Question Number: 19914

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/9/2008

RE: Rec Adult

Warren of Sydney, NSW Australia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 19792

Hi All,

Since we are talking hypothetical here, I'd like your opinion on a variation to the scenario in 19792.

How about if the defender blatantly (and recklessly/unsportingly) tripped the attacker without any attempt to play the ball, and the attacker's teammate had re-entered the field only a couple of seconds prior to the tripping incident ?

My gut reaction is that the right decision in the spirit of the laws would be to rule the teammate's entrance simultaneous (rather than before) the trip and still proceed with the DOGSO (punish the more serious offence when two occur together). Do any of the panel feel the same ?

Cheers,

Warren.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

No Warren, we're not going to create a wrinkle in time to change the order of the events. That would make the game protestable. Only if the time the player entering the field was so close to the time of the trip that the AR was not reasonably sure the player entered first would we consider this.

However, as I stated in my earlier answer, if the nature of the 'foul' on the attacker was reckless or excessive, we could still deal with the misconduct that was committed.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Always good to hear from you Warren,
As a referee with integrity you are bound by the laws of the game.

Your reference to simultaneous infractions is flawed. ONLY if the same player commits more than one offence or him and a team mate are involved could you apply that logic.

If you surmised this was a simultaneous infraction by two opposing players then you could conceivabley do a drop ball and caution show a yellow card to the player who reentered without permission. If that foul was more than careless, say reckless or excessive in nature caution show yellow or send off show red as required.
This would involve you seeing the re entry at the EXACT same time the foul was occurring.
Pretty far fetched!

IF you decided to award the foul and discipline the misconduct of the defender if any, be it caution or SFP or DOGSO, that was associated with the tackle then you should not caution the player who reentered at this time as it *never happened* because if you did then the match is protestable as you have then documented the INDFK offence occurred prior to the DFK foul.

The attacker who re-enters without permission and is seen doing so renders his team unable to score and affects the restart! THAT WAS HIS DECISION NOT YOURS AS REFEREE! If we accept this infringement renders his team unable to score per law 10 and thus DOGSO via any foul is impossible do we accept the fact that because play is NOT stopped for the illegal entry but rather something else given we are told the referee MUST stop (although not immediately if the player does not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
While the reentering player did not affect anything in behind play it is not within referee discretion to recognize the defending misconduct as a foul, it is only misconduct! If you recall the the incident where the laws state we disallow a goal for the team that scores with too many players. The fact that goal might have deflected in off a defender before crossing the goal line means nothing we are awarding an INDFK for someone entering or rentering without permission because it occurred first.
It states we are to
? caution the player for entering the field of play without permission
? order the player to leave the field of play if necessary (e.g. infringement
of Law 4)
If the referee stops play, it must be restarted:
? with an indirect free kick for the opposing team from the position
of the ball when play was stopped (see Law 13 ? Position of Free
Kick) if there is no other infringement
? in accordance with Law 12 if the player infringes this Law
This refers ONLY to the player who entered without permission
Cheers