalty kick (even in extended time) continues until the ball passes out of play. See FIFA Q&A, Law XIV, 9.2.(d). Although this posits the ball hitting something else first and then the goalkeeper, the principle is the same. See also Q&A, Law XIV, 9.2.(g): “The referee must wait until the ball’s flight is finished and, if it passes entirely over the goal-line, between the goal-posts and beneath the cross-bar, he shall allow the goal and terminate the extended time, if applicable.”

Question:

Red team has 7 players on the field. One red player gets injured and must go to the touchline for treatment. Must the match be abandoned as red team has fewer than 7 players?

Answer (March 20, 1996):

If the rules of the competition require seven players (as recommended by the International Football Association Board), then the match must be abandoned if the player leaves the field for treatment. (Of course, a wise referee might allow the player to sit on the field while he is treated by an attendant who remains off the field. But why would any team want to continue playing with so few players?)

Question:

When the keeper receives a ball kicked to him by an opponent, does the ball he then kicks or throws have to leave the penalty area before his teammate can kick it? If the keeper kicks the ball to a teammate and the teammate kicks it back and the keeper plays it with his feet before any opponent has touched the ball, is it a penalty?

Answer (March 29, 1996):

The answer to both Question is no. A teammate of the goalkeeper may play the ball at any time after the ‘keeper has released it, whether it has left the penalty area or not. In addition, a ‘keeper may always play the ball with his/her feet without fear of any punishment, provided he/she does not commit any infringement at the same time, such as playing dangerously, holding, kicking, tripping, etc. What restrictions are there? The goalkeeper may not touch with his/her hands any ball he/she has released which has then been (a) _deliberately_ kicked to him/her by a teammate (either inside or outside the penalty area) or (b) played in any way by a teammate within the penalty area. (See Law XII, 5(b) and ©, and also Law XII, International Board Decision 16.) Nor may the goalkeeper play with the hands any ball _deliberately_ kicked by a teammate, whether previously released by the ‘keeper or not. The ‘keeper may touch with the hands any ball played by an opponent within the penalty area.

Question:

If the ball is in play and the goalkeeper and an opposing player get into a fight, in the penalty area, and there isn’t any evidence who initiated the action; what would be the restart. I realize that both would receive a red card, but would there be any penalty kicks?

Answer (March 31, 1996):

If you did not see the fight start or have no information from your assistant referee (“The Official Formerly Known as Linesman”) as to the circumstances, then you can do no more than send off (red card) both players and restart by dropping the ball at the place where it was when the violence occurred, except if it was within the goal area at the time, in which case it shall be dropped on that part of the goal area line which runs parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to the where the ball was when play was stopped. (You send them off for violent conduct if they were _not_ contesting for the ball, or for serious foul play if they were contesting for the ball.)

Question:

In a number of corner kick situations, opposing players have stood in front of my goalkeeper, trying to screen him from the play. At what point is this interference?

Answer (April 2, 1996):

Standing in front of the goalkeeper to screen him from play is not an infringement of the Law, unless while doing so the opponents actively prevent the ‘keeper from playing the ball or moving to a position where he can play the ball. In the recently-minted words of the International F.A. Board, if the opponents move with the goalkeeper, they are “impeding the progress” of the goalkeeper to prevent him from having a chance to play the ball; we used to call this “obstruction.” If they merely take up the position and do not interfere to prevent him from playing the ball, they cannot be punished, as they have not committed any infringement. They have just as much right as the goalkeeper to play the ball—as long as that is all they do.

Question:

I do have a question regarding the mechanics of 10 yards on a free kick. In a previous question you stated that if someone is encroaching on a quick free kick the referee must stop play, caution the encroaching player and properly restart.

In the FIFA handbook “Question and Answers to the Laws of the Game” LAW XIII, Question 9, regarding a player playing “a free-kick quickly, with an opponent being only 4.5m from the ball. Should the referee allow this? A. Yes, and even if an opponent intercepts the ball, play shall be allowed to continue.” Is the FIFA handbook outdated, or is your response specific to USSF situations?

Answer (March 18, 1996):

It is the referee’s responsibility and obligation to ensure that the kicking team is able to act without undue interference. I hope the earlier question and Answer indicated that the referee should stop play for encroachment only if it is obvious that the kicking team does not want a quick kick. If not, I must correct that now. The referee is released from his responsibility and obligation to provide the ten yards when it is obvious that the kicking team sees some advantage to itself in putting the ball into play quickly. If they choose to take a quick kick, the kicking team cannot then claim that the opponents encroached if the kick is unsuccessful, nor can the referee do anything but allow play to continue. The referee must judge the actions of the kicking team to determine their intent. The ability to make quick and accurate decisions is one of the primary skills of the successful referee.

Question:

I have two questions for you. One of them is in order to be onsides there has to be two opponents in front of you. But does that mean one defender and the keeper? Or two defenders and the keeper?

The second one is how do you talk to a ref if you want him to look out for something that is going on the field that he is not calling and you want him to, but at the same time you don’t want to get a yellow card.

Answers(March 19, 1996):

1. There is no requirement to have two opponents in front of you. That changed several years ago. Now to be “onside” the player must be no nearer the opponents’ goal than the ball or than the last two opponents, whether one is a goalkeeper or not. That means that the player may be exactly the same distance from the goal as the two opponents, in other words, in line with them.

2. This is a difficult question to answer, because it all depends on how the referee is feeling about himself, the game, and life in general, and on how you phrase what you want to say. Unfortunately, too many players try to distract the referee from other things by telling him (or her) that something is going on elsewhere on the field, so referees have learned to be very cautious about listening to “helpful” comments from players—no matter how legitimate they may really be. However, if you are polite and do not appear to be trying to fool the referee, he will probably acknowledge your statement and may actually even look for the activity you spoke of.

Question:

Player A is in an offside position on the far side of the field. On the near side a teammate, player B, dribbles up the sideline and then heads toward the goal, eventually ending up ahead of player A. Then player B might pass the ball backward to player A. At what point does the player on the far side of the field cease to be in an offside position, even if he is still behind the second-to-last defender? Is it when the ball passes him? If that is true, the spirit of the law would penalize him because he gained an advantage by his positioning even though the ball is closer to the goal than he is.

Answer (March 20, 1996):

The first thing to remember is that it is not a infringement of Law XI to be in an offside position [see paragraph (3)(a)]. Players can stay in offside positions virtually the entire game and never be punished if they do not violate the requirements of paragraph (2) of Law XI. Player A, the player on the far side of the field, was originally in an offside position, but did nothing to infringe Law XI. If the ball were passed _back_ to him A would not be punished, because his earlier position had not gained him any advantage and, given the situation as you described it, he had not interfered with play or with an opponent

Question:

During play, the red goalkeeper receives the ball from a blue attacker and throws it to a red defender. The red defender then heads the ball back to the goalkeeper who picks it up once again. Would this fall under deliberate trickery (International Board Decision 16) under Law 12 or would this qualify as the ‘keeper releasing the ball into play and then handling it before another player of the opposing team touches it, or is this perfectly legal?

Answer (March 21, 1996):

Here we fall back on the Seven Magic Words, “If, in the opinion of the referee,” which leave it to the referee’s knowledge and discretion to decide whether either the red defender or the goalkeeper meant to initiate trickery through this sequence of events. Much depends upon where the red defender was. I cannot tell from your description whether the defender was outside or inside the penalty area. If the defender was outside the area, there would not seem to be any problem; however, if the goalkeeper had used up his four steps and took advantage of the throw to the defender to move nearer to the top of the penalty area, from where he could punt the ball farther, the referee _might_ consider this an attempt to circumvent both the text and spirit of Law XII. If the red defender was inside the penalty area, as soon as the goalkeeper touches the ball with his hands he has infringed Law XII, 5(b), which would be punished through an indirect free-kick to the opponents from the place where the infringement occurred.

Question:

Situation: During the course of play, with the ball at midfield, red team GK and defender decide to exchange places without formally notifying the referee. They have stripped off their former jerseys and now the previous GK and the previous defender are each holding their new jerseys. BEFORE they can put on the jerseys the blue team turns play toward the red goal. Shot is taken. The previous GK who now holds a defender jersey drops the jersey, makes a diving save, and deflects the ball over the end line. Ball would have entered the goal. What is the correct call?

Answer (March 6, 1996):

In the scenario you describe, the change of positions (without the permission of the referee) had already occurred, as each player was holding his new jersey, preparing to don it. The _previous_ goalkeeper is now seen to be an outfield player who has handled the ball deliberately, preventing it from entering the goal. His handling was deliberate. Because he is no longer the goalkeeper within his own penalty area, this violates Law XII(o), leaving the referee no choice but to send off the previous goalkeeper/new defender for serious foul play. The restart is a penalty kick. The referee must also caution the previous defender/new goalkeeper for ungentlemanly conduct for his infringement of Law IV(4). (The indirect free-kick punishment for this offense is superseded by the penalty kick levied against the previous goalkeeper/new defender.)

Question:

One area areas where I cannot seem to get a straight answer is on players wearing casts and goalies wearing baseball hats.

Answer (March 3, 1996):

Casts are always difficult. There is no written policy. It would be impossible to draft one that would cover all the possibilities. Even so-called “soft” casts can become weapons in the (im)proper hands. How can the referee judge a player’s attitude, physical abilities, the climate of the game, and all the other pertinent variables before the game has started? Yet that is what he/she is required to do. My personal recommendation is not to allow any casts for games involving players over age 12, and to allow only extremely well-padded casts in games involving players 12 and under. My concern lies with both parties, the wearer and the possible beneficiary of a love tap from the cast. Both could be injured.

(This difficulty in evaluating casts is one of the reasons that casts worn by players at regional youth tournaments are inspected by a committee, photographed, and tracked throughout the tournament. Too many people complaining that the ref allowed the cast in the last game, why won’t “you” allow it in this one.)

Soft hats are allowed for goalkeepers, but not for anyone else. This is not written policy either, but is in the best soccer tradition. In both cases, if you detect any misuse of the item, whether cast or hat, the offending player must be dealt with immediately and in an appropriate fashion. I can’t prescribe here, again because of the many possibilities.

Question:

Blue GK picks up the ball. A red player is still running and cannot stop. The red player knocks the ball away from the goalkeeper and scores. What should I do next time? This time I let it slide.

Answer (March 3, 1996):

If the goalkeeper had possession of the ball, you cannot award a goal. The next time this happens, immediately stop the game and award a direct free kick to the goalkeeper’s team. Depending upon the severity of the contact by the opposing player, you then have several options. If you believe it to have been a careless act, then you do nothing beyond awarding the direct free kick. If in your opinion it was reckless, then you must also punish the player with a caution. If you think the opponent acted with disproportionate force to knock the ball away, you must also send off that opponent.

Question:

I know that you do not show a card to a coach. Can a coach be cautioned for dissent or ungentlemanly conduct? Or can he only be dismissed for foul or abusive language?

Answer (March 1, 1996):

Working strictly under the Laws of the Game, the coach (or any other person not on the list of players or named substitutes) may only be dismissed—for whatever action caused you to do it. As these persons may not be sent off, you do not need to list one of the four reasons for expulsion or sending-off. You simply write a report describing what the person did and what action you took. The competition authorities will worry about the rest. However, if the competition (league, cup, etc.) you are working for has made modifications to the Laws that allow the coach to be cautioned or sent off, then you may deal with that person as you would with a player or named substitute.

Question:

Team blue kicks ball at team red’s goal so that it hits the top post and drops straight down. Team red’s keeper punches ball out of the goal. Referee signals goal, but linesman stands still and does not sprint back to the eighteen. Referee doesn’t consult with linesman even though linesman isn’t moving. This was a league game and red team lost by one goal. When referee was asked after the game about why he didn’t acknowledge his linesman’s action, or lack thereof, he stated that the goal was in his opinion good and if his linesman disagreed or wished to comment then his linesman should have waved his flag. The linesman, by the way, stated after the play that the ball didn’t break the plane. Were the rules violated by the referee?

Answer (February 28, 1996):

The referee bears the responsibility of making the final decision; however, he should make use of all available information. In this case, the referee has broken the rule of maintaining good communication with his linesman. The proper procedure is for the referee, before signaling that a goal has been scored, to look to the linesman to see if they are in agreement that a goal _has_ indeed been scored. If the linesman agrees, he turns and sprints toward the halfway line. If the linesman disagrees, he stands at attention. The referee can certainly dismiss the linesman’s information without paying attention to it, but this is not the way a good referee conducts himself. The referee will have to consult with the linesman or realize that what the linesman is trying to tell him is that the ball did not completely cross the goal-line under the crossbar and between the goal posts. This matter could and _should_ have been cleared up in the pregame discussion among the officials.

Question:

Is it fair to charge the goalkeeper, in the goal area, when the goalkeeper has possession of the ball? I know in the past that this was legal, but have recently been told that FIFA changed the rule.

Answer (February 26, 1996):

Yes, it is legal to charge the goalkeeper fairly when he/she has possession of the ball in the goal-area. No, there has been no recent change in Law XII regarding this.

Question:

Can a keeper catch the ball take his/her three steps bounce the ball take another three steps and then punt it?

Answer (February 26, 1996):

Not legally. The referee should allow the goalkeeper a step or two to regain balance after gaining possession of the ball, but then the count must begin. After that the goalkeeper is allowed only four steps (and not a whole lot of time) to release the ball back into play.

Question:

An attacker in the off-side position is positioned about six yards from the goal line in the penalty area. He had slipped by the next to last defender, who, seeing him back there, decided to push up to the mid-line and let the linesman take care of him. The attacker’s teammate with the ball sees the attacker open and passes to him. The linesman who has been with the next to last defender sees that the first attacker is indeed the object of the pass and raises his flag to indicate that Law XI has been violated. The referee acknowledges the flag by blowing his whistle. From what spot is the IFK taken? At the position of the attacker on the six or at the position of the next to last defender who is near the midline line when the ball was sent forward?

Answer (February 25, 1996):

According to Law XI, the punishment for offside is an indirect free-kick, to be taken by a player of the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred (unless it was within the goal area). No matter what the position of the linesman or the second-last defender, the kick must be taken from the spot where the offender was at the moment the ball was played. Not at the halfway line with the defender, not wherever the linesman was, but—in this case—at the six-yard line at the top of the goal area. If the infringement had occurred within the goal-area, then the kick would be taken from any point within the goal area.

Question:

Where must the opposing (defending) goalkeeper stand during a penalty-kick? Does the goalkeeper have to stand in the exact center of the goal?

Answer (February 24, 1996):

According to Law XIV, “the opposing goalkeeper must stand (without moving his feet) on his own goal-line, between the goal-posts, until the ball is kicked.” There is no requirement as to precisely where the ‘keeper must stand. He or she may take up a position at _any_ point on the goal-line, whether in the middle or to one side. There is no requirement that the ‘keeper stand exactly in the middle of the goal—if there were, then there would be a mark there to ensure compliance.

Question:

As a first year referee, I believe that the moment the referee begins the second half, she therefore recognizes/acknowledges all the players on the field of play. Therefore, whether the substitution of a field player or a goal keeper took place during the half time interval and the referee was not notified; the problem posed in question 16 would be a moot point. Please let me know if my train of thought and procedure is clear on this matter. (Once a referee begins a game or a play, everybody on the field is recognized.)

Answer (February 22, 1996)

Ah, if only things were that simple. Logically, Question and reasoning are without fault. Where you go off the track is in the area of procedure. Unfortunately, the Laws of the Game do not always recognize logic, no matter how impeccable. The incoming _substitute, soon to be a player, is required by Law III to follow certain steps before actually becoming a _player_ in the game. Although we have modified these steps in our “mob” substitutions for youth and some amateur games, the requirement is still there.

First, the referee must be informed of the proposed substitution. Second, the player leaving the game has to be off the field, at which time the substitute may be signaled on by the referee. This must be done from the halfway line at a stoppage in play. The player who left may no longer participate—but “mob” substitution does away with that, doesn’t it? The substitution is completed only when the substitute enters the field and becomes a player. (This is all spelled out in Law III, paragraphs (5)(a)-(f).

Ever since the Law was rewritten to include substitution, the act has not been authorized without the permission of the referee. The burden is on the substitute to ensure that the rules are followed. If not, then he or she must pay the consequences. That certainly does not relieve the referee of the unwritten obligation to keep herself out of trouble through preventive refereeing.

Question:

An indirect free kick is awarded to the blue team just outside of the red team’s penalty area. One player on the blue team places his foot on the ball and “rolls” it the required distance. Another blue player kicks the ball and scores. Is the “rolling” of the ball legal, even with only the one touch by the player?

Answer (February 20,1996)

In a word, no. The ball must be kicked to be put into play. The simple rolling of the ball by the blue player, who moves the ball by placing his foot on it and rolling it along, does not constitute “kicking” and thus does not meet the requirements of the Law. No goal can be awarded. The kick must be retaken.

Question:

In a U-19 Boys match, Blue goalkeeper collects ball along left side of the penalty area (as referee is looking at goal). Red player occupies area directly in front of ‘keeper and does not move. Since the ‘keeper is a right-footed kicker, he is pinned along edge of PA and cannot punt ball. I allow play to continue as no foul (that I can think of) has occurred. The ‘keeper rolls the ball out of the penalty-area and kicks it out of bounds to get out of the situation. Later in same game Red goalkeeper collects ball and a Blue player runs in front of the ‘keeper’s path impairing his ability to kick the ball. I whistle foul, caution Blue player (for ungentlemanly conduct) and restart with an indirect free-kick for Red. Did I apply the Law correctly in each situation?

Answer (February 5, 1996):

In a word, no. Your action in the second case was correct. Although not spelled out in the Law, preventing the goalkeeper from releasing the ball into play certainly could constitute ungentlemanly conduct. In the first instance, you should have applied the same principle: The Red player intervened so as to form an obstacle for the goalkeeper, with the aim of delaying his advance. This must be sanctioned with an indirect free-kick in favor of the opposing team (Blue). This is covered under International F.A. Board Decision 7 to Law XII: If a player impedes the progress of the opposing goalkeeper, in an attempt to prevent him from putting the ball into play in accordance with Law XII, 5(a), the referee shall award an indirect free-kick. Once again, a caution for ungentlemanly conduct would not be counter to the Spirit of the Game.

Question:

On a goal kick, the ball is kicked beyond the penalty-area into the field of play. A teammate of the goalkeeper kicks the ball directly back to the goalkeeper, who touches it but does not prevent it from entering the goal. Should the referee invoke the advantage clause and award a goal, or should he award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team?

Answer (February 2, 1996):

To quote Bob Evans yet again, “The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players.” The goalkeeper was foolish enough to touch the ball without saving it from entering the goal; his ineptness should not be rewarded by recalling a perfectly legitimate goal. The referee should invoke the advantage clause and award the goal.

Question:

On a slide tackle, a referee must consider what happens to the ball and the opponent before judging what punishment (if any) to award. There are four cases:

BALL OPPONENT Punishment

contacts first trips/accidental none

no contact trips/accidental DFK

no contact hits directly/careless DFK + caution

no contact behind&violent/intent DFK + Send Off

In the FIFA 1995 Laws, it appears that cases 2 and 3 have been combined - see page 35. Is this a correct interpretation?

Answer (February 6, 1996):

No. Your premise of four cases is flawed. Let’s look at the problem in a different way, considering the sliding tackle to be tripping (see p. 35):

The International F.A. Board changed Law XII this year to simplify decision-making for referees and to reflect the spirit of the recent mandatory instructions issued by FIFA (since 1990). Law XII now specifies six offenses committed “in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless, or involving disproportionate force.” (One of these offenses is tripping.) Regarded in the light of the recent mandatory instructions, “careless” can be directly equated to punishment through a direct free-kick, “reckless” to punishment through a direct free-kick and a caution (yellow card), and “involving disproportionate force” to a direct free-kick and a sending-off (red card).

The example referred to in additional instruction 2(a) on p. 35 of the July 1995 “FIFA Laws of the Game and Guide for Referees,” published by the U. S. Soccer Federation, shows “reckless” tackling, punished with a caution in addition to the direct free-kick.

Question:

Please clarify: A goalie may be charged when he/she has possession of the ball. A goalie is considered to be in control of the ball when he/she takes possession of it by touching it with any part of his/her hands or arms. If the above is true, then why would an opponent be considered at foul for kicking the ball out of a goalie’s hand? Is it because “a goalie may be charged” but “the ball can’t be kicked out of his hands”?

Answer(February 4, 1996):

It is considered dangerous for a player to attempt to kick the ball from the hands of the goalkeeper. That is precisely the scenario given in Law V, 1, as one example of dangerous play, punishable by an indirect free-kick. The Law goes on, in 4, to describe when the goalkeeper may be charged fairly.

Question:

Ball is in red half of field controlled by red player. Blue player in offside position. Red player makes pass to teammate, but blue player runs and intercepts the pass. Offside? Law XI would seem to indicate that a player in offside position is penalized only when a pass is made from a teammate.

Answer (February 2, 1996):

Your reading of Law XI is absolutely correct. Although clearly in an offside position, the red player can never be offside in a situation where the ball is passed by a blue player.

Your original question (answered January 22, 1996):

At the half one team substituted their goal keeper (and probably other players as well) and the referee began the second half without taking any action. A defender played a ball into the penalty area and the new goalie fielded it with her hands. At that point the referee blew his whistle and awarded an indirect kick on the 6 which led to the tieing goal. I know this was wrong, but what should the referee have done?

Subsequent question 1:

1. The referee having signaled the start of the second half with the substitutes (field and ‘keeper) on the field in place as players, (also having asked the ‘keeper if she was ready), has he not tacitly and perhaps implicitly

acknowledged the substitution? This call was not made immediately on the kick-off sequence, but 10-15 minutes into the half.

Answer (January 29, 1996):

Both—which brings up a procedural point in game mechanics: The referee should never _ask_ the ‘keeper is _she_ is ready. The referee who is in control of the match _tells_ the ‘keeper, through the agency of the linesmen as they check the nets and goals prior to kick-off, that he/she is about the begin the half. (To preclude Question, that is not arrogance, it is proper procedure and good psychology to let the players know who is in charge of the match.) Now, back to your point: Yes, by asking the ‘keeper if she is ready, the referee has acknowledged her existence and looks a fool if he later stops the match to punish her for being in the game. That is why the referee should always look for and even ask if there were changes in the lineup on the field before starting the half. This is one of the problems we encounter through allowing multiple in-and-out substitutions in so many competitions in the United States; it makes the officials less aware of who is or is not part of the match.

Subsequent question 2:

2. Where should the indirect kick take place? The infringement occurred at the halfway line when the keeper first entered the field of play. Should not the indirect take place at the spot of the infringement?

Answer (January 29, 1996):

If the referee stops the play to administer the caution, he must award the indirect free-kick by a player of the opposing team from the place where the ball was when play was stopped, subject to the overriding conditions imposed in Law XIII. (In other words, if the ball was in the goal-area, then the kick must be taken from that spot on the six-yard line parallel to the goal-line that is nearest to where the ball was within the goal-area when the referee stopped the play.) That was the official, book answer. The referee would display much more common sense and knowledge of the game by allowing the ball to go out of play and then cautioning the goalkeeper. He or she would display the most common sense of all by remaining alert to who was on the field and who was not prior to the half-time break and using preventive means to eliminate the need for a caution and game stoppage altogether.

Question:

An attacking player is attempting to make a pass from the center of the field, just outside the penalty area, to a teammate in an offside position outside the penalty area about six yards from the goal line. Well before the ball reaches the offside player, a defender intercepts the pass with his hands while in the penalty area. Recognizing that offside occurs when the ball was last played by a member of the same team, should this be offside or a PK?

Answer (January 28, 1996):

The judgment of offside is made at the moment the teammate of the player in the offside position plays the ball to him; the referee usually waits a moment before actually giving the decision to see what will happen. Under the “Letter of the Law,” the decision must be for a penalty-kick, as the referee had not yet blown his whistle for the offside offense, and you will never be _wrong_ if you write it that way on a test. A decision for the penalty-kick would be strictly by the book. However, we do not referee games in the testing room and must remember to temper our refereeing with some common sense. Although it is true, as Bob Evans loves to point out, that the Laws were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players, the referee would be wise to call offside in this case. The “Spirit of the Game,” as opposed to the “Letter of the Law,” dictates that the attacking team not be allowed to gain an advantage over the defending team in such situations. Every referee should put the Spirit of the Game ahead of the Letter of the Law.

Question:

Last fall while competing in our zone playdown, I executed a flip throw-in, and had it called foul. The throw was done according to the laws of the game, and when I asked the linesman who called the foul, he told me that F.I.F.A. had changed the laws to make that play illegal. Was the linesman correct? Also, a player gets on his knees and heads the ball back to his goal keeper (avoiding the passback rule). Is there a rule against this? If so what are the proper procedures?

Answer (January 26, 1996)

Re the throw-in: If properly executed, the flip throw-in is perfectly legal. As long as both feet are on the ground, on or outside the touch-line, and the ball is delivered from over the head with both hands, you have done it correctly. The linesman must have been thinking about the kneeling throw-in, which is illegal.

Re the pass to the goalkeeper: The situation you describe is regarded as trickery. The player is trying to get around the restriction against the ‘keeper using his hands to play a ball deliberately kicked to him by a teammate. This infringement is punished through a caution to the player who headed the ball. The referee should award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team from the spot where the player headed the ball.

Question:

At the half one team substituted their goal keeper (and probably other players as well) and the referee began the second half without taking any action. A defender played a ball into the penalty area and the new goalie fielded it with her hands. At that point the referee blew his whistle and awarded an indirect kick on the 6 which led to the tieing goal. I know this was wrong, but what should the referee have done?

Answer (January 22, 1996)

The referee’s solution to the problem was almost correct. Because he stopped the game to deal with the situation, he was obliged to award the indirect free-kick. Unfortunately, he should also have cautioned the new goalkeeper, as required by paragraph © under Punishment in Law III. The referee could have saved himself some trouble and possible later problems by doing two things: First, he could have asked the players if there had been any change at the half, thus eliminating any possibility for confusion and aggravation. Second, as Law III does not require immediate stoppage of the game to punish this infringement, he could have permitted the play to continue, even after spotting the new goalkeeper, and cautioned her later, after the ball had gone out of play, thus avoiding the indirect free-kick for a relatively trifling offense. Why ask for trouble when there is so much of it already available in the game? The referee who takes the time and makes the effort to anticipate and prevent problems in the game is the referee who will succeed.

Question:

On a corner kick, a short kick is trapped and stopped by the kicker’s teammate. The kicker then plays the ball. If the kicker is in an offside position at the time the ball is trapped by his teammate, should this be considered offside?

Answer (January 22, 1996):

Yes, the referee should penalize the original kicker for offside. The kicker has come from an offside position to play the ball. The maneuver took the referees at the 1994 World Cup by surprise as well. The first time it occurred the referee and linesman failed to deal with the situation properly, but this was quickly corrected. (The point is well illustrated in the new USSF training videotape on Offside, available from the Federation office in Chicago for about $8.00.)

Question:

At the half one team substituted their goal keeper (and probably other players as well) and the referee began the second half without taking any action. A defender played a ball into the penalty area and the new goalie fielded it with her hands. At that point the referee blew his whistle and awarded an indirect kick on the 6 which led to the tieing goal. I know this was wrong, but what should the referee have done?

Answer (January 22, 1996)

The answer can be found in the FIFA publication, “Question and Answers to the Laws of the Game” (normally referred to simply as the “Q&A”), p. 8, which contains the following:

16. A player changes places with the goalkeeper during half-time without informing the referee. The new goalkeeper who then enters the field of play touches the ball with his hand during the second half. What should be the referee’s decision?

a) Allow play to continue.

b) Caution both players when the ball goes out of play.

By stopping the game and then restarting incorrectly, the referee committed an error that could have led to a successful protest if the team that scored had won the game because of it. Obviously the referee could have saved himself some trouble and possible later problems by asking the players if there had been any change at the half and eliminating any possibility for confusion and aggravation. Why ask for trouble when there is so much of it already available in the game? The referee who takes the time and makes the effort to anticipate and prevent problems in the game is the referee who will succeed.

Question:

What should I do about trying to enforce some of the least-enforced rules: (a) 4-steps by the goal keeper; (b) one revolution forward on the kick-off before the pass back, and © no movement by the goalkeeper on PKs. I feel like I am swimming upstream for no reason. What are these rules for if no one enforces them?

And, “no jewelry”. Just watch the professional games and see what they wear.

Answer:

These are problems for referees all over the world, forced upon us by colleagues who are reluctant to appear as “bad guys” or who see no harm in such “trivial” infringements. Let’s look at them one at a time.

(a) First, the four steps by the goalkeeper. As with any other pesky violation, you must try to stop the infringement at the first occurrence. There is usually no need to stop the game and award a free kick. Just have a _friendly_ word with the goalkeeper, reminding him or her what the proper number of step is and perhaps adding that you would hate to have to stop the match and award a free kick to the opponents for something so trifling. If that doesn’t do the trick, then you must follow through by stopping the game and awarding the kick. (b) Second, the ball moving forward its circumference before the pass back. Something even more insidious that we see violated even more frequently and egregiously is the positioning of the players for the place kick. How many times have you seen members of the kicking team standing in the opponents’ half of the field? Many, I am sure, and they include both the kickers and people farther out on the wings. In a Dutch game last month I saw players from both teams well into their opponents’ halves of the field on at least two kickoffs. It is pure sloppiness on the part of the referee, not wishing to appear to be an evil disciplinarian. © Goalkeeper foot movement on penalty kicks. Again this is a matter of referee sloppiness and laziness. So many referees allow players to move forward that it has become difficult for the referee who cares about the game to make the proper call. In this case, there can be no warning. The referee must act immediately and consistently to stamp out this practice. (d) Jewelry is always a problem. Just as you point out, we see instance after instance in which players sport jewelry in the biggest matches in the world, apparently unchecked by the referee. Enforcement must start at the lowest levels of soccer and be carried out consistently to the top levels.

In all these cases, you must not worry about appearing to be a “nice” guy. The “nice” guys in soccer refereeing are the cause of problems for all of us, because of their lack of courage—or possibility stupidity—in refusing to follow the instructions given to him in Law V, principally section (a), which notes that the referee shall “enforce the Laws.” We must remember that the original Laws of the Game were written by the players themselves. This practice continues to this day. Referees do not write the Laws, we enforce them as best we can.

If you enforce the Laws correctly and consistently, you may not be the most popular person in town, but you will be one of the most respected. Referees are not here to win popularity contests. Our job is to enforce the Laws, protect the players from themselves and one another, and to ensure that everyone on the field is treated fairly and equally. This includes preventing one team to gain an advantage over another by not enforcing the Laws the same way for both teams at all times and in all places on the field.

Question:

At the taking of a penalty kick, after the signal has been given but before the kicker has kicked the ball, a player of the kicking team moves into an offside position, ahead of the penalty spot but outside the penalty area. What should the referee do?

Answer:

In this case, and in similar cases where a member of the defending team or members of both teams move into the area ahead of the penalty spot but outside the penalty area, the referee should apply the principles expressed in International Football Association Board Decisions 3©, 4(b), and 5(b) to Law XIV. In other words, the referee should allow the kick to proceed. In the first case, that of the member of the kicking team, if a goal is scored, it shall be disallowed and the kick retaken. In the second case, that of the member of the defending team, the kick shall be retaken if a goal is not scored. In cases where members of both teams move into the area beyond the penalty spot but outside the penalty area before the kick is taken, the kick, if taken, shall be retaken. In all these cases the players concerned shall be cautioned.

Question:

On a corner kick the blue team is kicking the ball. The blue’s teammate goes in ten yards. The red team’s player follows. Would you give the player on the red team a yellow card for encroachment, or let him go? Thank you for answering

Answer:

The correct thing to do is to caution the red player for encroachment. As you become more experienced in refereeing, you may find that there will be times when you will not want to stop play immediately to administer the caution, but will let play go on if the encroachment itself does not adversely affect the kicking team’s play. Indeed, you may decide to let the player go, because he did the kicking team a favor by removing himself from a better defensive position. But for the present, I would recommend stopping play and cautioning.

Question:

What are your suggested mechanics when the attacking team requests 10 yds on a free kick. Do you step off ten yards? What about positioning? Where is the best place to stand when the teams are anxious and concerned about where the wall will be allowed to be set?

Answer:

My suggestion: Do not fall into the trap of stepping off the ten yards, because if this becomes a habit it will only cause you pain as you move up the ranks into older players and harder games. There are a number of ways of getting the ten yards, some better than others. The principal thing to remember is that you must keep the ball in sight at all times, as players are not above shifting the ball forward a yard or two or more when your back is turned. (Do not be overconcerned about where they put the ball initially. A yard or even a few yards will not change the outcome of the kick enough to worry about. We should no care which particular blade of grass is covered by the ball or its shadow.) What I recommend is that referees learn to judge the ten yards by sight. Then, when the ball is set, whether or not the team has requested their ten yards, the ref can tell whether or not the kicking team has a reasonable approximation of proper room to work. If the kicking team does ask the ref to move the wall back, then he/she should run immediately to a spot level with the location where the ten yards end and then move the wall back by voice (all the while remembering to keep the ball in sight). If at all possible, the referee should avoid becoming the “first brick in the wall,” and should remain a discreet distance away, the better to observe what is happening and to avoid becoming entangled in and with the players. The referee’s concern is to ensure that the kicking team has a fair opportunity to put the ball back into play. The game is about scoring goals, and the referee should be concerned to see that there is ample opportunity for that to happen. If a team wants to take a quick free-kick, then they should be permitted to do so. .

To summarize: Stand where you can see the player(s) who will take the kick, the ball, and the wall. Do not permit encroachment.

Question:

In a flip throw in if I land on my knees, what is the ruling?

Answer:

It depends upon when and how you released the ball. If you are facing the field and deliver the ball properly with both hands from over your head and with at least part of each foot touching the ground on or outside the touch-line before you land on your knees there is no problem, the throw-in is legal. If you land on your knees and then release the ball, it is illegal, even if both feet are on the ground and all other aspects of the throw-in are correct. (That is the same as the kneeling throw-in, which is not allowed.)

Question:

On a direct free kick, if the kicking team kicks the ball directly into their own goal, does this count as a goal?

Answer:

No, a team may not score directly against itself. The referee would award a corner kick to the opposing team, unless the kick had been taken from inside the team’s own penalty area, in which case the referee would order that the kick be retaken.

Question:

What’s the right call in the case of a ball in play striking tree branches overhanging the field of play? I’ve seen this occur both during general play and from a corner kick. Sometimes the ball falls onto the field, sometimes it is deflected out of play. Thanks in advance for your response.

Answer:

The tree branch(es) must be considered to be an outside agent and the game restarted with a dropped ball from the spot immediately below the place where the ball hit the branch, whether the ball lands on or off the field after it has been deflected. If the ball hit a branch in the space over the goal area, then the ball must be dropped at that spot along the line running parallel to the goal line that is closest to the spot below the branch.

Question:

Help clarify a point, please. In your response to the question of deliberate handling by a defender to stop an IFK from going into goal, you said “...and no goal results, then the referee must send off the offender for SFP...”. However, you then went on to say that since here was no OGSO, “...there can be no expulsion of the defender”. I’ve heard this question discussed before and have not heard a definitive response from a qualified source, so I really do appreciate YOUR input.

Answer:

There could be no obvious goalscoring opportunity (OGSO) on an indirect free-kick if it was played only by the kicker taking the restart. The possibility for an OGSO does not occur until some second person, in this case the defender, actually plays (kicks or in some way touches) the ball. Only then can the referee consider expulsion for serious foul play.

Question:

I have seen referees stand in different positions on the field when a corner kick is taken; Why is this? Is there a place where he should stand (during the corner kick) that is better than others? If so, why?

Answer:

The only requirement is that the referee take up a position that is both intelligent and flexible. One reason to change positions is to get a better view of the play. A second reason is to follow up on something observed during a previous kick in the same area. Yet another reason is to avoid being predictable. Players quickly pick up when a referee is in the same place on every kick and will think up ways to exploit that. Whether in dynamic play or on a restart, the referee must be able to answer three Questions when deciding what his or her position should be: 1) can I see possible problem areas? 2) can I see my linesman? 3) am I using space that the players need?

Question:

I saw an article in the recent issue of “Fair Play” on what can happen on an indirect free-kick near goal, but it didn’t say what the referee should do if, at the taking of an indirect free-kick, the kicker kicks the ball directly at goal and the defender, seeing the ball coming toward him, handles the ball in an attempt to prevent the ball from entering the goal, but, despite the handling, the ball goes into goal. What does the referee do then?

Answer:

The referee must not react too quickly. The referee must be alert and *think* about the game situation. The proper decision is to *wait* a moment in such cases. The referee can always award a penalty-kick if no goal results. If the ball goes into the goal, the referee should award the goal, caution the offender for ungentlemanly conduct, and restart with a place-kick. If the referee has waited a moment and no goal results, then the referee must send off the offender for serious foul play and restart with a penalty-kick for the attacking team. The referee *must* be patient: If the referee reacts too quickly and invokes the advantage clause, then there can be no penalty-kick if a goal does not result from the indirect free-kick handled by the defender. Finally, remember that as there was no obvious goalscoring opportunity, which cannot exist under the conditions of an indirect free-kick, there can be no expulsion of the defender.

N.B. Technically, the referee should invoke the advantage clause, but, as I said in the answer, if he does that he cannot go back and award a penalty-kick if the ball goes over the line and not into the goal. My way (and Alfred’s) is the intelligent way of making (or not making) the call.

Question:

In a girls under 12 game I was refereeing, a fast moving goalie made a clean save in the face of a torrid attack. Knowing that time was short and trying to drive the attackers back, she went for a very high punt trying to get it over the forwards right in front of her. Instead it went high and straight up in the air. As we all stood around in amazement, it came straight down on her and would have hit her right on the head...except she caught it cleanly (again)! and this time kicked it clear. Was the ball in play? Should I have awarded an IFK right on the 6yd goal line?

Answer:

The goalkeeper infringed Law XII, paragraph 5(b), by touching the ball again with her hands after having released the ball into play without it being touched by a player of the opposing team. You should award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team at the place where the infringement occurred, subject to the overriding conditions imposed in Law XII. (In other words, if it occurred within the goal-area, yes, the kick should be awarded from any spot on the goal-area line that runs parallel with the goal-line.) I am assuming the case described in this question I received almost simultaneously with yours is the same situation and that the person who sent it was watching you: The goalkeeper has possession of the ball. She kicks the ball to put it into play. The ball goes straight up into the air and the GK catches it. The referee blows the whistle & awards an indirect free kick to the opposing team. Correct call?

To which my response is, “Yes.”

Question:

I am a new goalie in my city league in Eugene, Or. I have not played soccer for 10 years and am afraid that I will not remember (or know) the old rules and the new rules. I am in the C league and things are only moderately competitive. What I need to know are the basics about what to do with the ball once I get it. If you can answer this or lead me to a source, I would appreciate it. Thanks.

Answer:

Let me preface my response with a caveat: What I say here is based on what the reasonable referee would do. That said, let’s get on with it.

Once you “get” the ball covers a lot of territory. If you were in motion when receiving the ball from an opponent’s shot, the referee _should_ allow you a few steps to bring your body under control once again and come to a full stop (if you want to) before you have to worry about releasing the ball. (There is no requirement that you come to a full stop, as long as you get rid of the ball within four steps of actually gaining control.) When you do have control of your body, which should not take more than a second or two and which should include scanning the field to see where your next play ought to be, you may take a maximum of four steps before releasing the ball. You may bounce the ball as if you were dribbling a basketball, throw it into the air and catch it again, or just hold onto it while you take those four steps, but _do not_ otherwise release the ball to the ground within the penalty area and then touch it with your hands. If you do, the referee will whistle you for a violation of Law 5, paragraph 5. You may not pick up the ball anymore if a teammate has _intentionally_ kicked it to you. A teammate may play it to you with his body or head, but may not do it in any way that could be considered “kicking.” If it is _obvious_ to the referee that a ball was kicked to you by a teammate purely by accident, if, for example, he were trying to clear the ball and it came off his foot directly to you rather than going into touch or over the goal line, then the reasonable referee would not call an infringement against you.

You may not be charged when you do not have possession of the ball (holding the ball), but as soon as you do have possession, you can expect to be hit. What constitutes possession? According to International Board Decision 15 to Law 5, the goalkeeper is “considered to be in control of the ball when he takes possession of it by touching it with any part of his hands or arms.” This can work both for and against you. If you are lying on the ground with one finger on the ball and an opponent kicks the ball out of your hand, that is a foul by the opponent, but there are few referees with courage enough to call it. Despite the fact that you are technically holding the ball, many referees may not understand that and may not make the call properly. How does it work against you: If you intentionally parry the ball when it is shot at you and then go to pick it up, the intentional parry is considered to be possession, for which you would be penalized with an indirect free kick against your team from the spot where you touch the ball. If, however, you parry the ball away when making an obvious save of a shot at your goal, that is not considered to be possession and you could pick it up—provided you can beat the attacker to the ball.

Remember, you may not use your hands to play a ball kicked to you intentionally by a teammate. It is also illegal for a teammate to conspire with you or another teammate to play the ball to his head or body where he can play it to you. That is not only an indirect free kick against your team, but the referee is required to caution the player who began the sequence for ungentlemanly conduct.

It is also illegal to hang on to the ball for too long with your hands or to dribble it around and appear to the referee to be wasting time. That is also punished by an indirect free kick against your team and a caution for ungentlemanly conduct. There is no set time for getting rid of the ball, but you must make an effort to do so within a reasonable period, such as 5 or 6 seconds.

Question:

With the 1995 laws “hot off the press” so to speak, there are varying versions regarding Law I, Decisions of the International F.A. Board #14. Which is correct, “A mark may be made off the field of play, _10_ yards from the corner flag...” or... “_11_ yards from the corner flag...” ?

Answer:

FIFA Circular No. 560, dated 2 May 1995, contained a couple of typographical errors. The major error was the one in International Board Decision 14. The correct wording will be in the 1995 copy of the Laws of the Game and Guide for Referees, to be distributed soon by the U. S. Soccer Federation (USSF). The correct wording is: “A mark may be made off the field of play, 11 yards from the corner flag . . .” The correct version is already available in the USSF Memorandum for 1995, prepared by Al Kleinaitis, and obtainable from USSF.

Question:

I am a goalkeeper playing in my local city men’s league here in Little Rock, Arkansas. My question is: What (if any) extra protection is a ‘keeper entitled to within his own goal-area? I was told by a referee that this was handled in FIFA Law 12, but I can’t seem to find anything specific.

Answer:

Unless your local league has some special “rule of competition” specifying that goalkeepers should receive some sort of “extra protection” beyond that guaranteed in Law XII, you are on your own.

Law XII guarantees that you may not be _fairly_ charged (basically shoulder to shoulder with no elbows flying) unless you (a) are holding the ball, (b) are impeding (we used to say “obstructing”) an opponent, or © have left your goal area.

At one time NCAA rules—which had then and continue today to have little to do with the Laws of the Game—allowed the referee to give goalies some “extra protection” by specifying that the ‘keeper could not be charged”. Although that is now ancient history, the myth persists that under the Laws of the Game ‘keepers must be given this protection”—which they have never had.

Your only hope is that your referee recognizes the situations when you deserve to be protected, particularly those moments when you are in the air or diving for a ball, and applies the Laws of the Game strictly.

Many referees wonder what to do about injured players. Here is some sound advice from Australia, written in 1995 by the referee coach of the Elizabeth and Districts Referees Association and sent to me by John Hernandez. It may prove useful to referees and other groups here in the United States.

ELIZABETH & DISTRICTS REFEREES ASSOCIATION.

INJURED PLAYERS

FIFA, almost on an annual basis, fine tune the laws of the game of soccer in the interests of making the game more appealing a spectacle. Prior to the start of this season 1995, in an attempt to reduce the amount of actual playing time lost during a match, all referees have, amongst other things, been instructed not to allow the treatment of any injured players on the field.

An increasing number of parents are viewing our Referees’ actions on this matter as very harsh, Particularly when we are officiating in the younger age groups. My own opinion is that players’ health should not be jeopardized by any changes to this law, Indeed players are able to receive a greater degree of attention off the field and parents can be involved in any decision making with respect to their child taking any further part in the game.

It is unfortunate that this change has had to be introduced to combat the growing incidence of players who feign injury in order to gain an unfair advantage over their opponents. Whilst that may not be the case in the younger age groups, it can and most certainly does occur in matches involving older players.

The following steps summarize the course of action all our referees are to follow in the event of an injury during the game. Consistency between ourselves is most important. It is worth repeating here that until it becomes standard practice amongst all our teams, prior the commencement of a game, the referee is to advise both coaches that if they are called to the field to assist an injured player, they must not bring any equipment on to the playing field with them. (i.e., They are entering the field of play with the sole intention of assessing the injury prior to escorting the player off the field).

IN THE EVENT OF A SERIOUS INJURY

.Immediately stop play and call assistance.

.The player is to be assisted from the field to receive treatment.

.If the coach (or whoever is attending) determines that the injury is such that to remove the player could be detrimental to the player’s health, then at this stage any item which could offer comfort to that player may be introduced until such time as professional help arrives. If the delay is lengthy and requires the game to be abandoned, then so be it!

IN THE EVENT OF MINOR INJURY

Allow play to continue until the ball goes out of play; however, if an unduly lengthy period of play ensues it is advisable to stop play with the ball in a neutral zone.

Quickly go to the injured player and give that player the option of either immediately resuming his part in the game , or leaving the field of play for treatment with or without the assistance of the coach . Remember that once the coach has attended the injured player. There is no other option than for the coach to escort the player off the field for treatment.

The only exception to the above, with respect to minor injuries, is in regard to goalkeepers. You should not allow play to continue if the Goalkeeper , through injury, is unable to defend his goal.

Treatment of injuries on the field of play is allowed for Goalkeepers.

FINALLY

A minor Injury is one that is not serious.

A Serious injury is one which is initially deemed to be serious, in the opinion of the referee and referees are advised to err on the side of caution in making this decision.

E-Mail questions to: [email protected]

NOTE

It should be emphasized that any replies printed in this article are not official USSF rulings but are the educated opinions of experienced referees