Off the Ball

[JBeil]

A few situations that came up this weekend that I'm looking for clarification on:
1. An incident occurs off the ball and you blow for the whistle as the handbags start, but you did not see clearly who committed any offense, and you have blown before the ball could cross any line. How do you restart play, and what steps do you take to enforce discipline?
2. You blow for an incident off the ball in the penalty area, which you intend to give as an indirect free kick for the defending team. While play is stopped and you are warning two players about their conduct, a second incident occurs. You are unable to see who committed an offense, but a player claims to have been elbowed in the face. What, if anything, do you do to enforce discipline before restarting as you would for the original foul? Do you stick with your original IDFK decision, or change?
3. At the pre-match briefing, you instruct both club ARs to leave fouls to you. In the first half, a CAR signals for a free kick, and the players stop before you tell them to carry on. At the next break in play you ask the CAR in question to leave fouls to you to protect him from criticism (and don't say that he's not qualified to make those decisions anyway!), In the second half, he signals again for a foul in the goal-mouth as a goal is scored. You award the goal. The team conceding the goal are complaining that the AR has signalled for a foul and the goal shouldn't stand. How do you deal with this, apart from telling the players to get on with it? Do you ask to replace the CAR?

 

[JH]

A few situations that came up this weekend that I'm looking for clarification on:
1. An incident occurs off the ball and you blow for the whistle as the handbags start, but you did not see clearly who committed any offense, and you have blown before the ball could cross any line. How do you restart play, and what steps do you take to enforce discipline?
2. You blow for an incident off the ball in the penalty area, which you intend to give as an indirect free kick for the defending team. While play is stopped and you are warning two players about their conduct, a second incident occurs. You are unable to see who committed an offense, but a player claims to have been elbowed in the face. What, if anything, do you do to enforce discipline before restarting as you would for the original foul? Do you stick with your original IDFK decision, or change?
3. At the pre-match briefing, you instruct both club ARs to leave fouls to you. In the first half, a CAR signals for a free kick, and the players stop before you tell them to carry on. At the next break in play you ask the CAR in question to leave fouls to you to protect him from criticism (and don't say that he's not qualified to make those decisions anyway!), In the second half, he signals again for a foul in the goal-mouth as a goal is scored. You award the goal. The team conceding the goal are complaining that the AR has signalled for a foul and the goal shouldn't stand. How do you deal with this, apart from telling the players to get on with it? Do you ask to replace the CAR?

1. Drop ball, usually you can make out who was involved, if you can but didn't see anything, call them in for a chat and tell them to cut it out and you'll be watching them. If you have no clue, call in the captains and explain you didn't see it, but you'll be watching etc.
2. If you didn't see it, you cannot punish it. This is only possible if you have appointed assistants, whose word you can rely on. Never change the restart, the restart is determined by the first incident. If you give a defensive free kick and a defender decides to punch an opponent, it is still a defensive free kick.
3. Make it very clear you don't want fouls. First time they flag, ensure the players hear you: "No fouls from you thank you" etc. Re: The team complaining, just simply tell them, "I told them not to give fouls, it is not my fault they are confusing you. Play to the whistle." Even better if you clearly shouted it first time the flag went up.

 

[socal lurker]

A couple of thoughts:

Nothing that happens after a whistle can create a different restart. It’s a basic premise that solves a lot of problems (and helps get a lot of questions right on referee tests). One can quibble that an improperly taken TI that doesn’t enter the field violates the concept, but that’s about it.

The other basic precept is that a referee can only punish what he sees (or that a neutral AR or 4O gives him.). So if you don’t see it, you can’t give the foul or card.

And have no sympathy for those who choose to stop for flags. They should know better. (In youth games, I ask the captains at the coin flip to remind their teammates, especially their defenders and GK that the flags are for me and not to stop—if I get complaints later, I direct them to their captains...)

 

[spuddy1878]

Why as a referee would you not want help from an assistant (presuming Its an officially appointed assistant)

It all depends on who has the best view but if im in the middle (ive never refereed with an assistant yet) and an incident happens five yards from the assistant and i could have a blocked view im wanting his help.

 

[Kes]

Why as a referee would you not want help from an assistant (presuming Its an officially appointed assistant)

It all depends on who has the best view but if im in the middle (ive never refereed with an assistant yet) and an incident happens five yards from the assistant and i could have a blocked view im wanting his help.

He's talking about Club Assistants mate. (CAR).

 

[Kes]

3. At the pre-match briefing, you instruct both club ARs to leave fouls to you. In the first half, a CAR signals for a free kick, and the players stop before you tell them to carry on. At the next break in play you ask the CAR in question to leave fouls to you to protect him from criticism (and don't say that he's not qualified to make those decisions anyway!), In the second half, he signals again for a foul in the goal-mouth as a goal is scored. You award the goal. The team conceding the goal are complaining that the AR has signalled for a foul and the goal shouldn't stand. How do you deal with this, apart from telling the players to get on with it? Do you ask to replace the CAR?

Based on personal experience of this myself, you have two realistic choices here:

1. For the first instance, do as others on here have already advised and just tell the complaining players to stop moaning since it's their AR's mistake not yours ("play to the whistle"). Or - it's unlikely that he flagged for an "offence" without at least one of his team appealing for a free kick as well, particularly if they stopped, irrespective of whether or not you thought it was, so you could just simply blow for the free kick (easy to sell as your decision rather than his) and then before the FK is taken, run over to him and remind him firmly that he isn't to flag for those any more.

2. Instance number two is a no-brainer. Tough 5hit on the team complaining basically. The goal stands and as you've already suggested, I'd either replace or do without the CAR.

 

[GraemeS]

A few situations that came up this weekend that I'm looking for clarification on:
1. An incident occurs off the ball and you blow for the whistle as the handbags start, but you did not see clearly who committed any offense, and you have blown before the ball could cross any line. How do you restart play, and what steps do you take to enforce discipline?
2. You blow for an incident off the ball in the penalty area, which you intend to give as an indirect free kick for the defending team. While play is stopped and you are warning two players about their conduct, a second incident occurs. You are unable to see who committed an offense, but a player claims to have been elbowed in the face. What, if anything, do you do to enforce discipline before restarting as you would for the original foul? Do you stick with your original IDFK decision, or change?
3. At the pre-match briefing, you instruct both club ARs to leave fouls to you. In the first half, a CAR signals for a free kick, and the players stop before you tell them to carry on. At the next break in play you ask the CAR in question to leave fouls to you to protect him from criticism (and don't say that he's not qualified to make those decisions anyway!), In the second half, he signals again for a foul in the goal-mouth as a goal is scored. You award the goal. The team conceding the goal are complaining that the AR has signalled for a foul and the goal shouldn't stand. How do you deal with this, apart from telling the players to get on with it? Do you ask to replace the CAR?

1. LOTG answer is drop ball. In practical refereeing terms, I'd suggest that the last thing you want to do is restart after handbags with a contested drop ball, which has a chance to flare up again. I'm sure you saw a shove, or one player squaring up to another first, and can therefore give a DFK/IFK based on stopping play for an offence of some sort.

If you're really not sure, then I'm still sure you saw a shove by a player from the attacking team, so can therefore give a DFK for the defending team, which is a straightforward decision that players will move on from quickly. If you do the drop ball and one player uses it as an excuse to give the opponent's knee a whack, you've potentially got another load of handbags and a red/yellow card that you could easily have avoided.

2. As others have said, the restart is unaffected and you can't caution/dismiss if you didn't see anything yourself. If players square up, it might be appropriate to give them both a yellow, but that's about it. And then restart with the original IDFK.

3. Again, good advice from others here. Your response was correct, but don't be afraid to clearly and loudly wave down the flag as well. You may or may not get the desired response from the CAR, but it's arguably more important that you reinforce to the players what's supposed to happen here.

 

[Peter Grove]

One can quibble that an improperly taken TI that doesn’t enter the field violates the concept, but that’s about it.

Except that it doesn't. I queried this a while back when the wording of Law 15 changed. The reply from the IFAB's official Law Enquiries representative and IFAB Technical Director David Elleray, was that if the ball doesn't enter the field, the throw is always retaken, no matter whether it was properly taken or not.

The actual reply was:

If the ball does not enter the field of play from any restart the original restart decision can not be changed so the throw in would only be awarded to the opposing team if the ball entered the field of play from the throw in.

 

[one]

If the ball does not enter the field of play from any restart the original restart decision can not be changed so the throw in would only be awarded to the opposing team if the ball entered the field of play from the throw in.

Assuming he means ball does not go into play, given he says 'any' restart.

The exception is for some cases in a penalty kick which the law is specific on.

 

[QuaverRef]

A few situations that came up this weekend that I'm looking for clarification on:
1. An incident occurs off the ball and you blow for the whistle as the handbags start, but you did not see clearly who committed any offense, and you have blown before the ball could cross any line. How do you restart play, and what steps do you take to enforce discipline?
2. You blow for an incident off the ball in the penalty area, which you intend to give as an indirect free kick for the defending team. While play is stopped and you are warning two players about their conduct, a second incident occurs. You are unable to see who committed an offense, but a player claims to have been elbowed in the face. What, if anything, do you do to enforce discipline before restarting as you would for the original foul? Do you stick with your original IDFK decision, or change?
3. At the pre-match briefing, you instruct both club ARs to leave fouls to you. In the first half, a CAR signals for a free kick, and the players stop before you tell them to carry on. At the next break in play you ask the CAR in question to leave fouls to you to protect him from criticism (and don't say that he's not qualified to make those decisions anyway!), In the second half, he signals again for a foul in the goal-mouth as a goal is scored. You award the goal. The team conceding the goal are complaining that the AR has signalled for a foul and the goal shouldn't stand. How do you deal with this, apart from telling the players to get on with it? Do you ask to replace the CAR?

Little tip for point 3. When giving your pre-match instruction, bring the selected CAR's into the coin toss so the captains can listen to the brief. That way, if the CAR does flag for a free kick which they haven't been asked to do, the captains on the pitch are fully aware as well and can (hopefully) aid you in stopping the complaints.

 

[santa sangria]

Except that it doesn't. I queried this a while back when the wording of Law 15 changed. The reply from the IFAB's official Law Enquiries representative and IFAB Technical Director David Elleray, was that if the ball doesn't enter the field, the throw is always retaken, no matter whether it was properly taken or not.

The actual reply was:

Thanks for the reminder

 

[santa sangria]

1. LOTG answer is drop ball. In practical refereeing terms, I'd suggest that the last thing you want to do is restart after handbags with a contested drop ball, which has a chance to flare up again. I'm sure you saw a shove, or one player squaring up to another first, and can therefore give a DFK/IFK based on stopping play for an offence of some sort.

If you're really not sure, then I'm still sure you saw a shove by a player from the attacking team, so can therefore give a DFK for the defending team, which is a straightforward decision that players will move on from quickly. If you do the drop ball and one player uses it as an excuse to give the opponent's knee a whack, you've potentially got another load of handbags and a red/yellow card that you could easily have avoided.

2. As others have said, the restart is unaffected and you can't caution/dismiss if you didn't see anything yourself. If players square up, it might be appropriate to give them both a yellow, but that's about it. And then restart with the original IDFK.

3. Again, good advice from others here. Your response was correct, but don't be afraid to clearly and loudly wave down the flag as well. You may or may not get the desired response from the CAR, but it's arguably more important that you reinforce to the players what's supposed to happen here.

On #1 I’m with the G-man. You need to choose a direct free kick unless you have seen two players commit exactly the same offence at exactly the same time - which essentially does not happen in the real world.

It’s rock and hard place. I’ve made the ”error” of giving IDFK here and it doesn’t play well to anyone - coaches, players, assessors, punters. It’s a small part of taking control. Worst case is give it to the defence or guess the antagonist. And explain to the players ”I didn’t see who started it but it’s gonna be DFK, not a big deal from back here, let’s play” etc.

Great questions!

 

[santa sangria]

A few situations that came up this weekend that I'm looking for clarification on:
1. An incident occurs off the ball and you blow for the whistle as the handbags start, but you did not see clearly who committed any offense, and you have blown before the ball could cross any line. How do you restart play, and what steps do you take to enforce discipline?
2. You blow for an incident off the ball in the penalty area, which you intend to give as an indirect free kick for the defending team. While play is stopped and you are warning two players about their conduct, a second incident occurs. You are unable to see who committed an offense, but a player claims to have been elbowed in the face. What, if anything, do you do to enforce discipline before restarting as you would for the original foul? Do you stick with your original IDFK decision, or change?
3. At the pre-match briefing, you instruct both club ARs to leave fouls to you. In the first half, a CAR signals for a free kick, and the players stop before you tell them to carry on. At the next break in play you ask the CAR in question to leave fouls to you to protect him from criticism (and don't say that he's not qualified to make those decisions anyway!), In the second half, he signals again for a foul in the goal-mouth as a goal is scored. You award the goal. The team conceding the goal are complaining that the AR has signalled for a foul and the goal shouldn't stand. How do you deal with this, apart from telling the players to get on with it? Do you ask to replace the CAR?

Follow up to you with #1... were you aware of anything happening before between the players... could you identify a foul, contact, decision, passsge of play that might have sparked it... could’ve been many mins before...?

 

[socal lurker]

Except that it doesn't. I queried this a while back when the wording of Law 15 changed. The reply from the IFAB's official Law Enquiries representative and IFAB Technical Director David Elleray, was that if the ball doesn't enter the field, the throw is always retaken, no matter whether it was properly taken or not.

The actual reply was:

Interesting. I missed this change in the recent major rewrite (and I don't think it was flagged as a change--I need to go back and check that out of curiosity).

The current language is this:

The ball is in play when it enters the field of play. If the ball touches the ground before entering, the throw-in is retaken by the same team from the same position. If the throw-in is not taken correctly it is retaken by the opposing team.

The language in 2014-15 was:

If the ball touches the ground before entering the field of play, the throw-in is retaken by the same team from the same position provided that it was taken in line with the correct procedure. If the throw-in is not taken in line with the correct procedure, it is retaken by the opposing team.

(I don't recall when that went into Law 15.)

So it appears that the re-write brought us back to the prior concept that the ball must actually go into play.

They also did this in Law 14 by making the ball in play on a PK when it is kicked and clearly moves--by removing the requirement that it move forward to be in play, they ended the way that a team could lose the PK without it being in play when they kicked it forward.

So I think we are now back to the pure concept that a restart cannot change until it is taken. (Well, there is an exception, but it's a bit of a silly trick question.)

 

[Peter Grove]

The exception is for some cases in a penalty kick which the law is specific on.

Ah, but is it? I used to think this and on the face of it, it seems so as it says, "If, before the ball is in play, one of the following occurs" and goes on to describe various situations where an indirect free kick can be given. However those scenarios all involve waiting to see what happens after the ball is kicked - and is therefore in play. In no case does it say that the referee should call a halt before the kick is taken (and therefore, before the ball is in play) and award an IFK. Yes, the offence starts to occur before the ball is in play but in a sense the offence is still occurring as the kick is taken. If the referee were to blow the whistle for some blatant, blatant encroachment before the kick were taken (not that I've ever seen that happen) I'm sure the kick would still be taken after the offending players were made to retreat. So in a sense, it's only after the kick is taken and the ball is in play that the referee actually penalises the offence and could (depending on the scenario) award an indirect free kick.

I saw an incident in an Asian Cup game the other day - a player was taking a penalty but with a very slow, stuttering kind of run up. A couple of players started to encroach but seeing that the player was not quite ready to take the kick yet, retreated back outside the area. Although they then 're-encroached' (but not enough for the referee to take any action) assuming they had stayed outside the area until the moment of the kick, they would not have committed an offence. It's only if the player enters the area before the kick and remains there during and after the kick that the IFK restart could potentially apply, so I'm not sure this truly is a case of altering the restart before the ball is in play since we wait until after the kick is taken (and until we've seen the result of the kick) before deciding on the restart.

I can see flaws in this argument but still, it's not quite as clear-cut as the 'normal' scenario where the ball is out of play and another offence (usually some kind of physical misconduct) occurs, with the ball remaining dead for the entire time before, during and after this second offence happens.

 

[one]

Its a poorly written law (surprise, surprise ). Consider these scenarios.

Referee signals to take the kick. Taker completes his run up then feigns to take the kick for the keeper to dive one way. The keeper doesn't dive. The taker feigns again and the keeper still doesn't dive. At this point common sense and inference logic dictates to blow the whistle and give the IFK. It's an IFK no matter what happens even if the kick is taken so why wait for it (and possibly have to deal with more issues if the taker keeps feigning). Note in this case the offence does not continue into when/if the ball goes into play. Its clearly before the ball goes into play.

How about when the kick is taken backwards. Because the procedure is not followed correctly the ball does not go in play (I know this can be argued but its not dissimilar to a incorrectly taken TI or a incorrectly followed substitution procedure). You give an IFK without asking them to kick the ball again but forward before you award an IFK.

I agree that its not as clear cut as a normal scenario.

 

[socal lurker]

How about when the kick is taken backwards. Because the procedure is not followed correctly the ball does not go in play (I know this can be argued but its not dissimilar to a incorrectly taken TI or a incorrectly followed substitution procedure). You give an IFK without asking them to kick the ball again but forward before you award an IFK.

As of the big rewrite, a PK is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves. They removed the requirement that the ball be kicked forward. So when the ball is kicked backwards (or kicked by the wrong kicker or after a feint--or an improper TI) the offense is simultaneous the ball going into play.

 

[ASM]

As of the big rewrite, a PK is in play when it is kicked and clearly moves. They removed the requirement that the ball be kicked forward. So when the ball is kicked backwards (or kicked by the wrong kicker or after a feint--or an improper TI) the offense is simultaneous the ball going into play.

No, they didn't take that requirement out. It is in the paragraph above,

The player taking the penalty kick must kick the ball forward; backheeling is permitted provided the ball moves forward.

 

[socal lurker]

No, they didn't take that requirement out. It is in the paragraph above,

You're mixing your apples and oranges. The old LOTG said the ball was in play when the ball was kicked and moved forward. Under the new laws, the ball is in play so long as it is kicked and clearly moves (no direction required). The kicker is, however, required to kick the ball forward--the failure to do so is a violation of Law 14--but the ball is in play as soon as it moves. This is exactly the same, now, as an improper TI: the restart can be changed because the ball went into play by coming onto the field--the fact that it was put into play, albeit improperly, permits the change of the restart (and is why an improperly taken TI that fails to enter the field of play is not given to the other team--it didn't come into play).

 

[one]

You're mixing your apples and oranges. The old LOTG said the ball was in play when the ball was kicked and moved forward. Under the new laws, the ball is in play so long as it is kicked and clearly moves (no direction required). The kicker is, however, required to kick the ball forward--the failure to do so is a violation of Law 14--but the ball is in play as soon as it moves. This is exactly the same, now, as an improper TI: the restart can be changed because the ball went into play by coming onto the field--the fact that it was put into play, albeit improperly, permits the change of the restart (and is why an improperly taken TI that fails to enter the field of play is not given to the other team--it didn't come into play).

I disagree.

Would you say the ball is in play if the referee had not signalled for the PK to be taken (part of the procedure)? After all the ball is kicked and clearly moves.

Any restart taken incorrectly (not following procedure) means the ball does not go in play. In fact an Incorrectly taken TI is another restart that changes when the ball is not in play, unless the law specifically says so. A free kick taken from the wrong place does not put the ball in play despite the fact the law says the ball is in play when kicked and clearly moves (note it's a retake for this one). Similar with a rolling ball goal kick.

Not too long ago we had the discussion about substitution which follows a similar logic. The law says the substitution is complete when a substitute enters the field of play. However if the procedure is not followed correctly (eg, the player has not left the FOP, or the sub entered from the goal line), then substitution is NOT complete.

I am fairly certain the reason "and moves forward" was moved from one part of LAW 14 to another was to make it consistent with other free kicks rather than not make it a requirement for ball in play.