Question Number: 15031

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/23/2007

RE: Rec/Select Under 12

Mike Schaffner of Corona, CA USA asks...

Regarding Dangerous Play. In Law 12 the definition of a foul states that they are against an opponent (i.e. Kicks or attempts to kick an opponent). Now for dangerous play, that statement is missing. It just says 'Plays in a Dangerous Manner'. It says nothing about against an opponent. We have had the discussion amongst our referees and there are differing opinions if an IDFK should be given when a player plays in a dangerous manner near a teammate (i.e. a high kick near a teammate).

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Mike you are correct, the offence "Plays in a Dangerous Manner" does not stipulate an opponent. I consider myself as one who knows the Laws rather well and I have never let that little fact enter into my skull. It is a good observation on you part. Also the US High School soccer rules make the point that playing in a dangerous manner can be against an opponent or against a colleague. Right.

When we qualify as referee this fact is drummed into us.

Fouls happen on the field, whilst the ball is in play and against an opponent.

This is a given. Law 12 discusses fouls and misconduct, it does not differentiate between direct free kick offences and indirect free kick offences, they are lumped together under the heading "Fouls and Misconduct". In Law 12 the first sentence is as follows: "Fouls and misconduct are penalised as follows:". What follows is a list of things, that when observed, free kicks are given for.

On the following page one finds the things classified as Cautionable Offences and Sending-off Offences. The referee is given times when he may take disciplinary sanctions and to whom those sanctions may be given. These things, also, fall under the title of "Fouls and Misconduct".

When we qualify as referee the instructor discusses fouls and misconduct as separate issues if she follows the lesson plans provided by US Soccer. In those lessons the referee candidate is told [should be told] fouls can happen on the field, whilst the ball is in play and against an opponent; and the referee has the authority to take disciplinary sanctions, as from the moment the referee enters the field of play until he leaves the field of play after the final whistle. They are separate and distinct aspects of Law 12.

Now to the question at hand, howcum the IFAB didn't include "an opponent" when addressing endangering someone during a match? They know. Me? I can only surmise...

Because playing in a dangerous manner is classified as foul play, the referee can not intervene unless an opponent is involved... ...by this I infer that if team mates are doing something to one another it is accidental and, therefore, is something gentlemen can sort out amongst themselves -- unless it qualifies as misconduct. Here the referee can intervene on behalf of good order and discipline.

Before the 1891/2 season there was no referee on the field and players pretty much looked after themselves. It was decided, by the IFAB, they needed help and someone was needed to prevent mayhem so the gent off the pitch, who was referred to when the umpires could not decide, came on the field and his first task was to enforce the Laws of the Game. At that time players were still gentlemen and usually played within the Laws and didn't fight amongst themselves. Opponents were another thing and the referee protected them by not allowing foul play on the field. This is where fouls happen on the field, whilst the ball is in play and against an opponent came from. It remains that way to this day, US High School rules excepted, of course...

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Debbie Hoelscher

The whole idea of penalizing for foul play is in the interest of the Game....let's not go looking for trouble. Whoa to the ref who chooses to penalize a team for an infringment against themselves!!! That team has penalize themselves by their own actions....no need for our involvement.

Now, if a teammate continuously plays in a dangerous manner against his own teammate(s) he is either: a) in serious need of perscribed medication(s); b) not considered to be a threat to his team by his own coach -- and if the coach is that oblivious, they should consider a different sport in which to be involved; c) is just as careless and/or reckless against an opponent (actions for which he can be penalized); d) could be behaving in an unsporting way (doesn't have to be against an opponent for a misconduct) or e) ALL OF THE ABOVE. Just thoughts to think....

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

While this is missing from LOTG, you should be familiar with the USSF publication ADvice To Referees On The Laws Of The Game. Section 12.1 defines what ANY foul is and stipulates "against an opponent". Section 12.13 discusses Playing in a Dangerous Manner and further stipulates that 1. The action must be dangerous, 2. An opponent must be nearby, and 3. An OPPONENT must somehow be disadvantaged. You are a certified USSF referee and USSF has clearly stated what is a minor omission in LOTG. Remember, LOTG takes into consideration that MANY MANY things are givens throughout the world and they feel no need to articulate further. Here in the US, we have the need for more specification because we as a nation are woefully ignorant of the history of soccer. This is one of those instances. No one anywhere else in the world would question the need for ANY foul to be against an opponent. Here, it must be spelled out which Advice does quite nicely.