KICKS FROM THE MARK 2
You have probably seen the NCAA game that ended with KFTM, where a shot was saved by the GK and rebounded high in the air out near the 12 yard line and landed with backspin. The ball slowly rolled back into the goal as it was ignored by the GK. Neither the CR nor AR initially realized the goal should count, but the opposing GK (teammate of the shooter) vociferously pointed it out to the AR, and eventually the goal counted.
After hearing a lot of comments from referees on what they would do if this happened in a USSF game, I'd appreciate your comments.
Some of these experienced referees have stated they would not count the goal (despite what seems to me to be clear in the Laws), stating things such as:
- "If there ever was a time when a referee should declare a penalty kick to be over before it technically must be declared over, this would be that time. Neither the goalkeeper nor the kicker entertained the possibility that a goal might still be scored."
- "If this happened in most of our games, I suspect very few of us would award a goal. And I don't think we SHOULD. . . If I'm the referee and a ball bounces off the crossbar and is 10 yards away from the goal line, in my opinion the kick has been completed."
- "Besides being correct in what I feel is the spirit of the game or common sense, I believe a no-goal ruling also is correct by the letter of the law, as clarified by the ATR."
- "That is very easy to defend: It is not a misapplication of the LOTG. It is a fact of play and the referee's decision reigns supreme."
I will go out on a limb and say that goal/no goal decisions are always in the category of "facts of play" (not protestable) and never "misapplications."
- "You may want to re-read the relevant portion of the ATR again. The first time I read it, I missed the part about the ball needing to be in contact with post/bar/GK/ground AND still moving. Those criteria were NOT met on this particular kick. At least, at one point they were not and it seems completely valid for a referee to rule that the kick was completed -- way before it came 10 yards back toward the goal line and crossed the line."
- "Lets go directly to Law 5: The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final. That is about as explicit as you can get. If the referee says it's a goal then it's a goal. If the referee says it's not a goal then it's not a goal. The decision is final. That means it cannot be protested."
- - - - -
Based on the above statements by experienced referees, here are my questions, assuming this was a USSF game:
1. Under FIFA/USSF rules, should this goal count?
2. Assume the goal was not allowed and there was a protest.
Assuming the CR and AR accurately state that the ball spun back over the goal line but say that they believe the kick was over because it rebounded so far from the goal, would this be considered a misapplication of the LOTG (and thus protestable) or a factual situation that cannot be protested?
Thanks for your help. I think a lot of referees could use it in this situation.
Answer (December 8, 2009):
The first paragraph of Advice 14.13 is pretty clear; it also follows word for word the instructions from FIFA on when the kick has been completed. However, we might suggest that skeptics use their common sense and read the phrase "any combination of the ground, crossbar, goalposts, and goalkeeper, a goal can still be scored" to mean in sequence or combination of those things. If the ball remains in motion after it has rebounded or deflected from any of those things and remains in the field, it is still in play. A referee would not stop play for such a thing during the game and there is no reason to stop it during penalty kicks or kicks from the penalty mark.
Answers: 1. Score the goal. 2. That situation would be counter to the Laws and tradition.
14.13 WHEN IS THE PENALTY KICK COMPLETED?
The penalty kick or kick from the penalty mark is completed only when the referee declares it so, and the referee should not declare the kick to be completed if there is any possibility that the ball is still in play. In other words: So long as the ball is in motion and contacting any combination of the ground, crossbar, goalposts, and goalkeeper, a goal can still be scored.
//rest deleted as non-pertinent//
KICKS FROM THE MARK 1
When does the requirement to "Reduce to Equate" end.
At the final whistle Blue has 11 players, Red 9. The Blue captain tells 2 players that they cannot participate in the KFTPM. As the Blue players are leaving the center circle, and before the first kick a Red player says something and a fight breaks out between the 2 Blue players and the Red player. The 3 players (2 X Blue + 1 X Red) each receive a Red Card. As Red now has only 8 eligible players must Blue now reduce to equate again? If yes, does the "Reduce to Equate" period extend until the first kick is taken?
Answer (December 8, 2009):
The requirement to reduce to equate pertains only to the players remaining on the field or those temporarily off the field with the permission of the referee when the game ends. If a player is removed from the field for misconduct or injury AFTER the kicks begin the contest continues without him or her. If this occurs BEFORE the kicks begin, reduce to equate applies. So in your situation -- the misconduct occurring before the first kick is taken -- the two Blue players (who were ineligible in any event) are sent off and another Blue player is removed to meet the requirement to reduce to equate because the Red player has been sent off, the teams now play 8 Blue versus 8 Red. The requirement to reduce to equate pertains only to the players remaining on the field or those temporarily off the field with the permission of the referee when the game ends. If a player is removed from the field for misconduct or injury AFTER the kicks begin the contest continues without him or her. If this occurs BEFORE the kicks begin, reduce to equate applies. So in your situation -- the misconduct occurring before the first kick is taken -- the two Blue players (who were ineligible in any event) are sent off and another Blue player is removed to meet the requirement to reduce to equate because the Red player has been sent off, the teams now play 8 Blue versus 8 Red.
We distinguish between when the "KFTPM phase of play" begins and when the "kicks from the mark begin." The KFTPM phase begins the moment the final whistle sounds (including any required additional playing time). The kicks themselves begin only with the taking of the first kick. The distinction exists because the requirement to reduce to equate ends with the taking of the first kick.
This means that if Blue loses a player to injury or misconduct while, say, the coin toss is being performed to determine which team kicks first, Red will reduce by one. Marking the kicks phase is important because, once this phase begins, no substitution is permitted (except for an injured goalkeeper and only if the team has a permissible substitution remaining to it under the rules of competition). You will find this information in the USSF position paper of April 2, 2009, on Kicks from the Penalty Mark.
An AR raises his flag to signal that team A's goalkeeper has stepped out of the area with the ball in his hands before punting it. The center referee doesn't see the signal for approximately 15-20 seconds. The ball has traveled all the way to the opposite end of the field before the referee notices the flag and blows his whistle. He does not give any indication to the teams that the infraction occurred at the other end of the field. Team B's players think an infraction has been called in their end of the field and do a quick restart where the ball was stopped. Several seconds later the referee stops play.
He then restarts play with a dropped ball in Team B's end of the field saying Team B did a quick restart. Obviously if the players knew the infraction occurred 70 yards down the field just outside the area, they would have taken a direct kick on goal from there. Did the referee act correctly in allowing the quick restart point which was 70 yards from where the infraction occurred?
Answer (December 2, 2009):
Your information (not included here) suggests that you were at a high school game, for which we cannot provide an official response. If we assume that the game was played under the Laws of the Game, then here is your answer. Be prepared, as mistake after mistake seems to have turned this game into a fiasco.
1. First we have to ask if the flag by the AR was REALLY necessary? Generally this infringement is trifling, particularly if no one but the AR noticed it. And because it was likely trifling and the referee took so long to notice it, the flag should have been dropped almost immediately. (And if it was the first occasion, it would likely have required only a brief and professional warning to watch the line, which the AR could have done him- or herself.)
2. Are we certain that the referee stopped play for the flag or only noticed it after he stopped the game (and decided to disregard it)? That would explain the restart at the far end of the field.
3. General lack of professional conduct by the referee in not making clear what was happening.
4. Tough luck for the Team B players, who drew a conclusion not supported by the actions of the referee. (Clearly ambiguous, or were they not? See 2.)
Without knowing what the referee was actually thinking, we cannot answer your final question with certainty and authority.
INFORMATION FOR THE REFEREE
In a match, one team secured the goal and referee gave goal whistle. Afterwards, he forthwith came to know from the outside persons that actually ball was touched by the player's hand and then it was entered in goal net. Before start of the game again, referee took back his decision of goal and called the player and showed him "yellow card" as he didn't reveal this fact. Question is that can a referee take back his decision of goal if he come to know from the public that he has given a wrong decision.
Answer (November 25, 2009):
The referee should not accept information from anyone other than his assistant referees or fourth official. However, if the referee had received this information from one of the assistant referees or the fourth official, then, yes, he could deny the goal, caution the player, and restart with a direct free kick from the place where the infringement occurred.
ACTION AFTER PLAY HAS BEEN STOPPED
Goal keeper grabbed the ball in his hands, all players were taking back their positions. An opponent player intentially pushed the goal keeper. Goal keeper was started to protested. Match referee was not absolutely sure about the fact. He came in D area and showed the Yellow card to goal keeper. Every one was stunned. Goal keeper came out from D area along with football during protestion. One player, asked the referee to concern with assistant referee. Assistant referee told the actual fact to match referee. Then he took back his decision of yellow card which he showed against goal keeper. And gave the free kick to other team outside the D because goal keeper took the football outside the D in his hands during protestion. Question is that, can a referee withdraw from his wrong decision of Yellow card during the match and if he do that, then if goal keeper during protestion against the wrong decision of referee, come out from D area with the ball in his hands, be punishable?
Answer (November 25, 2009):
If the referee had already stopped play for the incident between the goalkeeper and his opponent, then the place where the restart must be taken is the place where the opponent pushed the goalkeeper. That would be a direct free kick for the goalkeeper's team. The referee cannot change the location of the restart.
SUITABILITY OF THE BALL
I have sat through the entry level referee clinics several times now and it has seldom been taught by the same guy twice. I do so to give the new referees a chance to meet their assignor and to keep myself in the loop on how they are being taught this year.
One year the instructor said that all balls should be checked by a gauge before the game. This he said was due to differences in construction, ambient temperature, altitude, etc.... The next sighted a 'rule of thumb' where you simply push in with two thumbs to get a feel for whether the ball is tight enough. I happen to side with the first of the two, especially knowing the I have some referees that could barely push a ball in at 6 lbs. and others that work in a packing house by day and could easily push in a ball at 18 lbs.
Here in lies my problem. I have a gauge and a back up (as well as one that is on an cordless electric pump that I keep in my bag). All 3 read the balls differently to one degree or another. How do I determine which is right and which one(s) I should throw away?
Answer (November 24, 2009):
Different instructors use different methods to make their points. As long as the referee learns that he or she must apply the requirements of Law 2, the Federation and the Law are satisfied.
As to how to judge the suitability of the ball, that is left to the discretion of the referee, based on what is suitable for this particular game.
REPORT ALL MISCONDUCT!!!
Is a referee required to include in their game report the red card infractions issued during the game? Can he/she change their ruling after the game is over, and not file the report. I know of this happening in our league. A player is red-carded, removed from play.
The referee, intentionally, does not file the report with this infraction included. The player and team assume the infraction, and a suspension game is served. In this case without notice of disregard.
This allows a referee to disregard at their own will, a call that has been made and affected the current game, as well as future games, with disregard for notice or consideration. Also, seems to reflect their intent of issuing the red card in the first place.
Answer (November 24, 2009):
All cautions and dismissals must be reported. There is no excuse for not doing so. Any referee who fails to do this should be reported to the competition and to the state referee authorities.
In addition, considering the gravity of not reporting serious misconduct (a clear violation of the Laws of the Laws of the Game), the referee in such a situation could also be dealt with under the terms of US Soccer Policy 531-10, Misconduct of a Game Official. The policy is contained in the Referee Administrative Handbook, which can be downloaded from the Instructional Materials section of the referee program pages at www.ussoccer.com.
WHEN SHOULD AR SIGNAL FOR OFFSIDE?
There was a discussion at halftime today between me and another AR about the proper way to signal and call offsides. As a center ref, I prefer to have my AR's hold up their flag when they notice someone in the offside position so I can watch them as well to see if they become involved in the play. As an AR, I was doing that for the center ref today. The other AR asked why I was signaling the offside position this way and went as far to say that it was against the rules to signal offside until there is an actual offside violation. Is this true? I asked around today with some regional referees and there didn't seem to be a clear consensus on this issue.
Answer (November 24, 2009):
Assistant referees should NOT flag to indicate offside position; nor should they be instructed to do so. The AR's job is to indicate that a player in an offside position is actually offside ONLY at the moment that player becomes involved in play by gaining an advantage from the offside position or interferes with either play or an opponent. Then the referee makes the final decision as to whether that player is actually offside.
PLAYER AND MATCH MANAGEMENT
My husband and I are referees for a long while. We were wondering your opinion on the Elizabeth Lambert ("dirtiest" female soccer player) story. We haven't heard much (which is unusual)about the referees that were doing that game. We feel that most of the responsibility for the continuation of such "unsporting", violent conduct lies with the referee crew. Why wasn't she ejected early in the game instead of letting this game be get out of control. We understand that we miss things but this sure seemed to occur over and over.
Answer (November 24, 2009):
Your reasoning appears to be logical and sound. However, because this game was not played under the auspices of the U. S. Soccer Federation and under the Laws of the Game, and because it was not refereed by officials assigned by the U. S. Soccer Federation or its affiliates, we can take no official position on this matter.
PLAYER OFF THE FIELD
A winger dribbles the ball in the opposition half, directly down the touchline. He is tackled fairly off the ball by a defender and exits the field of play. The defender passes to a forward teammate who passes straight back; the first defender slips over; the ball continues directly down the touchline. The fallen winger meanwhile, noticing this, sprints down the touchline - still off the field of play - and onto the field to take the ball, alone, and score.
Answer (November 20, 2009):
A player who has left the field in the course of play is expected to return as quickly as possible to a position on the field. The legality of the goal would depend on the referee's perception of two things: Whether this player's return occurred quickly enough and whether the player stayed off the field accidentally or to deceive the opponents.
WHAT DOCUMENT TO CONSULT?
How can a referee determine what is the most current standard for a particular topic, given that there is a mound of reference material on the USSF website? Are we to rely on the most recent "Advice to Referees" as being the final word on every topic, or do we also need to search through historical memos, directives, etc?
The current USSF website has numerous memos that date back many years, some of which are duplicative (ie, 2004 Advice, 2005 Advice, etc).
For example, is it necessary to read the 2007 Law Changes Memorandum or are these law changes incorporated into the 09-10 Advice? Where there are conflicts, which document prevails?
Second but related topic, which is organization of the ussoccer.com webpages for referees. Why isn't there one page that is kept current and represents the current definitive body of laws, directives, advices, etc. As of this date, the laws are on one page, along with a long list of documents, and the advice is on another page. This is confusing. It would be better to have a section called "Current Laws and Interpretations" which contains the FIFA LOTG, the Advice, and any of the historical memos which aren't incorporated in the Advice that still apply. There should be another page titled "Historical Documents" that contain all other documents, with language that these have been supplanted by more current interpretations.
Answer (November 16, 2009):
Your suggestion for improving the utility of the webpages has been passed along to the appropriate people. Thank you.
As to which document "trumps" the others, this excerpt from the Introduction to the Advice to Referees should prove helpful to you:
This book of Advice to Referees is specifically intended to give USSF referees, assistant referees and fourth officials a reliable compilation of those international and national guidelines remaining in force, as modified or updated. It is not a replacement for the Laws of the Game, nor is it a "how to" book on refereeing: It is an official statement of Federation interpretations of the Laws. However, the referee, coach, player, team official and spectator should remember that there are also other sources of information:
* the Laws of the Game, published annually by USSF from the text provided by the IFAB through FIFA;
* the Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees, which replace the former Questions and Answers;
* annual FIFA Circulars, as republished in designated USSF annual Memoranda;
* USSF Referee Program Directives, the Week in Review, and podcasts;
* the USSF Guide to Procedures for Referees, Assistant Referees and Fourth Officials;
* entry-level referee clinics, in-service clinics and referee recertification clinics taught by USSF instructors;
* other official publications from the USSF instructional program, including articles in Fair Play and specific subject memoranda (position papers).
END OF QUOTE
In general, one can say that the 2008/2009 and earlier editions of the Advice is nice for historical purposes, but are no longer applicable in many situations. The same is true of the older memoranda and Laws of the Game. They are all included in the collection because many referees, instructors, and assessors like to be able to follow the history and development of the Laws and their interpretation. In all cases, the most recent document (on the particular topic) in any of these series is the one with the current information. The Advice is kept as much up to date as possible, including all documents published in the period since the last revision, but any document is "outdated" the moment the ink hits the paper. This means that the reader should look to the Advice plus all recent memos (with the latter eventually to be incorporated into the next revision).
BALL DELIBERATELY KICKED TO THE GOALKEEPER (YET AGAIN)
Defender under pressure kicks the ball back to the keeper, it is a crappy rainy day, the keeper misplays the ball trying to kick it away but it bounces up an into the air only a short distance away where it bounces and as attackers and other defenders are now close at hand the keeper chooses to grab this ball with the hands.
Is this an INDFK offence?
Can it be ignored as the keeper tried to do the right thing the first time but failed?
Should it be ignored if a pursuing opponent was there to challenge but prevented because the keeper WAS able to use the hands?
Is the ONLY reason to make this call if time wasting was the reason?
Does the intention of the passer or the intention of the keeper matter?
Answer (November 16, 2009):
There is no issue here at all if the scenario is to be given its face value meaning. A teammate kicks the ball back to his goalkeeper -- no violation.
The goalkeeper kicks the ball (badly, but that doesn't matter) -- no violation. The goalkeeper subsequently handles the ball -- since this occurred directly (no intervening play of the ball by anyone ELSE) -- violation.
In short, there is no issue that a violation has occurred. The only question is whether it was trifling or should be whistled. This HAS to be decided by the referee based on the circumstances of play, taking risks, maintaining flow, etc. The only fact bearing on the matter is that the goalkeeper DID illegally take hand control of the ball under pressure from the opponents. In other words, he illegally withheld the ball from challenge, which is what this infringement is all about. Accordingly, although the decision must be up to the referee, the scenario tends to favor whistling this indirect free kick foul.
Referees often make the mistake of treating this as an issue involving time-wasting when, in fact, the central issue is unfairly withholding the ball from challenge.
And, no, the "intention" of the passer is not relevant to this decision because that was resolved when the action was determined to be a violation.
Answer (November 15, 2009):
Answer (November 15, 2009):
Answer (November 15, 2009):
U.S. Soccer thanks Jim Allen (National Instructor Staff/National Assessor), assisted by Dan Heldman (National Instructor Staff), for their assistance in providing this service. Direction is provided by Alfred Kleinaitis, Manager of Referee Development and Education, with further assistance from Paul Tamberino, Director of Referee Development; David McKee, National Director of Assessment (assessment matters); and Ulrich Strom, National Instructor and National Assessor (matters in general).
Submit your questions via e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org.