You-Call-It 19

Question...

In the final few minutes of a tied match the referee correctly awards a normal Pk to the blue team
The whistle signal to begin the PK occurs first.
Then, out of sight of the referee, outside the penalty area a red defender deliberately kicks the ankle of a blue attacker. The PK is taken but initially saved by the keeper, however, the rebound is fought for. In a bit of scruffy ping pong play the ball eventually winds up inside the goal. Referee was initially good to go with goal and a brief kick off but when he looks over to AR to confirm he sees the near AR had raised his flag pointing across. By now a blue attacker is retaliating against the red defender punching him, so initially the referee is briefly unaware that the raised flag was to mirror the TRAIL AR who witnessed the kick! After the MESS is discussed and the dust settles the referee disallows the goal, retakes the PK and only cautions the defender who kicked and the attacker who punched!
The retaken PK is saved the game ends tied.
If you were referee what would you have done differently if anything at all?
Your Match, Your Decision, Your Reputation!

Our Hint

Our Answer...

That was our Question YOUR Answer is...

Doug Anderson a Referee from Orillia Ontario Canada

OK –
I judge that the CR has not acted correctly here. I would have counted the goal and would have issued red cards to both kicking and punching players and re-started with a kick off from centre.

It is key for me here that this kick in the ankle occurred between the whistle and the ball being kicked and moving (the punch occurred after the ball was in the net). This means both events occur with the ball not in play, which is significant about how the play is handled and about how the punch and kick are handled.

LAW 14 is clear about what is to happen when a teammate of the goalkeeper infringes of the Laws of the Game between the signal and the PK (after the whistle and before the ball is kicked and moves forward). Paraphrasing Law 14, if there is an infringement by a defender between the whistle and the penalty kick, the kick is allowed to proceed. If the ball goes into the net, it is a goal and it does not go in, play is stopped and the PK is retaken.

The ball did enter the net so a goal is awarded.

While it is possible to imagine that the CR might have stopped play immediately after the penalty kick was saved and ordered a re-take, the CR did not do that.

I do not see any reading of Law 14 or its commentary that suggests that we must go back to a retake of such a PK. In my opinion, it would grossly unfair re-call the goal and retake the PK when it was the defender who had committed misconduct by kicking the attacker. Misconduct is certainly an infringement of the Laws but here the ball has crossed the goal line, under the crossbar and between the posts and the attacking team has not violated any of the laws of the game (at least not yet because the punch comes after). That is a goal. I would judge it perverse to think we go back to ‘punish’ team who otherwise would have been scored upon and do it for the misdeed they committed.

I would not hang any of this on advantage as the CR did not see or have any reason to wait and see if advantage transpired. That would be a fiction that might seem attractive, but it really does not follow from Law 5 on advantage.


The punch and kick are both misconduct that occurred while the ball was not in play. They can and should sanctioned as misconduct but neither is a foul under Law 12 as they occurred outside of active play.

The kick in the ankle is misconduct that would be subject to either a sending off or caution (red or yellow) in accordance with the seriousness of the misconduct. Same with the punch. The sanction for either can occur later when the ball is next out of play and before the restart.

You would have to go a long way to convince me that a deliberate kick while standing and waiting for the PK to occur is anything but a red (violent conduct). The same applies to the retaliatory punch.

It is possible to argue that they were only worth a caution / show the yellow card (unsporting behaviour) but that is in the discretion of the officiating team. For me, that would be where the phrase “in the opinion of the referee” figures in.

For me, a punch or a kick to another player is violent conduct and I would say: “Attacker, you are dismissed for violent conduct, red card is shown, good bye. Same goes for the defender who kicked the ankle. Both teams lose one player. Goal is awarded. Restart at half”


It is perhaps interesting to think of what the call would be if the attacker had cracked the defender’s ankle insted of the other way around. Then I think I would have gone back, sanctioned the attacker who offended (red card) and then in accordance with Law 14, the re-start would have been an re-take of the kick (and only if the play was stopped before the ball ended up in the net would it be an out bound IDKF).

It is also interesting to wonder what would have happened if the Kick in the ankle and the punch both came before the ball was kicked. In that case, with misconduct on both attacking and defending sides, the PK must be retaken. Law 14 is quite clear.

But those are not the facts given; it was defender who violated and surely his team does not benefit from his misconduct.


I do have some questions about the mechanics used by the referees in this scenario:
a.   On the PK, shouldn’t CR be positioned to be able to see virtually all of the players? Technically, it possible to have some behind him but do I question whether he placed correctly since he missed seeing the original kick in the ankle or the flags of the ARs.
b.   I am not sure about when the trailing AR began to flag. He would have been brilliant to do so right away. And the leading AR would have been good to mirror the trailing as soon as he saw the waggle. If they done so, perhaps the CR would not have missed seeing a signal until after the “scruffy ping pong” had ended in the net.
c.   Shouldn’t the play have stopped after the shot was taken and failed to go in? The CR did not see the kick to the ankle or the flag(s) signaling a problem and he likely should have. It may be asking a great deal but if we are talking about what SHOULD HAVE happened, the problem, if unseen should have resulted in the communication to the CR and a whistle to stop right after the ball failed to go in.

I know that such a standard places a great burden on the officiating team and especially the CR. Perhaps that is unfair. Who looks at the AR that much? Which CR trusts his AR so instinctively to blow down “scruffy ping pong” before the goal here even when he saw no foul? And for that matter, who checks with the trailing AR to see if a goal is OK?

But maybe we are all supposed to, and that is why they pay us the big bucks (this is ironic humour if you didn’t get that!) And of course, if we had the fancy mike system that FIFA / MLS refs have, we could all have that kind of instantaneous communication. So until then, we have to do the best we can and trust our ARs!

DSA

James a Referee from Brisbane Queensland Australia

This is, in my humble opinion, an easy situation to deal with.

In the first instance, the offense has occurred while the ball was not in play.

As the referee has not seen the incident, but has seen the flag up after he has awarded the goal, the referee needs to talk to the assistant and find out what has happened.

In doing so, I only ask 3 questions:
1. Who am I looking for?
2. What colour card?
3. Appropriate restart.

As this was a slightly unusual situation (i.e. it has happened in back play before the kick is taken) the correct actions to be taken are:
1. Both players are sent off for violent conduct (law 12)
2. The goal stands as the incident happened before the ball was in play. -I suspect that there will be some disagreement about this, butas neither player has interfered with play (as the ball was not in play at the time the initial offence occurred), then there is no need to bring play back.

I do need to clarify that in my pre-match instructions, I have informed both assistants that calling me over is a serious business, so I would expect a card to be issued and as such, only need to know what player, what colour card and appropriate restart.

AskTheref.com Educating and Amusing The Soccer Referee Since October 11, 1999