Question Number: 29875

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/1/2015

RE: Rec/competitive Under 15

Jeff B of Suwanee, GA US asks...

This question is a follow up to question 29868

I'm curious as to the reasoning here. In the scenario given, after first awarding a goal, the attacker admitted to handling the ball. If, after questioning the attacker, you deem that he is in fact guilty of deliberately handling the ball, why would the restart be a dropped ball as both Ref McHugh and Ref Dawson seem to suggest?

If you accept that there was a handling offense negating the goal, doesn't that make the restart a direct free kick for the defenders?

Thanks!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Jeff
Good point and one that on further reflection I agree with. The Laws are mute on the point and the answer I gave was based on what might typically happen on a reversal of a decision on the advice of a player with play already stopped. Hence the pickle
As you know a dropped ball is used where the referee has to stop play temporarily for any reason not mentioned elsewhere in the Laws of the Game. Chalking off a goal at the request of a player is not mentioned in the Laws. Would the referee in the case of a player that deliberately handles the ball to score and then says that he has done so wanting the goal cancelled out, caution the player and restart with the DFK? What if the player was already on a caution? What if there was no deliberate handling just that the ball hit his hand?
The referee has not seen the offence and he is depending on the word of a player which perhaps is not a reason to award a free kick what ever about getting play restarted in an equitable manner. Certainly in the case of an erroneous whistle with the decision reversed it is a dropped ball which is the most common of these situations and the one that I focussed on.
Having said all that the DFK is without doubt correct in Law for deliberate handling and it will not cause any issue for the referee and one that I would agree with. I would also not get overly animated about a referee using a DB restart particularly if it is done in a Fair Play manner which is the genesis of the decision and where there is uncertainty. The alternative we have seen on many occasions is where the referee will not change his decision and the team then miss a penalty on purpose or allow the team to score uncontested. Neither of those are welcomed by FIFA.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Jeff,
sigh! that's what I get for being an INVENTIVE referee! Bad Richard bad! I can hear my old friend Jim Allen tsk tsking me with pursed lips! He was not fond of inventive referees! Take a bow Jeff, because you are spot on! If you do accept that this was a handling offense negating the goal, that does indeed make the restart a direct free kick for the defenders! However there is sinister aspect of you being right! If we 100% accept the word of the player as an act of fair play. The LOTG have to be applied, you must do as you would have if you had seen it, as he tells it to you, because you are accepting it. The only restart is a DFK and we are instructed to show a yellow card for USB - scoring using the hand deliberately. If this was his 2nd caution you show a red and send him off reducing his team by a player. Can you deny the logic of accepting something at face value for what you actually did not see? I have to wonder while he could admit to the ball hitting the hand if he will go so far as to declare he deliberately directed it into the goal? Lol
Disciplinary sanctions
There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required
when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player:
• deliberately handles the ball to prevent an opponent gaining possession
• attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball

Now realistically no referee is going to WANT to show a card for such a gesture. Only a very harsh taskmaster could think this is within the sphere of the spirit of fair play

Taking back this goal is something that usually does not occur at a HIGH LEVEL match, you would usually not accept the word of the player, as it must be seen by the neutral party, a referee or assistant. Then of course we have Miroslav Klose received a Fair Play award for doing exactly that sigh. I can not say for SURE if play was restarted with a DFK out and no caution but I have to suspect that it was?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJBRg1jA7AQ

http://www.fifa.com/fifa-tournaments/news/y=2012/m=10/news=klose-wins-fair-play-prize-1785945.html

If you had decided to award the goal and restart with a kick off, if the opposition then refused to participate at the kick off due to the player admitting it was a DHB(deliberately handled ball), if a team refuses to play, you have to abandon the game and submit a report.

The LOTG allow us recourse to restart a game with a drop ball for situations the LOTG do not cover. Generally refusing to accept a referee decision, then ask that they be punished is not one on the books. I find it not within the LOTG to award a DFK for something I did not see and must rely on a player to tell me it was a foul when or ..if.. I saw it, I could ...STILL...think it was not. Yet who can object to the concept of integrity and fair play on such prominent display?

The FACT a referee could decide to NOT award a goal, is NOT the act of an inadvertent whistle, but accepting the team who scored did so contrary to the LOTG. I.e. a foul of handles the ball deliberately! A referee with integrity sees what he sees and calls it accordingly. If we don't believe the foul occurred then why are we disallowing the goal?

I have seen fouls awarded, the player lay claim he was not fouled and a drop ball for an inadvertent whistle as a gesture by the referee to acknowledge fair play. Pulling back a goal or switching the foul around based solely on the word of a player who received the advantage of a goal or a free kick then chooses to admit wrong doing or claim he does want the free kick or in fact claim he was responsible is unusual but commendable!
Well done mate for helping us keep our integrity intact. Although we do try to be correct, we do seem to still find opportunities to prove we are not know it alls ! lol
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Good job Jeff
caught us deking left when we needed to go right. The original question 29868 will be amended <

A drop ball restart gets the game underway, avoids the caution but ...DOES NOT... provide a reason to take away a goal. In this case it is inventive refereeing not what the LOTG required, trying to fit fair play which is what the players wanted
Law 8 The Start and Restart of play
A dropped ball is a method of restarting play when, while the ball is still in play,
the referee is required to stop play temporarily for any reason not mentioned
elsewhere in the Laws of the Game.
The issue is LAW 9 Ball out of play
The ball is out of play when:
• it has wholly crossed the goal line or touch line whether on the ground or
in the air
• play has been stopped by the referee
This has occurred!

To take the goal away we have to believe the team scoring committed a transgression prior to the ball entering the goal under the crossbar between the posts and over the goal line according to Law 10 – The Method of Scoring
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.

This is an unusual situation because a DHB is a subjective foul of intent. The player is admitting to a foul, on the FOP while the ball is in play PRIOR to the goal being scored! Law 12 – Fouls and Misconduct. A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player handles the ball deliberately. That means this restart must be a free kick ! Law 13 Free Kicks
Our player is not claiming he was not fouled by the opponent, where a drop ball restarts fixes all as an inadvertent whistle i.e. referee's error! Law 8 The Start and Restart of play

This is now more about whether we MUST caution if we award the DFK .
DFK solves the restart according to the LOTG for the foul of handles the ball deliberately occurs prior to the goal and play has not yet restarted since. What if this player was already on a caution? Are we going to send him off for a 2nd caution? For freely admitting he scored an illegal goal! Oh My!

There are circumstances when a caution for unsporting behaviour is required
when a player deliberately handles the ball, e.g. when a player:
• attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball

If this player is 100% sure he did it deliberately you must still apply the LOTG correctly, even if you accept the word of the player as an act of fair play. For the LOTG be applied and you must do as you would have if you had seen it as he tells it to you because you are accepting it. DFK and yellow card for USB - scoring using the hand deliberately.

I believe we all just hate the idea we should caution but in reality that is what we would do ...IF... we saw it as the player is claiming, that he deliberately used his hand to score !

Think , if we did see the ball hit his hand and go into the goal but felt it was accidental! But the player says no, it was deliberate under the LOTG we have no choice but to caution him if we are going to rule no goal ! In the case where we did not EVEN see what happened how do we not caution?

Yet in these rarified circumstances if the caution was forgotten until after the next restart, well then its too late and the spirit of fair play can relax
If the offence warrants a caution, it must be issued at the next stoppage.
If the caution is NOT issued at the next stoppage, it cannot be shown later!
Cheers