Question Number: 15114

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 4/3/2007

Liam Mc Guirk of Dublin, Rep Of Ireland asks...

i was recently asked by a fellow referee for my opinion on a decision he had given during a game,i would like to ask the panel their feelings with regard to same question.
During a game the attacking team are about to make a attempt on goal when a defender makes a noise attempting to put off the forward, the ref gave a free kick to the attacking team inside the penalty area which caused a lot of arguement from the defending team,when i asked him what he gave the free for his reply was "i was not sure if it was obstruction so i pretended a defender had used abusive language against me so a blew for a free",i told him if he was not sure he should of played on as his decision was unfair to the defending team as he was not 100% sure of the ruling,during games we all encounter some sort of mouthing by players to each other so should we call this obstruction when it involves a possible goal opportunity.

Answer provided by Referee Steve Montanino

Liam,

What the defender did, depending upon the circumstances, is what I personally call "verbal interference", that is a very loose term and I probably did not invent the concept.

In this scenario the defender has acted in an unsporting way to unfairly distract the attacker, there is no legitimate reason to yell or otherwise use the voice to distract an opponent. If the referee deems that the action was so distracting as to "put off" the opponent as you say, the Referee may stop play and issue a caution to the defender for unsporting behavior. Remember though that this is a matter of the referee's opinion.

If the referee does this he should restart play with an indirect free kick at the place where the offense was committed. So, in the case you present if the defender had been standing inside his own penalty area when he made his remark the restart should be located at the spot he was standing. The yellow card however is compulsory

Now, to your other points, the Referee should not have "pretended" the other team had done something they had not done. The laws of the game clearly state that using Abusive language requires a red card and none were produced here. In fact, no card was produced so the reason for that particular restart does not make sense.

You mention to him that he shouldn't call it unless he is 100% sure of the rule. Clearly, he knew that the behavior shouldn't be allowed and he went with his gut, I would encourage him for understanding the spirit of the game. However, he couldn't get the restart correct because he didn't know how to properly handle this situation. Hopefully he will be better educated for the next time.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Liam what you observed was unsporting behaviour on the part of a beaten defender. If it put off the attacker, as intended, the referee should deal with it as the misconduct it is. Play is stopped, the defender is cautioned and shown the yellow card for unsporting behaviour and play is restarted with an indirect free kick at the point of the misconduct, subject to the special circumstances of Law 8.

In the event the referee heard abusive language a sending-off was appropriate and the restart would remain the same.

Bottom line, the referee is short in the area of fortitude, Tell him, if there is a Wal-Mart nearby, fortitude is on sale after 2200 on even dated Thursday evenings and every 29th February...

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Liam. First, obstruction has been deleted from the lexicon and replaced with impeding the progress of an opponent. It is implied that this is a physical not a verbal act so I would tell your friend, this is not a possibility. Now, if the opponents said something that put the player off, this could be construed as unsporting behavior but for the referee to award an IFK he would have to first caution and then show the yellow card to this player. If the referee awarded an IFK for "obstruction" or did not caution and show the yellow card, he should have kept his whistle and mouth shut and let play continue.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Liam,
just before Mr Jeff Winters retired from proffessional EPL refereeing he came to Canada and gave us a seminar. He was apointed to referee our highest level adult match while we dutifully watched and learned. He did or allowed four things in the match that admittedly I questioned him on during the post game.

One was he switched ARs at the half so the same AR was calling offside against the same team. Totally freaked out the coach of the away team who felt this was unfair and against the law. It is not illegal just not atrait we often see or hear about.
It was a trait where a NEUTRAL AR with integrity having learned in the first half the tactical set up of defenders /attackers could be depended to resume his duties and not relearn another set of conditions. Plus flag was pointed in same direction with reguards to goal since the ARs were switched with the team.
Wow learned something new!

Two the AR was seen running along side two opposing players with the flag being carried down low and the other hand stretched out as the AR was yelling ADVANTAGE play on!
The AR is a referee too and since play was in his sector and the incident occured directly in front of the AR Mr Winters was about 30 yards away thumbs up!
Wow I thought the AR was not supposed to play advantage and only follow the referee's lead something new again!

Three the advantage declared by Mr Winters on at least three occassions lead to a nothing opportunity in fact loss of ball possession. I asked why did he not bring the ball back and go with the foul. He replied there were shooting or attacking opportunities that the players failed to take advantage off the fact they tried to dribble further was a choice of their choosing
Wow tactically a referee can determine what is advantagous even if a player cannot see it for himself? New but not certain this was a learning thing

Fourth on two DISTINCT occassions Mr Winters awarded an INDFK for a player who did EXACTLY as you describe in your post! NO caution, NO yellow card was shown. I asked why no cautions and no yellow cards shown. Mr Winters said the match did not NEED them!
Wow a referee can arbitrarily set aside the law as it is not needed to control a match. While I can see VERBAL IMPEDING is a cultural INDFK and in truth I wish it was the same as impeding in point of fact it takes fortitude to make up ones own version of what the law is supposed to do without actually doing it!

Cheers