Question Number: 17698

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/5/2007

RE: Select Under 16

Mark of Westport, CT USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 17650

So this all begs the question [17650] as to what the proper decision is if the same substitute enters the field of play and commits what would otherwise be a penal foul against an attacker in which the DOGSO criteria were met. I can understand that the restart would remain an IDFK, but are the referees hands tied with regard to the send-off? Maybe is isn't a straight red for DOGSO-F, but surely there is a second caution to be had somewhere in chain of events that occurred once the substitute is on the field of play.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Mark good point you bring up! SO5 may only be committed by a player, a substitute on the field without permission cannot, by definition infringe the Fouls side of Law 12 because he is not a player. He may be guilty of USB, dissent, delaying the restart of play, SO2, SO3, SO4, SO6 or SO7. That's it. The restart remains where the ball was when play stopped and indirect from there. even if you work the numbers to get him sent-off his side still remains at the same number of players.

It's just one of those things, like the USYSA substitution opportunities not including a stoppage for a sending-off. This little known bit forces an outfield player to assume the duties as goalkeeper when the keeper is sent-off and there is no injury. That is one you'll have much more trouble with!!

Regards,

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 17768