Question Number: 22906

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/6/2010

RE: All Levels Under 17

Larry of Danville, CA USA asks...

The following question was asked,March 1, 2010 on USFF's Ask A Soccer Referee. As usual, their answer was technically correct, but basically left the correct decision to be 'based on experience, game circumstances, and common sense', and lacked the insights that all of you provide. My question is, how might you handle this situation, and would it change if the attacking team was up by say 5 goals? As always, thanks.

Question:
An attacker A1 shoots the ball toward the goal and the ball is handled by defender D in the penalty area preventing a goal. As a result of Ds handling, the ball is deflected to another attacker A2 with a possible shot on goal that is at least as good an opportunity to score as a penalty shot. Say, no real challenge by a defender on A2. The referee allows advantage, and A2 shoots toward the goal but misses. The ball goes directly over the goal line after A2s shot.

Q1.What is the restart? Penalty kick or goal kick ?

Q2. Does D get a caution or a send off? Note that according to 12.39 of "Advice¦", if A2 had scored, then D would be cautioned and the restart would be a kick off.

Game level: To the extent that the answer is level dependent, I would appreciate a response reflecting that up thru adult pro.

USSF answer (March 1, 2010):
According to the Laws of the Game 2009/2010 (Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees, p. 122), "If the referee applies advantage during an obvious goalscoring opportunity and a goal is scored directly, despite the opponents handling the ball or fouling an opponent, the player cannot be sent off but he may still be cautioned." In this case, the referee applied the advantage, which was realized, in that the attacking team was able to shoot, but failed to score a goal. Decision? See below.

You cited Advice 12.39, but apparently did not consider its second paragraph:

In cases where a goal or goalscoring opportunity has been denied by handling (DGH) or by a foul (DGF), but advantage has been applied, it is advisable to stop play as soon as possible once it becomes clear that the offended team has not been able to benefit from the advantage. This would be the case when, after roughly 3-5 seconds and at least one subsequent play, the team was not able to maintain a successful attack. In such cases, of course, the referee should return to the original foul and, additionally, show the red card for the denied opportunity associated with the foul. Because circumstances vary from game to game, there is no single mandatory decision that would be universally correct. The referee must use discretion in making the decision, based on experience, game circumstances, and common sense.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Larry
The way I would deal with this is the 'delayed' whistle. The moment the defender deliberately handles the ball there will be a loud shout for penalty. The ball will fall to an attacker who will shoot. If he scores then no problem. It is a goal and a possible caution for USB. If he misses then I will blow for the whisle for the penalty and the defender will be dismissed for a DOGSO
Also 3/5 seconds in this situation is an age plus when the referee play advantage and the player misses a clear shot at goal has not the advantage been realised. The attacking team will be irate about not awarding the penalty even after a chance at goal.
The scoreline will not make any difference to my decision as I could be in a similar situation a few weeks later with the same teams, goal difference can be relevant plus the player will face suspension as well which can have a bearing on future matches and the players have to see the Law being administered fully.
In general it is not a good idea to play advantage on a stonewall penalty decision.

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

In deciding whether the advantage was realized, the lower the level of skill and age, the more likely I am to conclude that advantage was NOT realized, call for the penalty kick and send-off. The referee also must decide whether the foul had any effect on the second player's shot - - for example, did the foul affect where the ball was located so that it did not sit well for the second player's attempt to score or did the second player simply make a bad shot. IMO, the score is irrelevant.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

Larry, the props are appreciated, but I'm not sure we can improve on the advice given from the official USSF site.

There really is no single mandatory decision to be made here. If these are young or recreational level teams, a penalty kick and sending off is probably the most appropriate, although even that is never mandatory and is based on the circumstances in that game. Often at that level, the level of experience of the referee is also a huge factor in recognizing and correctly dealing with such issues.

In an older, very highly skilled game, if the advantage is given, and the attacker has a chance to get off a really good shot, the advantage can be said to have been realized even though he didn't score, and we will simply caution the defender. If the attacker cannot get off a good shot, there was no advantage, and we are back at the penalty kick and sending off.

It all depends on the huge variety of facts driving decisions, and all of those work through the referee of the game, her skill level and experience with this level game, these players, this day.