Question Number: 12338

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/11/2006

RE: Competitive High School

Ed of Birmingham, Michigan U.S.A. asks...

I was watching a high school tournament game and viewed the following play in the closing minutes of the game. The attacking team inbounded the ball via a corner kick. After a header back to the front of the goal box, the following sequence of events occurred. The attacking player shot the ball at the goal from about 20 feet out. The keeper made the save but could not control the ball. A defender kicked at the ball but did not clear it. As the ball lay about 10 feet from the goal, a defender dropped to his knees over the ball, bent forward to shield the ball from the attacking team, and effectively blocked access to the ball. In fact, this defender, while still on his knees shielding the ball, shuffled to his left to block an attacking team player thus denying a play on the ball. In the mean time, the keeper recovered and dove on the shielded ball to enact a stoppage in play. The referee, who was well positioned on the goal line, called a stoppage in play based on the keeper's save, and awarded a free kick. The attacking team claimed obstruction. The attacking team was yellow carded for protesting the call and went on to lose the game by a 1-0 score. I would be interested in your opinion as to the actions of the defender and your interpritation of the referee's call. When would obstruction have been a potential call? Any other commentary would also be appreciated.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Ed the first thing that need addressing is there can be no obstruction (impeding the progress of an opponent for the rest of the world) when the ball is being played or can be played.

The referee called a stoppage in play based on the keeper's save? This is something I don't understand. Either the referee saw something you missed because of his proximity to play or he got himself involved in "creative" refereeing. Anyway it was a fact connected with play, the referee made a decision and that is final, so far as the match goes. An assessor may find some holes in the referee's decision making process, or his assistants may want to ask what he saw -- we may only guess.

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Ed,
Based on your words "a defender dropped to his knees over the ball" It is not automatically impeding (not obstruction) for a defender to be on the ground or shield a ball that is within playing distance while on the ground.

We are instructed to see if an unreasonable situtation occurs or was created by that defender.

The referee in your match saw the defender's actions as fairplay even if you did not. As a fact concerning play the decision is uncontestable.

Teams/players that argue a call place themselves at unneccessary risk if they dissent as the referee could choose to caution and show the yellow. In this case he felt it neccessary to do so!

Still you are correct in that as a potential call impeding or playing in a dangerous manner could be present.

I too express puzzlement at "called a stoppage in play based on the keeper's save" although you mention the referee was well positioned so perhaps he saw an infringement where by the keeper was fouled by a charging/kicking attacker? I am assuming the free kick DFK or INDFK? was in fact in favour of the defenders since the attacking team was upset?

You ask an important question even if incorrectly identified any foul present, a referee with integrity sees what he sees . The fact others see it differently is why the questions and letters keep coming. Each referee is a field condition that players must adapt to. How each referee interprets what he sees is an opinion that we can only hope was made with honest effort and an understanding and application of the laws within the spirit of the game. Your query was well crafted and speaks highly of your nature to be able to agree to disagree and move on during a match yet resilent to seek answers rather than let something fester away without resolve. As a in all human frailties it is refreshing not to personalize a point of view that differs from anothers.
Cheers