Question Number: 35811

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/24/2024

RE: Competitive High School

Peter of Stockton, CA USA asks...

I am hoping that you could provide some explanation for me. In the Southampton Vs Liverpool game 24th Nov Southampton got a penalty for a foul on the edge of the penalty area. Despite being a Liverpool fan, I think the referee got the right call. My question is more trying to understand the Var decision - "It is indeterminate." My question is, how can they have the technology to determine if a player's toenail is offside and yet say that they cannot determine whether a player was over a stationary line?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Peter
I watched the game.

I believe the difficulty was determining the point of the foul contact relative to the penalty area line. Was it the foot contact or leg contact that was called.

I suspect that given Michael Oliver’s recent debacle on a penalty VAR call that he made that he was not going to get involved in overturning the on field call when there was no clear evidence that it was a clear and obvious error to give it by the referee.

I also believe that if one spent enough time on evaluating the freeze frame image that a clearer statement could have been made.
With a desire to get on with the restart the VAR statement is technically correct when limited time is spent in the evaluation.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Peter,
when I try to assist those who are sincere in understanding the LOTG I ask that they remember, perception and reality, are defined as much by what we know as much as what we are unaware of! The difference between doubtful and trifling is with one we are not 100% sure there is an offence, whereas the other, is we think there could be, but it has minimal impact on the game if we let it slide, versus a major impact should we call it.

Imagine the boundary lines that encompass the FOP touch lines goal lines and its sectional areas, ie: goal area, penalty area, center circle, penalty arc, as 5 inch wide walls of water extending straight up into the sky . If you as a player, or the ball, is the least bit wet, you are entering that area!

If ANY part of the playable body part is wet then that part of the body is considered to be INSIDE that area where as the BALL itself is also considered to be totally inside that area that includes the part of the ball that is not!

The Ball is a WHOLE, the body of a player is different, a connective frame, where the arms for example (play no part in offside) but to the contact point of a foul where or how those arms are used could determine/create a foul.

Perhaps offside is an easier determination due in part to what playable body part is as a whole, not just a contact point along its length?

As my colleague Ref McHugh suggest I suppose if we freeze frame to a millionth of second with correct angles of view we might be able to determine if the contact point is wet as in on the line which is considered as or inside the area. or completely dry as in 100% outside the area?

When legs get entangled the points of contact could be a single moment at the ankle before the calf, knee, before the thigh, shoulder push down, arm grab, hip check.

A body is not a compressed ball, as a single entity parts of the body can be inside and outside and wet all at the same time.

A referee has his decision, his match, his reputation and by being firm fair and consistent in his management we should simply agree to disagree and move along. VAR is there to ensure nothing is missed that should be looked at, not that what is looked at is necessarily incorrect!
Cheers