Question Number: 22968

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/19/2010

RE: Other

Mark Malacky of Warren, OH USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 22331

Hi everyone,

I would like to get some clarification on this situation along with a similar one.

My first thought is how can an arm swing to the head of an opponent not be some sort of cautionable offense. Lets see.

If the holding foul had not occurred, but the arm swing still did, the referee could stop play for striking, if he feels it is done carelessly, recklessly or involving excessive force. Intent should have nothing to do with it. I'm referencing ATR 12.1 here.

Also, 12.2 of ATR mentions Referees should not punish actions that are accidental or inadvertent.

So, if in the opinion of the referee, the arm swing to the head was accidental and not careless, reckless or involving excessive force, he is perfectly OK in allowing play to continue. Correct?

In the example with the holding foul occurring first, is the referee limited to action against the 'arm swinger' of either trifling (no action - evidently his opinion), a yellow card for unsporting behavior, or a red card for violent contact? Once again, should the intent be a moot point?

Thanks for your help with this.

Mark.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Mark
Soccer is a game in which players constantly move their arms and hands as a natural part of their movement. Many times when jumping for a ball players will lift their arms to assist with balance, leverage etc.
Now the referee has to decide if the natural swing of the arm which makes contact with an opponent is accidental, inadvertent, avoidable or deliberate. That will result in either play on if the contact is trifling or if it is careless then it is a DFK.
When the natural swing is reckless it is a DFK and a caution and if the referee believes that the movement of the arm was deliberate using excessive force it is a dismissal for serious foul play. If the ball is not present and the player swings his arm with the intention of hitting the opponent it is violent conduct and a dismissal.
USSF makes a good analogy between the use of the arm as a tool or as a weapon. When the swing is up and away from the opponent that is seen as a tool whereas up and into the opponent is seen as a weapon. The full Directive can be viewed at
http://www.ussoccer.com/Referees/Referee-Development/~/media/FC3E7670F28D418AA93A9D7EF3B027BE.ashx

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

During aerial challenges, the player who jumping straight up and has not extended the arm (like a battering ram) usually is making a fair challenge. When the arm goes up and out, making contact above the shoulder, the conduct usually is violent conduct. The referee can use F-I-R-E to consider the sendoff: is the arm there due to Frustration; Intimidation; Retaliation or to Establish territory or space?

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

One thing a referee must not do is make decisions on unfounded assumptions. Players who raise their arms never do so innocently - there is a purpose - some legal, some not. Observe carefully what happens when a player's arms are involved in the play, and when the arms go up, move so what happens is visible - angle is better than proximity, but angle and proximity are always best.