Question Number: 25511

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/28/2011

RE: Competive, High School Adult

Robert Hom of Eagle River , WI USA asks...

At a WI High School Match, White is ahead 1-0 in a closely contested match, the clock has 5 minutes left.

A DFK is awarded to Green about 10 yards from White's PA. White immediately sets a wall at an appropriate distance. The attacking kicker has not asked for '10', and is pausing for his players to get in position and I assume, strategizing his opportunity. The Green kicker has stepped back from the ball in order to take a running start on the ball.

As Green begins his run to the ball, the White wall similarly advances and encroaches. Two of the White wall sprint and leap into the air as they charge, and make contact with the ball. The third White wall member has 'only' taken a couple of steps towards the Green Kicker and ball...but quite obviously advanced towards the kicker.

The AR signals and CR immediately whistles for a rekick, and the CR calls the offending 3 White players over to issue 3 yellow cards for Unsporting Behavior (encroachment).

Should 3 yellow cards have been issued? Is it typical to 'just' card the most egregious misconduct in this situation? Was the third players infraction 'trifling' in this case?

As this was a WIAA game, all 3 yellow carded players had to leave the field and be substituted. However, White only had 2 available subs; and thus had to play a man short until the next substitute opportunity. Needless to say...the last 5 minutes of the game was tense with emotion and play. White finally had a substitute opportunity with about 40 seconds left in the match and survived the Green onslaught.

And one other question... Why is 'failure to respect required distance' a specific caution for goal kicks, corner kicks, and throw-ins'...but the same conduct during a FK is considered 'encroachment' or a component of 'Unsporting Behavior'... which technically are two different misconducts? Just curious

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

1. The referee has the right and power to caution all three players who engaged in misconduct. It is usually wiser, however, to caution only one. My experience is that every player will recognize that the referee will punish encroachment and will change their behavior when a card has been shown. The danger in three cards is that the referee who is perceived as too harsh and unjust will probably ending up cautioning players for continued dissent. The net result can be less effective in changing behavior and game management than a single card.

2. I suspect that the 3 defenders have learned that the technique of rushing the kicker at a free kick is a very bad idea. The experience may cause other coaches in WIAA to discard the tactic.

3. High school rules change the label for how the caution is reported. But, there is no difference than the laws of the game in the interpretation of the acts that constitute the misconduct. One of the objectives of high school rules is uniformity among different sports, and unsporting conduct occurs in every sport. Hence 'disqualification' rather than sendoff. A recent NFHS rule change adds 'reckless foul' to list of acts that constitute unsporting conduct - - something that has always been part of the interpretation, but never stated in the rule.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Robert
While I'm not familar with High School rules other than what is written down I would find three cautions for the same offence as being 'heavy handed'.
The rules allow for this as they do in FIFA games yet in NFHS with the three players having to leave the field of play to be substitued it is certainly a very heavy censure particularly when there was only two replacements available.
Generally the referee would caution the player that made contact with the ball or had the most influence on the free kick having to be retaken. That would give sufficient warning to players that a repeat would result in a similar sanction.
In a FIFA game a referee that issued three yellow cards for the same offence would lose credibility very quickly and indeed he would quickly encounter other match control issues probably resulting in a card fest. Referees know that when the card count escalates that they have probably 'lost' control which is never a good outcome. I suspect your tense with emotion comment reflected some of that which lucklily enough only had to be endured for 5 minutes although at a very difficult period in the game. I suspect that the decision had some other influences such as a constant tactic previously warned against by the referee or indeed repeated fouls. the referee then says I've had enough which manifests itself in three cards.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

3 cards at the end of a game lead me to believe this had been going on for awhile, the referee had warned the team, and he finally had enough of it. Otherwise usually a caution to the player that touched the ball and, at most, to the other player that jumped at the ball

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

See Question: 25532