You Call It Our Questions YOUR Answers AskTheRef.com

Soccer Referee Questions on Soccer Rules

You-Call-It 22

Question...

Attacker A is shooting from just outside the 18 yard area, kicks a lovely ball towards the top right corner of the goal. Our 2nd last opponent at about 7 yards from goal reacts by deliberately handling the ball causing it to be redirected left of the goal where we have an offside attacker who was not participating in play at the time of the shot at the left corner edge of the goal area. Our offside attacker now moves in shields the ball and follows it into the goal. The keeper tries to get around him but fails to stop the ball from entering the goal.
The AR has his flag up and the referee after conferring with the AR allows the goal and restarts with a kick off! In your opinion is the referee correct in law? State your reasoning for or against?

Our Hint

law 11, law 5, law 12

Our Answer...

AS in most of our ?You call it!? segments, it is based on an ACTUAL event! As by the many responses we can see that confusion reigns out there in the rest of the soccer world as it did that day of this match!

Match Referee point of view!
The referee made a match decision about a goal based on his opinion on a FACT of play! Thus it stands and no protest will undo this decision!

LAW 5 Decisions of the Referee
The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final. The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or, at his discretion, on the advice of an assistant referee or the fourth official, provided that he has not restarted play or terminated the match.

The referee decided that by allowing the goal and not cautioning the defender he was using common sense (a dubious term in soccer) whereby the team that scored the goal was happy and the team that could have been short handed is happy!

The referee concluded AFTER discussing with the AR three specific things which he felt justified awarding the goal!
(1) The defender deliberately albeit illegally played the ball thus resetting the offside criteria for the attackers.
(2) The attacker was not a factor until the deliberately handled ball brought him into the area of active play, the attacker never touched the ball that was going into the goal and the keeper was not going to get there in time anyway
(3) The deliberate handling did not affect the outcome of the shot which he was certain would have scored except for the action taken!

Here is our answer:

The referee was incorrect!
He should have stopped play for deliberate hand ball, disallowed the goal, sent off the defender for DOGSO, showed the red card reducing them by a player and restarted with a PK.

Here is the reason:

The first infraction has occurred when the ball was deliberately handled, which caused the DOGSO.
A player is sent off if he commits the following offence: ? denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area)

The ball entering the net cannot be allowed because this happened only as a result of a REBOUND of the ball off an opponent to an offside player, who was active and would normally be penalized for being in that position.
? gaining an advantage by being in that position ? ?gaining an advantage by being in that position? means playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent having been in an offside position ? ?interfering with an opponent? means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent?s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent

So, ?advantage? cannot be used, thus allowing the goal, because all that is annulled with the realisation that the OSP attacker is illegally shielding the ball.
The Referee ? allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time ? takes disciplinary action against players guilty of cautionable and sending-off offences. He is not obliged to take this action immediately but must do so when the ball next goes out of play

Law 10 does not permit a goal scored if the opposing team infringes the laws of the game!
LAW 10 ? THE METHOD OF SCORING Goal Scored
A goal is scored when the whole of the ball passes over the goal line, between the goalposts and under the crossbar, provided that no infringement of the Laws of the Game has been committed previously by the team scoring the goal

The 2nd last opponent was NOT the keeper but good on those who added if it was the correct restart would have been an INDFK for offside when the OSP attacker interfered with the keeper when he shielded the ball!

Some suggested only a caution not a send of for DOGSOH point 4 of the send offs in law 12
If you were of the opinion the ball would have completely missed the goal and 100% convinced this was not an obvious scoring opportunity then the caution show only yellow could be justified but I caution you to remember obvious and guarantee are not the same!
In our opinion this was clearly DOGSO H by deliberate use of the hands

The justification of a DH (deliberate handling) as a controlled possession does have some basis in law as both a parry is a one touch release and control as is headed or kicked ball at certain times considered as a controlled possession resetting offside for the other team. At issue here is the DH act NEVER controlled that ball since it continued toward the goal. It was argued by some that if the DH was a controlled possession since it results in a free kick could enough time elapse for an offside attacker to regain ball possession and score is remote? We must imagine the defender catching the ball completely controlling it realizing oops then dropping the ball then the offside player being near off so as NOT to have been interfering in play earlier running over to shoot it at the goal while the referee watches holding the whistle is far fetched!

Shielding the ball the OSP never did touch the ball and it COULD be true the keeper might never have had time to recover and make the save BUT what do we constantly tell our questioners about offside? We judge an offside involvement in active play on WHAT the OSP actually does while the ball is IN play! We are asked not to even allow a CHANCE of a collision when an OSP and opponent are in close proximity never mind the direct route to the ball is impeded!

The fact the ball was a rebound off an opponent specifically states such is a non factor in resetting offside criterion
The OSP while not initially did in fact become involved in the active area of play and hindered an opponent!
Law 11 OFFSIDE
A player in an offside position is only penalised if, at the moment the ball touches or is played by one of his team, he is, in the opinion of the referee, involved in active play by:
? interfering with play or
? interfering with an opponent
? gaining an advantage by being in that position

After all was said and done the two teams accepted the decision, the referee sold his decision during the match and faced the music in the post game review!

If this same event were to occur again, the referee of this match is not likely to make the same decision again!

Cheers

That was our Question YOUR Answer is...

Doug Anderson a Referee from Orillia Ontario Canada

I think the CR is wrong to allow the goal and restart as a KO.

At first, the CR was fine to ignore the handing of the ball (even if the denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity). He does so to watch the path of the ball after it was struck by the second last defender (i.e. he does not call the play dead yet to allow the advantage to play itself out). Law 5 permited this - and maybe demanded that he wait. The deflected ball was apparently still headed to goal so the CR did well to not call anything just yet and watch where it went.

Presumably the ‘on the ball’ AR is not calling a handled ball (and all that it entails) but signaling the problem with the offside; I presume he informs the CR about when they confer. Because the offside player was not involved when the ball was first shot, he had committed no offside offence (not yet!). And as long as the ball was headed right, AR and CR were right not to call him.

But when the ball comes toward the offside attacker, the situation changes. Danger of his becoming involved becomes relevant and, while no call goes immediately, he is now in real danger of being called.

It is when the offside attacker steps up into active play that he should have been called. It is true that he did not touch the ball but shielding means that he was within playing distance of the ball, preventing the GK from playing the ball, which is definitive involvement with play. So, in my book, that meant he was “interfering with play”; it was at that moment that all the ingredients of law 12 are made out and offside offense should have been called.

Had GK been allowed to play the ball, that would have brought the advantage to the attacking side to an end. I would have blown the whistle and pointed to the spot for a PK for the handball in the Penalty Area at that point. And there are other consequences (see below).

And had that offside player been in an onside position at the time his teammate shot, his positioning himself to shield would have been permissible, the play continue and the goal as it played out allowed.

But when the GK was prevented from playing the ball, the offside call must go. They must stop the play as of that moment. I then would have returned to the moment ball was handled and I would have awarded the attackers a PK.

I do not think enough discretion exists for CR to ignore the offside offense while he looks to the advantage. Law 5 allows the more serious foul to be called on one player when he commits two; it does not give CR discretion to ignore the second offene of offside. The offside (like the GK picking off the deflected the ball, had that happened) brings the advantage to an end and permits the CR to return to the serious misconduct and PK foul!

Consequences must occur at that time too. The hapless 2nd last defender is sent off for DOGSO (Handling the ball) Rule 12. The defenders will have one fewer player at the moment of the restart (PK) and for the remainder of the game.

I have sympathy for the CR who looks like he is trying to cut through and do justice but not at the expense of the proper application of the rules to the sequence of facts.

DSA

Mike S. a Referee from Chino Hills CA USA

The referee should hold the whistle until he is able to determine whether the ball heading towards the goal crosses the line. If the keeper had not made a save, the referee could have awarded a goal, and the defender would not have denied a
goal scoring opportunity.

The offside attacker clearly interfered with an opponent; therefore, the referee can not award the goal.
The referee will need to present a red card to the defender that deliberately handled the ball for DOGSO.
The restart will be a penalty kick.

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

<-->

Soccer Referee Extras: Sunday, November 24, 2024
Offside Question?
Offside Explained by Chuck Fleischer & Richard Dawson, Former & Current Editor of AskTheRef

<>
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

Recent Questions

Click Go to view all recently posted questions