Question Number: 29789

Mechanics 10/7/2015

RE: Rec/select Under 15

Brad Heers of Plymouth, Michigan United States asks...

This question is a follow up to question 29780

This scenario raises two questions in me that revolve around 'interpretation' and practical game management.

The example cited is of a keeper dropping the ball due to 'dissenting-level' distraction of the opposing coach, then reacquiring the dropped ball.

A first thought/question: given the circumstances (and presuming no charging attacker), could this be dismissed as 'trifling' with the keeper simply keeping possession (somewhat consistent with what actually occurred)? In a broader sense of the question, when can 'trifling' be applied to avoid such hairy situations? I am not trying to 'bend' the definition, but rather 'understanding' trifling better as a possible tool.

The second question is that of a possible ensuing dropped ball (due to opposing coach being warned). In a spirit of 'FIFA fair play', ball should be in keeper's hands. Can a referee 'exert control' on this--both in this particular case and as a broader question?

I've heard suggestions from senior referees that in such a situation (if the opposing coach/team don't honor spirit of FIFA fair play) that the referee simply can drop the ball before the 'unsportsmanlike' team is quite prepared for the drop. I would like to understand both the ethics and expectations of such a strategy--while it seems like the 'right' thing to do, is it the 'legal' thing to do per LOTG?

As both a referee and coach, I have seen numerous occasions where one team honors fair play protocols and the other disregards them. What can we do as a referee in such a situation? (Note that I am referring particularly to U11 and up Select games--an age and level of play where it should be reasonably expected that coaches and players are familiar with fair play, and are choosing to ignore them). I don't want to punish a coach and his team for playing within the spirit of the game, so what recourse is there?

I welcome your valuable guidance on both of these questions about game control.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Brad,
you raise important aspects of the TRUE neutrality of officials, allowing the PLAYERS to make the choices.

Trifling refers to an offence that does not truly fit the context (dub that the spirit ) of why the LOTG are applied to the circumstances you see before you even if they might fit the written version of the LOTG.
Accepting certain play as tolerable foul play does not always fit with the exact application of written law ! The player's acceptance to how fair a foul can be! A referee must still accept the definition of allowable within their own framework of tolerance in permitting the teams to decide the match rather than an interpretive event of little substance have such an impact. Trifling is not the missing but actually the ignoring of a foul, it comes with a price.

Doubtful has less to do with context, than credibility! Just what is it you are NOT seeing, while actually witnessing the event or circumstances? Perhaps uncertain as to what occurred or which participant was truly at fault. Or very certain, just choosing to ignoring it or acknowledging it then ignoring it upon a realization the players simply do not care to be interrupted when playing a match.

You raise the Spector of involvement by the referee to ENSURE fair play is adhered to. As neutral officials we are not supposed to place our version of morality but apply the LOTG! As the LOTG are interpretive to aspects of USB a referee does have influence in certain things but they have NO authority to forbid players from acting irresponsible or choosing undesirable tactics. That is not to say, such actions have no consequences!

In these matters ITOOTR is a credible crutch as to the best interests of the match but an opinion can not set aside laws!

The quiet drop to a single party with little indication is a ...BIT... different than say, the swivel away, place your body between the opposing players drop. If both teams indicate they want to participate, a referee who arbitrarily decides to not include one or more players on a legal drop ball restart due to his own belief that player should know better is a slippery slope of intervention.

I recall doing a drop ball between opposing players! I suggested that as a fair play gesture, the defender could choose to return it by kicking it up field to the opposing keeper or out into touch for a throw in, if the opponents would permit him to do so. He thought about it said ok (the other team had possession at the midfield, when I had stopped play for a large dog that had entered the FOP and started to chase the players), he would do the honorable thing and return the ball. The opposition striker said no, he wanted the defender to back off and just let them continue from there. Here I thought I was doing a good thing apprising the defender with fair play protocols . Sigh!
Drop ball gets dropped, the ball rebounds, goes off the attacker into touch, a quick throw in and a nice cross down field the ball winds up inside the attacker's goal a few seconds later . Interesting difference in LOTG, USA high school rules, given the attackers had CLEAR ball possession they would have been awarded an INDFK but if they felt the other team should have it you can kick the ball to whom ever! Leave the choice to the players but hold them accountable for their actions if they do fail the USB smell test

You can simply remind players there are consequences to actions. You reap what you sow! You can really look close and ensure ALL aspects of protocols are followed exactly. A drop ball MUST contact the ground before it can be kicked. There is no getting around that. However often kicking the opponent while doing so could be good for a caution if prior to the ball hitting the ground or a free kick out if after.. Of course if the ungentlemanly player participating was the one receiving the kick, the trifling or doubtful aspects of what you see might suddenly seem rather innocuous if they applied at that exact moment as part of acceptable play.

FIFA recognized the drop ball restart created issues thus they changed it so you can not score a DIRECT Goal on a drop ball just like an INDFK!
Players who sincerely tried to give the ball back as a sporting gesture occasionally scored off a drop ball. It created big headaches and bad feelings. Even if the opposition allowed the kick off team to run a quick equalizer in statistics and away goals play a large part in standings so this was a fix of sorts.

It is not AGAINST The LOTG to drop to one player or to do it quickly or a bit away from the spot it should be dropped at, these are CHOICES! These decisions are not doubtful or trifling simply a referee doing what is in the best interest of the match while not seeking consulting opinions as he follows the dictates of the LOTG. The referee can not stop participation but then he does not have to inquire if they will either.

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Brad
A trifling offence is one which, though still an offense, has no significant impact upon play. A doubtful offense is one which neither the referee nor the other officials can attest to. The referee's decision as to whether a player's action is trifling or not is affected considerably by the skill level of the players.
Now lets say that the GK clearly threw the ball down and released the ball then that is not trifling when he subsequently picks it up again denying opponents the opportunity to challenge.
Now as to managing the dropped ball situation the Laws allow for the ball to be dropped with no minimum or maximum players present. In situations where the referee wants to engineer the restart he might quickly drop the ball so that one team benefits from that. Many times that is no concern in a fair play situation as the opponents planned to give the ball back anyway. I have dropped the ball on many occasions to goalkeepers rather than take the risk of a kick that goes astray even unintentionally. I have never been questioned on this.
Now in cases where there is a lack of fair play spirit the referee has to be impartial and ensure that he is not engineering something that while in his opinion is fair can be construed as one sided or biased. I certainly ensure that I know what is going to happen on any DB restart and so be it if the DB is contested. Better for it to be contested and challenged for as in those situations the contest usually ends up just that as an open play contest which is part of the game. I can take time to inform players what is going to happen and to set up the location, players in such a way that is not going to cause a problem for the game. For example if Im going to stop play inside the penalty area I might just wait just a second to see if the ball is cleared away. That allows the DB location to be well away from goal and less of a threat to both teams on the restart.