Offences off the FOP

[refeire]

I'm trying to clear up my understanding of the various scenarios where a player and or manager commit an offence off the FOP.

Here IFAB give this Q&A:
A player who is already off the field of play (having been treated for an injury) argues with a ball boy/girl and spits at him/her. What is the referee’s decision?

The player is sent off (red card). Play is restarted with a dropped ball as outlined in Law 8 – a free kick cannot be awarded because this offence was not committed against someone on the team lists or a match official.

Then here they also give this:
When the ball is in play, a player leaves the field without the referee’s permission and strikes a spectator. The referee stops play. What is the correct decision?

The player is sent off (red card) for violent conduct. Play is restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team on the boundary line nearest to where the offence (striking) occurred.

Why in the first scenario, they state we cannot award a FK for offences unless commited against someone on the team list or a match official, but then in the 2nd scenario they say we punish the striking of a spectator (obviously not listed on the team lists neither a match official) with an IDFK?

There is a 3rd scenario where a manager strikes a player off the FOP. The restart is a dropped ball, why not IDFK/FK? If a manager runs onto the fop and interferes with play we award a FK, why can we suddenly not punish managers with likewise if they are off FOP and commit violent conduct?

 

[JamesL]

I'm trying to clear up my understanding of the various scenarios where a player and or manager commit an offence off the FOP.

Here IFAB give this Q&A:
A player who is already off the field of play (having been treated for an injury) argues with a ball boy/girl and spits at him/her. What is the referee’s decision?

The player is sent off (red card). Play is restarted with a dropped ball as outlined in Law 8 – a free kick cannot be awarded because this offence was not committed against someone on the team lists or a match official.

Then here they also give this:
When the ball is in play, a player leaves the field without the referee’s permission and strikes a spectator. The referee stops play. What is the correct decision?

The player is sent off (red card) for violent conduct. Play is restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team on the boundary line nearest to where the offence (striking) occurred.

Why in the first scenario, they state we cannot award a FK for offences unless commited against someone on the team list or a match official, but then in the 2nd scenario they say we punish the striking of a spectator (obviously not listed on the team lists neither a match official) with an IDFK?

There is a 3rd scenario where a manager strikes a player off the FOP. The restart is a dropped ball, why not IDFK/FK? If a manager runs onto the fop and interferes with play we award a FK, why can we suddenly not punish managers with likewise if they are off FOP and commit violent conduct?

Maybe you could send to ifab the inconsistencies so they can see it for themselves.
I do try to steer clear of the FAQs as they do often give conflicting answers.

The answers to these questions are found towards the end of law 12 and are your best bet of getting it right on FOP.

 

[Anubis]

Situation 1, the player is, having left the field with permission, taking no actual part in the game at that point.
Situation 2, the player is part of the game at the time he committs his offence,

would be a random guess without looking at the book so probably miles off the mark.

 

[refeire]

Maybe you could send to ifab the inconsistencies so they can see it for themselves.
I do try to steer clear of the FAQs as they do often give conflicting answers.

The answers to these questions are found towards the end of law 12 and are your best bet of getting it right on FOP.

Well I was hoping there was some logic to it that was escaping me and someone could explain what it was

Thank you, I will have a look. I've got an exam this evening, everything is making sense to me except these scenarios. It's all well and good memorising questions and answers but nothing replaces understanding the logic, then you can answer any variation of questions

 

[markref]

In the first case the player has already been given permission to leave the FOP, and since the offence is against a non-participant there is no free kick awarded, hence the dropped ball.
In the second case the player has left the FOP to commit the offence, so the IDFK is awarded for leaving the FOP without permission, not the violent conduct.

 

[refeire]

In the first case the player has already been given permission to leave the FOP, and since the offence is against a non-participant there is no free kick awarded, hence the dropped ball.
In the second case the player has left the FOP to commit the offence, so the IDFK is awarded for leaving the FOP without permission, not the violent conduct.

See this is what I thought too and it was all dandy up until I was told I was incorrect and in actual fact IFAB say it too. They write "the offence (striking)" => they are punishing the striking, not the leaving the FOP

 

[markref]

The punishment for the offence of striking anyone, including a non-participant is a red card. That is consistent. The restart is what changes. If the player is on the FOP and leaves to commit VC the restart is an IDFK for leaving the field without permission. If he is already off the field of play he can't be punished for leaving the field without permission so the restart is the dropped ball.

You punish the more serious offence - Violent conduct - with a red card both times, but the restart is different due to different circumstances. ie leaving / not leaving the FOP without permission. If the restart was for the violent conduct this would be a DFK not IDFK.

 

[refeire]

The punishment for the offence of striking anyone, including a non-participant is a red card. That is consistent. The restart is what changes. If the player is on the FOP and leaves to commit VC the restart is an IDFK for leaving the field without permission. If he is already off the field of play he can't be punished for leaving the field without permission so the restart is the dropped ball.

You punish the more serious offence - Violent conduct - with a red card both times, but the restart is different due to different circumstances. ie leaving / not leaving the FOP without permission. If the restart was for the violent conduct this would be a DFK not IDFK.

So the restart is in fact for leaving the FOP, not for the VC? This was my previous understanding (punishing the first offence)

My follow up question then is why is the IDFK taken from the point on the boundary line nearest to the striking, and not the point at which the player left the FOP? The restart appears associated to the VC rather than leaving the FOP if that makes sense?

 

[JamesL]

Page 108-109
4. Restart of play after fouls and misconduct
If the ball is out of play, play is restarted according to the previous decision.
If the ball is in play and a player commits a physical offence inside the field of
play against:
• an opponent – an indirect or direct free kick or penalty kick
• a team-mate, substitute, substituted or sent-off player, team official or a
match official – a direct free kick or penalty kick
All verbal offences are penalised with an indirect free kick.

If the referee stops play for an offence committed by a player, inside or outside
the field of play, against an outside agent, play is restarted with a dropped ball,
unless a free kick is awarded for leaving the field of play without the referee's
permission.
If, when the ball is in play:
• a player commits an offence against a match official or an opposing player,
substitute, substituted or sent-off player, or team official outside the field of
play or
• a substitute, substituted or sent-off player, or team official commits an
offence against, or interferes with, an opposing player or match official
outside the field of play,
play is restarted with a free kick on the boundary line nearest to where the
offence/interference occurred; for direct free kick offences, a penalty kick is
awarded if this is within the offender’s penalty area.
If an offence is committed outside the field of play by a player against a player,
substitute, substituted player or team official of their own team, play is
restarted with an indirect free kick on the boundary line closest to where the
offence occurred.

I think in scenario 2 we are punishing the leave FOP and that offence happens 1st for the restart. . Then VC for the striking offence.
Thsts the major difference. One is already off and two leaves.

The third is just wrong by my reckoning.

 

[refeire]

Page 108-109
4. Restart of play after fouls and misconduct
If the ball is out of play, play is restarted according to the previous decision.
If the ball is in play and a player commits a physical offence inside the field of
play against:
• an opponent – an indirect or direct free kick or penalty kick
• a team-mate, substitute, substituted or sent-off player, team official or a
match official – a direct free kick or penalty kick
All verbal offences are penalised with an indirect free kick.

If the referee stops play for an offence committed by a player, inside or outside
the field of play, against an outside agent, play is restarted with a dropped ball,
unless a free kick is awarded for leaving the field of play without the referee's
permission.
If, when the ball is in play:
• a player commits an offence against a match official or an opposing player,
substitute, substituted or sent-off player, or team official outside the field of
play or
• a substitute, substituted or sent-off player, or team official commits an
offence against, or interferes with, an opposing player or match official
outside the field of play,
play is restarted with a free kick on the boundary line nearest to where the
offence/interference occurred; for direct free kick offences, a penalty kick is
awarded if this is within the offender’s penalty area.
If an offence is committed outside the field of play by a player against a player,
substitute, substituted player or team official of their own team, play is
restarted with an indirect free kick on the boundary line closest to where the
offence occurred.

I think in scenario 2 we are punishing the leave FOP and that offence happens 1st for the restart. . Then VC for the striking offence.
Thsts the major difference. One is already off and two leaves.

The third is just wrong by my reckoning.

Thank you for that .. why then is the IDFK restart to be on the point of the boundary line closest to the VC, and not the point at which the player left the FOP without permission?

 

[JamesL]

Thank you for that .. why then is the IDFK restart to be on the point of the boundary line closest to the VC, and not the point at which the player left the FOP without permission?

Refer you to my earlier point about the FAQs. I wouldn't place as much importance on them as to what the law says:

If the referee stops play for an offence committed by a player, inside or outside
the field of play, against an outside agent, play is restarted with a dropped ball,
unless a free kick is awarded for leaving the field of play without the referee's
permission.

To me that says the FK is taken from the boundary where they left. Although I could accept an argument of play only being stopped for it as a result of the VC and invoking the simultaneous offences Clause.

Also spirit of game. We are never going to allow the team of the offender to have a dropped ball, are we?

It's a all a bit muddy isn't it

 

[refeire]

Refer you to my earlier point about the FAQs. I wouldn't place as much importance on them as to what the law says:

If the referee stops play for an offence committed by a player, inside or outside
the field of play, against an outside agent, play is restarted with a dropped ball,
unless a free kick is awarded for leaving the field of play without the referee's
permission.

That's fair, one hopes the writers of the exam won't be referencing the FAQs

 

[socal lurker]

This used to be all pretty simple. Then IFAB started going into the weeds to make the restarts more fair based on the conduct. The problem, in my view, is they took rare events and made the restarts complicated and keep tweaking them--making it highly likely that even diligent referees are going to get them wrong. (And that's even before the DB change to a non-neutral restart, which could, in theory, mean that certain off field offenses by a defending team while the opponents are attacking in the PA could lead to the ball being turned over to the offending team's GK. Of course, we would always try not to stop in such a scenario.) IMO IFAB has tried to solve for too many things and just made it a mess. I used to know exactly what the restart would be in these scenarios and I no longer have any confidence that if I see one of these unicorns I'll get it right on the pitch. But I also don't lose sleep over it as they are so rare I have better things to do with my time than keep sorting through these to be perfect.

 

[JamesL]

This used to be all pretty simple. Then IFAB started going into the weeds to make the restarts more fair based on the conduct. The problem, in my view, is they took rare events and made the restarts complicated and keep tweaking them--making it highly likely that even diligent referees are going to get them wrong. (And that's even before the DB change to a non-neutral restart, which could, in theory, mean that certain off field offenses by a defending team while the opponents are attacking in the PA could lead to the ball being turned over to the offending team's GK. Of course, we would always try not to stop in such a scenario.) IMO IFAB has tried to solve for too many things and just made it a mess. I used to know exactly what the restart would be in these scenarios and I no longer have any confidence that if I see one of these unicorns I'll get it right on the pitch. But I also don't lose sleep over it as they are so rare I have better things to do with my time than keep sorting through these to be perfect.

But the powers that be do insist on including these in laws of the game exams.....so in refeire's case he has to lose sleep over it

 

[socal lurker]

But the powers that be do insist on including these in laws of the game exams.....so in refeire's case he has to lose sleep over it

Too true. The last test I took I did without studying and the one question I missed was an off-field misconduct. This is certainly something I would study before taking a test.

 

[Macca]

Ok, what about this scenario?
Leaving the field of play without the referees permission. IFK I believe?
What if the player left the field of play and punched a sub/team official. Red card, but IFK as first offense or DFK or VC?

 

[refeire]

Ok, what about this scenario?
Leaving the field of play without the referees permission. IFK I believe?
What if the player left the field of play and punched a sub/team official. Red card, but IFK as first offense or DFK or VC?

I believe the first offence must be punished, so IDFK for leaving the fop without permission.

Is this good for a summary?

1. Ball in play, player leaves FOP and commits an offence against anybody:
The restart is an IDFK and then a yellow/red depending on offence.

2. Ball in play, player/sub/team official off the FOP commits an offence against:
A. An opposition player, sub, team official or match official => restart is an IDFK/DFK (depending on the offence) and YC/RC as appropriate
B. An outside agent => Play is restarted with a dropped ball from where play was stopped (regardless of offence) and YC/RC as appropriate

3. Ball out of play, player commits an offence on or off the FOP:
Restart according to previous decision and YC/RC as appropriate for offence committed

4. Ball in play, a manager strikes a player, substitute or team official:
A. From the opposition or a match official=> Referee stops play and issues a DFK from nearest point on boundary line and RC to the manager
B. From the same team => The referee stops play and restarts with dropped ball from where the ball was when the referee stopped play, RC to the manager

5. A substitute or team official enters the field of play
A. They don't interfere with play => IDFK at point of entry
B. They do interfere with play => DFK (or PK) at point of interference

Please confirm/correct as appropriate .. I need a cup of tea!

 

[Big Cat]

I believe the first offence must be punished, so IDFK for leaving the fop without permission.

Is this good for a summary?

1. Ball in play, player leaves FOP and commits an offence against anybody:
The restart is an IDFK and then a yellow/red depending on offence.

2. Ball in play, player/sub/team official off the FOP commits an offence against:
A. An opposition player, sub, team official or match official => restart is an IDFK/DFK (depending on the offence) and YC/RC as appropriate
B. An outside agent => Play is restarted with a dropped ball from where play was stopped (regardless of offence) and YC/RC as appropriate

3. Ball out of play, player commits an offence on or off the FOP:
Restart according to previous decision and YC/RC as appropriate for offence committed

4. Ball in play, a manager strikes a player, substitute or team official:
A. From the opposition or a match official=> Referee stops play and issues a DFK from nearest point on boundary line and RC to the manager
B. From the same team => The referee stops play and restarts with dropped ball from where the ball was when the referee stopped play, RC to the manager

5. A substitute or team official enters the field of play
A. They don't interfere with play => IDFK at point of entry
B. They do interfere with play => IDFK (or PK) at point of interference

Please confirm/correct as appropriate .. I need a cup of tea!

You could've just said, 'who, what (who did what to who), where, when?' Easy to remember IMHO
Given that the permutations are a) IFK b) DFK c) DB and the location is, a) Boundary, b) where ball is, c) where interference took place (with the caveat that the restart may be unchanged), that's 4x3x2 chance of getting it right 1 in 24 ... oh and which team gets the restart 1 in 48 (ish)
I think your summary is good enough.

 

[one]

I think in Q&A ifab has just gone against their own advice in terms of sanction. Had they done the sanction correctly then the restart make sense.

The player has commited two offences in quick succession, leaving the field of play without permission and VC. So you yellow card for the first offence and then red card for the second offence. You restart according to first offence.

Now your communication and body language has to very clear as to not to confuse anyone that the red is not for a double yellow and I think why ifab, in their Q&A, chose to 'incorrectly' not show the yellow.

Funny offences in quick succession has come up in two different threads in quick succession.

 

[socal lurker]

The player has commited two offences in quick succession, leaving the field of play without permission and VC. So you yellow card for the first offence and then red card for the second offence. You restart according to first offence.

Since you didn't stop play for the first offense, seem to me the better answer is essentially retroactive advantage on the first offense, as the restart for the second offense is better--not that IFK/DFK is really going to make a real difference unless it was going off the GL behind the PA. (And I don't think in the real world I would be cautioning before the send off, but that's a separate question.)