Soccer Referee Resources
Ask a Question
Recent Questions

Previous You-Call-It's

VAR (Video Assistant Referee)

Q&A Quick Search
The Field of Play
The Ball
The Players
The Players Equipment
The Referee
The Other Match Officials
The Duration of the Match
The Start and Restart of Play
The Ball In and Out of Play
Determining the Outcome of a Match
Fouls and Misconduct
Free Kicks
Penalty kick
Throw In
Goal Kick
Corner Kick

Common Sense
Kicks - Penalty Mark
The Technical Area
The Fourth Official
Attitude and Control
League Specific
High School

Common Acronyms
Meet The Ref
Contact AskTheRef
Help Wanted
About AskTheRef

Soccer Rules Changes 1580-2000

Panel Login

Question Number: 34085

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 12/16/2020

RE: Pro Professional

Steve Debus of Crofton, MD USA asks...

Regarding the Brighton/Southampton match I have two questions about the PK call in the 77th minute.

First Law 12 clearly states that if a hold is started outside the PA but continues into the PA, a PK should be called. It is silent, however, about a push or charge that starts outside the area but where the contact continues into the area. My thought is the same result should apply and "appears" to be what was used by VAR to reverse the DFK called on the field to PK as contact does appear to start outside the area. Is that the correct interpretation?

Second, why was a YC issued after the VAR but not before? If it was reckless or SPA outside the area it should be the same inside the area.

I appreciate your opinions.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Steve
We just responded to a question on the new advantage rule. Perhaps part 2 might be their ruling or interpretation as to how play unfolded? It did appear the CR WAS going to go with a DFK outside and no caution. I saw the foam in hand but cannot speak for sure on the caution as I did ONLY see the highlights . It is entirely speculative from the arm chair to jump inside a real time decision by the officials' .The VAR and possibly input from AR convinced the referee it should be a PK and the USB of the attempt required a caution show a the yellow card because the DOGSO criteria applied & or no effort was made to challenge for the ball.

Part 1: If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution/ sending-off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution/ sending-off must be issued when the ball is next out of play.

Part 2: However,
if the offence was denying the opposing team an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour
if the offence was interfering with or stopping a promising attack, the player is not cautioned.

The defenders pushing arm remains in contact for a good 6 to 8 feet before the attacking player was seen to be leaving his feet. If in the opinion of the officials they agreed the DOGSO criteria were met that foul by being a PK not a DFK outside , red send off is downgraded to yellow caution for USB, the PK being the obvious scoring opportunity, A foul can ALSO be deemed careless, reckless, or excessive. Inside the PA, if said foul was a reasonable challenge for ball possession even if mistimed with no malice the fact DOGSO criteria was met the caution is awarded only as the PK saves his but from being a send off. My understanding, if there is NO DOGSO present, if it was a reasonable challenge for ball possession no card is required for the foul unless it was reckless or excessive.

Read other questions answered by Referee Richard Dawson

View Referee Richard Dawson profile

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Steve
It is the point of contact that causes the foul that matters. VAR opined that the push was inside the penalty area rather than outside. Also there could be a number of pushes and the one that is more advantageous is the one that is called.
On the timing of a card I would believe that with VAR referees are mindful of being *too quick* with cards particularly on possible penalty calls.
A push is not a challenge for the ball so in a DOGSO situation with a penalty awarded or not it will still be a red card.
if a player commits any other offence which interferes with or stops a promising attack, except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball it is a caution. In this case there was no attempt to play the ball so it was a caution.
For grassroots referees the referee here could go with a red card if he felt that the DOGSO conditions were met and if not it is a caution inside or outside the penalty area for that type of foul.
In this instance perhaps the referee was so fixated on the position of the offence that he did not think caution. Perhaps the VAR in his summation that it was inside and that a caution was appropriate when it looked like there was not going to be a card.

Read other questions answered by Referee Joe McHugh

View Referee Joe McHugh profile

Ask a Follow Up Question to Q# 34085
Read other Q & A regarding Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct

Soccer Referee Extras

Did you Ask the Ref? Find your answer here.

Enter Question Number

If you received a response regarding a submitted question enter your question number above to find the answer

Offside Question?

Offside Explained by Chuck Fleischer & Richard Dawson, Former & Current Editor of AskTheRef

This web site and the answers to these questions are not sanctioned by or affiliated with any governing body of soccer. The opinions expressed on this site should not be considered official interpretations of the Laws of the Game and are merely opinions of AskTheRef and our panel members. If you need an official ruling you should contact your state or local representative through your club or league. On AskTheRef your questions are answered by a panel of licensed referees. See Meet The Ref for details about our panel members.