Question Number: 19941

Law 5 - The Referee 9/14/2008

RE: Select Under 16

Doug Crawford of Rocklin, CA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 19873

Hello folks. Thanks for all your advice, encouragement, and humor.

Ref Contarino, in question 19127, and Ref Dawson, in question 19873, have set me rummaging through my brain again. This concerns "ADVANTAGE" when there is a SECOND TOUCH by the kicker on a restart, and a goal is scored from that second touch. I thought this issue had been settled by USSF, so I was surprised to see the comments.

In hypothetical question 19127:
- the keeper takes a goal kick
- the ball leaves the penalty area
- the wind blows the ball back towards the goal
- the same keeper attemps to block the ball, touching the ball with the hands
- the ball rebound from the keepers hands, directly into the goal

Contarino in 19127 says:
- If the keeper WAS the player that took the kick and he touched the ball a second time before the ball went into the net, the referee should give advantage and still award the goal.

(This implies there are times we should ignore the second touch by the person taking the restart, when it is to the advantage of the other team.)

In hypothetical question 19873, a general question is asked about advantage when there is a violation of a law, in this case law 13 governing free kick mechanics.
The question asks if advantage should be allowed despite a violation of the mechanics of the law, or if play should be stopped irregardless of the advantage, and restarted in accordance with law 13.

Dawson in 19873 says:
This is in my opinion where controversy lies, whether advantage applies to these rare moments. In my opinion NO ADVANTAGE is possible on a second touch restart violation as it contradicts the overriding concept that it is impossible to score against yourself from a restart and whether you kick the ball into your own goal or make it possible for an opponent to do so it goes against the restart mentality.

(This implies a referee in the USA should never ignore the second touch on a restart, even when ignoring the second touch would give a goal to the other team.)

Later Dawson in 19873 says:
I think in terms of handles the ball deliberately which becomes a DFK on a restart second touch violation for a player inside or outside the PA and only outside for a keeper while a DFK or PK in the case of a player inside or in the case of a keeper inside an INDFK ,could be awarded no DOGSO could apply.

(This implies we should ignore the second touch on a restart, and instead penalize deliberate handling, when it occurs on the second touch.)

I realize that these hypothetical situations of goal allowed vs INDFK are improbable, but I have seen the wind blow the ball back into the penalty area from a goal kick, and kids will do crazy things!

I just realized that three and one half months separate these two posts. I do seem to remember a long series of discussions about this issue some months ago, with clarification by USSF. If I am simply digging up dirt in your flower bed, after you all have so neatly arranged it, then I will try to tread more carefully.

Take it easy /Doug

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

There are always what ifs that create a certain amount of confusion.
First off we certainly cannot fault you on your dilegence in percieving conflict in the answers. The fact you read decifered and pieced things together show us you are serious about increasing your understanding and knowledge. In fact we have the back pages burning with clarification, point, counter point in an effort to give a clear picture when in fact we are not in agreement amongst ourselves. I am not a USSF referee thus not bound by their policy but I do know they rarely contravene the laws. Nor do I wish to instill any incorrect assumptions so remember I offer only an opinion.

Lets try to put the unusual into a practical context .
Advantage is a great tool for referee to apply when the attempt by the opposition fails to stop an attack .
In the rare cases where a goal or opportuity results with no hint of the opposition being affected the spirit of such context troubles us/ or at least me greatly .
I do recognize a MISTAKE cannot always be rectified.

A poor goal kick with massive backspin is hoisted barely outside the boundry blows back inside and directly enters the goal is a CORNER kick same as if a direct throw in by a teammate entered the goal directly. You could considered at WHAT level of play this would occur at?

Now if that kicker was a player and the keeper tried to stop the ball and touched it before it entered the goal technically it is an indfk for using his hands on a ball deliberately kicked to him by a team mate. This is an INDFK offence mentioned SPECIFICALLY IN law 12 and yes the referee could allow such a goal using the advantage clause. If the restart was a throw in from a team mate and the ball travelled back towards the keeper who misplayed it and it went into the goal we can apply the same logic.

The ball did make it into play and went indirectly into the own goal thus an advantage of a goal even if unearned is better than an indfk restart.
This principle was stated law 12 FIFA Q&A a deliberate kick or law 15 FIFA Q&A throw in by a team mate direct to the keeper if the touches the ball prior to it entering the goal a goal is awarded be it the hand or any other body part.

Where I have issue is in proceedural restart violations.

IF the kicker was the keeper then his attempt to touch the ball becomes a second touch of a free kick the same as a throw in player who makes a poor throw and upon realizing the opposition might get to it decides to play it a second time kicks at the ball or punches the ball away, both are second touches off a restart although one is a DFK offence as well. It states when a player commits simultanous offences at the same time we apply the the greater offence. YET if a goal CANNOT be scored directly by the SAME player on himself if he does so indirectly via an illegal action the DOGSO criteria CANNOT Apply.
THE REFEREE LAW 5
? allows play to continue when the team against which an offence
has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and
penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does
not ensue at that time

Advantage
The referee may play advantage whenever an infringement or offence occurs. The referee should consider the following circumstances in deciding whether to apply the advantage or stop play:
? the severity of the offence: if the infringement warrants an expulsion, the referee must stop play and send off the player unless there is a subsequent opportunity to score a goal
? the position where the offence was committed: the closer to the
opponent?s goal, the more effective it can be
? the chances of an immediate, dangerous attack on the opponents?
goal
? the atmosphere of the match
The decision to penalise the original offence must be taken within a
few seconds. If the offence warrants a caution, it must be issued at the next stoppage. However, unless there is a clear advantage, it is recommended that the referee stops play and cautions the player immediately. If the caution is NOT issued at the next stoppage, it cannot be shown later.
LAW 5 The Referee
? punishes the more serious offence when a player commits more than one offence at the same time

While I has misgivings we should award a goal on a second touch violation from a restart as it is a proceedural infraction if a referee DELAYS the whistle and the ball after the contact rolls into the goal it is likely a goal. I do not know under what auspices it could be protested. I just know my whistle would sound immediately upon the touch before it entered or had opportunity to enter the goal.

Think on this impossibility from a law perspective
A throw in to the keeper is retouched by the thrower upon entering the field as a second touch proceedural violation INDFK as he deliberately kicks the ball towards his own goal to prevent a nearby opponent from getting to it. The keeper uses his hands on the ball just inside the penalty area another indfk violation but not proceedural but it bounces of fhis hands and out of the penalty area towards an opponent . The keeper deliberately rehandles the ball this time outside the area now a DFK and prevents the opponent from shooting the ball into the goal YOUR DECISION IS??
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Doug and thanks for writing. Your question made me not only do some serious thinking but also to check with Mr. Allen as to my answer. It is correct to give advantage and award a goal if the wind blows the ball back (or if it rebounds off the referee for that matter) into the penalty area and there is a second touch. This applies to ANY kick coming out of the penalty area be it a goal kick or free kick. You cannot score directly on yourself at any restart that is true. But, the second touch takes away the directly so now a goal may be allowed. Of course, if the referee blows the whistle before the ball enters the goal it's just treated as a second touch.

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

See Question: 20043