Question Number: 29425

Mechanics 5/19/2015

RE: Amateur Adult

Patrick of Detroit, United States asks...

Assume a rare scenario where a referee applies advantage to an incident that is both a foul and a send off for violent conduct. The advantage materializes, resulting in a strike on goal. The ball is saved and controlled by the goalkeeper. At this point, the referee feels he can no longer wait until the next stoppage to send off the offender. While the ball is in the goalkeeper's possession, the referee stops play to handle the send off. Since the advantage materialized, the restart post-send off cannot be a DFK to the attacking team. What would be the proper restart here? IFK to the attacking team at the point the ball was located when the referee stopped play, i.e. at the edge of the goal area? This seems like the attacking team would be getting two opportunities from the safe offense.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Patrick
The advice is not to play advantage on a sending off offence including violent conduct except in the case of an immediate shot on goal. In that case the referee adopts a wait and see and if the goal is not scored the referee stops play immediately, sends of the offender and restarts with a direct free kick or penalty kick depending on where the offence took place.

As regards the technical answer to a situation where advantage has been realised with play continuing and the referee then has to stop play the restart is a dropped ball from where the ball was when play was stopped. That is not a very viable / sellable /safe decision in the case of violent conduct / serious foul play and it is the reason that play should be stopped immediately or very close thereafter within a few seconds in those situations.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Patrick,
Best it be nonexistent than rare! NO ADVANTAGE materialized unless a goal occurs! The PK is aprox 75% lock on scoring and the send off reducing the team by a player creates other opportunities but extending play and keeping that player on the field is bad for the match. Going the drop ball route by claiming the advantage was realized could take away the red card for DOGSO but it would actually be incorrect in doing so as the first opportunity was denied by the foul . The SFP or VC as a direct red card act are not forgiven. I suspect the thinking is those who have defiled the match and are due to be sent off could only create MORE misconduct if play continues. ie... engage in a fight with other teams best player, score a goal while you wait for a stoppage to deal with him. Nothing good is coming from this!
The advice is in DOGSO or SFP or VC situations where an immediate goal MIGHT occur is not to indicate advantage but to wait briefly see if the goal is scored and if it is not, stop play award the foul, usually a pk situation, show the red card and send off . If the foul was ONLY DOGSO although a goal will cancel the ...need... to send off , a caution ...might... still linger as an option. Not so for SFP or VC as the player will be sent off for sure! Goal or no goal!



Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Patrick,

Once the referee has decided to apply advantage, he must wait until the next natural stoppage to apply the card.

He hasn't done that here, but play has essentially been stopped for a reason not specified in the laws (this is different to the normal case of stopping play to issue a card, as in this case the offence had previously been acknowledged), so a drop ball would be the only option. Incidentally, if it was for an 'on the ball' incident, it would usually be Serious Foul Play (except for, say, incidents with no actual attempt to play the ball, such as a punch).