Question Number: 30846

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/2/2016

RE: AYSO Under 15

Jeff Reiner of Captain Cook, Hawaii USA asks...

Is there a restriction on a goalkeeper yelling at an attacker? I'm not referring to profanity, but to yelling in an attempt to intimidate the attacker from making a goal.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Jeff
Yes there is. Any player may not verbally distract an opponent during play or at a restart. It is a caution for unsporting behaviour and an indirect free kick restart.
Typically it would be shout like MISS IT at an opponent or LEAVE IT with the intention of deceiving an opponent. Other examples include shouting ARGHH or whatever with the express intention of intimidation or putting a player off.
There is no offence in communicating with a team mate or shouting keepers in a loud manner.. The test of the offence is does the shout merit a caution.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Jeff,
what is said is not as important as why or how it is performed. A keeper or indeed ANY player is NOT permitted to unfairly deceive an opponent by yelling out verbal distractions that are not related to one's own communicative team dynamics.
Such an action is reason for a referee to stop play and caution show a yellow card for USB to the miscreant responsible.
MOST often when we say something it is a communicative effort to inform our team mates we are going to be the one challenging for the ball be it a simple, 'Mine or I got it or Richard's ball or when a Keeper is coming to claim it the vey word 'Keeper!' rings out authoritatively. It is to prevent confusion or a collision with a teammate . Baseball fielders will do the same but in THEIR cases there is no opponent vying for the ball only team mates. Soccer though has opposition players ALSO challenging and these same communicative outcries COULD be misused to fool an opponent to give up his challenge or in fact actually cause them to back out of a challenge or to actually GIVE the ball away.
The issue a referee must decide is DOES the outcry in fact affect the opposition to that extent? I have often cautioned youth players for attempts to intimidate opposing player by yelling inarticulate growling or random screams as they give chase. I have even seen players cup hands as a megaphone and scream their OWN name directly into the ear of an opponent to put off the challenge. Then try to look innocent, claiming they only were putting a name on it to effect a communicative exchange with teammates, when, it was obvious it was done to intimidate the opponent. These actions are such that IF play IS halted for such transgressions, the culprit is cautioned, shown the yellow card for USB with an INDFK restart to the offended team from the spot of the offence subject to the special circumstances in the goal area.
I have had coaches or well meaning parents trying to communicate from the touchlines affecting the opposing kids playing by scaring them or causing them to stop playing by such outbursts. Under the NEW LOTG the coach would be held accountable with an INDFK restart as opposed to the parents with a drop ball restart as outside interference. As a coach and as a referee I encourage the kids to PUT A NAME ON IT when a ball is coming in to a crowd as an effective communication tool, however, as my friend and colleague Ref McHugh points out there is NO offence for just saying such things as MINE or I GOT IT or a goal tender yelling KEEPER etc. The outbursts MUST be seen to clearly affect the opposition in an unfair manner. There is NO INDFK for verbal impeding without the caution. The action is only perceived as USB thus cardable. It is a big deal to establish the NEED of 1/2 of a red card for trying to put off or trick an opponent unfairly. Tread carefully, act ONLY when it is OBVIOUS the act was done to hinder the opponent.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Jeff,
Shouting at an opponent as one is running in for the challenge is unsporting behaviour and punishable by a YC and an IFK.
It's difficult, though, as players may yell a little from exertion (you'll know what I mean if you watch tennis!) - unless it's quite clear you want to give them the benefit of the doubt.
You may warn them before a card, but that is up to you - and will depend if you think there has been an impact.
Now, where there appears to have been a shot on goal denied it gets tricky. Because the offence is punishable by an indirect free kick (because of the card), does that mean that it's now a possible DOGSO?
There's an argument here that has been hashed out quite a bit on refereeing forums - some would argue that because there's an IFK involved from stopping play that we can consider DOGSO (the shout appears to have prevented the goal as the shot missed, and DOGSO can apply to an indirect free kick), some would argue that the IFK is simply the restart because we're stopping play to caution a player for a reason not otherwise mentioned in the laws. It's the caution that was the reason for stopping, not the IFK, so to then say that's justification for a red card is a circular argument.
It's an argument that's been hashed out repeatedly online with no clear resolution - and I can see where either interpretation fits.