Question Number: 23592

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 7/1/2010

Gil of Ann Arbor, MI USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 23558

Interesting. At the State Recert in Michigan a few years ago, we had a Grade 2 as the instructor for the clinic. Might have been Kermit, but I can't remember exactly which year.

In any event, he talked about this situation exactly, and even used the phrase 'it might seem like two bites of the apple, but this is how we want you to call it'.

The theory he outlined was that Law 5 states that the referee '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.'

So, what's more advantageous than a PK? A goal. So if a goal doesn't ensue, then the advantage wasn't realized. Therefore, if the goal isn't scored, we should bring the ball back and penalize the original offense with a PK.

Now, I realize that most players recognize that if they get a good shot off, that was advantage enough.

The other point on advantage in the Penalty Area (which might have come from a circular/directive, and certainly comes from experience) is to not verbalize the advantage in the PA.

Just grist for the mill.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Gil
This advice IMO would not be given in Europe as it is incorrect to say that if a goal doesn't ensue, then the advantage wasn't realized. In the event of the fouled player being allowed the advantage then wasting it as a result of a subsequent error or a colleague who receives the ball immediately from the advantage loses it, or shoots wide of goal, etc then play should not be halted to penalise the original offence. A player inside the penalty area can be fouled, regains his balance and control of the ball, the referee allows the advantage and the player can then gets a clear shot away which is then blazed over the bar. In that situation advantage has been realised but it has not resulted in a goal. If the foul had not been committed there is no guarantee either that a goal would have been scored.
So if the referee allows advantage he has to makes the call as to whether the anticipated advantage ensues. That does not mean that unless a goal has been scored that it has not ensued and that is the key point really.
The better advice IMO is that if there is any doubt about the advantage being there is to award the penalty. I have yet to see a player or team complain about a penalty award as against not allowing an advanatge.

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

The USSF addressed this issue in a position paper in 2008, and in an answer in 2009. Pertinent portions of the 2009 answer follow:

'Question: [Another referee] claims that the memo implies that, in saying that the referee should wait 2-3 seconds to determine if advantage develops, should a DFK foul by the defense in its own PA occur, and in that 2-3 second interval the attacking gets a clean, uncontested shot on goal but misses the goal, the referee is entitled to go back to the original foul and award a penalty kick. . . . . . I think as long as the referee has not indicated to the players he has given advantage, he is within his right to go back and give the foul. However, if an attacker, though the advantage gets off a clean uncontested shot and misses of no fault other than his own, going back and giving the PK in that situation will likely have a very negative effect on game control.
USSF answer (September 8, 2009):
When an offense is committed by a defender inside the team's own penalty area, the definition of Potential changes from "probability" and "dangerous attack" to a goal actually being scored by the fouled team immediately following the foul or at most within another play. The "within a play" is not a hard and fast rule, but a "rule of thumb" subject to the opinion of the referee. The objective is to reward the attackers for scoring a goal despite the offense and not benefiting the defenders by replacing a sure goal with the roughly 70% probability of scoring a goal from a penalty kick.
. . . . In short, if a goal is not scored right away, give the penalty kick.'

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

This is why, no matter who offers you advice, you should consider it rather than just swallow it whole.

Your instructor is making one fundamental error in his approach to advantage.

'Advantage' is about 'opportunity' plus 'possession' - it isn't enough to keep the ball, but you need to be in a good position to do something with it.

Your instructor seems to believe that 'advantage' equals 'positive outcome', which is simply incorrect.

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

See Question: 25731