Question Number: 32795

Mechanics 10/14/2018

RE: Competitive Under 15

Ryan Brenneman of CHarlotte, NC USA asks...

Game today with my kids U15 club team. Referee called a foul out side the 18. Other team tries a quick kick. There was some issue immediately and he blew the whistle and brought the ball back. He then allowed the team to quick kick it again. My thought was if a quick kick has some issue that is defense related the restart would then be a ceremonial free kick. I was in uniform for I was headed to work games myself so at the end I flagged down the ref and asked him as a "professional question" why he did that. His reply was that one of the defenders never stopped playing and interfered on the restart. So he allowed them to quick kick again. Besides not cautioning the interfereing player, was giving the offence a second quick kick an appropriate restart?

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Ryan,
if the team taking the free kick has NOT been SPECIFICALLY directed by the referee to NOT go, they can go!

Now in this case the referee decides the interference by the defender prevented a quick restart and should by all rights caution the player for doing so by holding up play to show a yellow card.


Although I question the logic of this mechanic in it is unusual & because it appears the team TOOK a chance to restart & play should by rights continue unless there was direct interference by the to0 near or participating defender? By allowing the team to go ahead & restart a 2nd time given he has not expressly forbidden such an action, the referee by applying a bizarre form of advantage forgoes the caution to allow this restart otherwise he MUST show the card & commence with a ceremonial restart.

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Ryan
It is not expressly against the Laws what was done here. It is however in my opinion poor mechanics.
I would say that the defending player should have been cautioned for not respecting the 10 yards after going with a retake. Once that would have happened the restart should have been on the whistle.
The fact that the defending player was not cautioned meant that a whistle was technically not required as advice.
The other point is that a whistle is needed to restart play for free kicks when the appropriate distance is required. You do not mentioned if the referee got involved with the defending team after the first kick? One imagines that he must have although he may not have done so.
If not then no whistle was technically required.
Let me pose this extreme scenario. Quick break and a defender fouls an opponents who gets the ball immediately to take a QFK. A defender stops that QFK with a raised leg with the attacker again spotting the ball to go with a second QFK which succeeds and the break continues. That all happens quickly and the referee did not intervene allowing the 2nd kick to proceed without a whistle. Indeed stopping the 2nd kick would have disadvantaged the attacking team. Technically nothing wrong with that in Law nor would it be *unfair* to the defending team. A caution or ensuring the appropriate distance requires a whistle.
Final point is that in Law the signal is NOT required so there is no possible misapplication of the Law. Poor mechanics yes but that is all.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Ryan,

Once the referee intervenes, it can no longer be a quick free kick.

If a kick has been stopped, then it really needs to start on the whistle after that.

If the defender 'didn't stop playing' then yes, usually that should be a caution for delaying the restart. If the referee really wants to give him the benefit of the doubt he could (though I seriously doubt the defender didn't know the whistle went), but either way, allowing the QFK at this point is just confusing for all involved.

And if he's taken it back because the players didn't know what was happening, then the referee really should stop, slow everything down, and make sure it's clear - otherwise he's adding confusion onto confusion with poor mechanics.