Question Number: 25918

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 1/25/2012

RE: Intermediate Under 12

Phil of Tarzana, CA United States asks...

This question is a follow up to question 25900

Actually, the AYSO site said something quite similar, but in different words. They gave 2 scenarios:

* Blue #9 returned to the field of play and interfered with the goalkeeper's ability to play the ball - The referee should stop play, admonish/verbally warn blue #9, or caution her for unsporting behavior (trying to gain an unfair advantage is more serious than leaving the field of play without the referee's permission). Then he should restart the game with an indirect free kick for the red team.
* Blue #9 left the field of play to get around the opponent and have a good chance at playing the ball - If in the process of returning to the field of play, blue #9 does not interfere with the opponent and/or does not put any player in danger, the referee should allow play to continue.

Their full question & answer can be found here:
http://www.ayso.org/resources/referee_res/whistle_or_not.aspx

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Phil
Thanks for that information and it concurs withe answers given by the panel. The player has to do something more that just going into the goal to warrant a free kick and perhaps disciplinary action.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

I would note that unless the referee decides to caution the player, there can be no free kick. The kick is because the game was stopped to caution a player, not because the player ran off the field temporarily. If you stop play to only chew out the player, you must restart with a dropped ball. (Wouldn't that be fun?) That's because stopping play to talk to a player does not have a defined restart in the Laws, so we revert to the default dropped ball found in Law 8.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

The key difference in the original post and the cite from the AYSO site above is 'interference with the keeper'. Above it says #9 interfered with the keeper's ability to play the ball, which implies that the movement by #9 was not a play for the ball, but an attempt to play the keeper. That's wholly different from a player moving off the field and back on again quickly in order to better position themselves to play the ball. The first is an IDFK offense and how #9 got into position to interfere is not the issue, the interference is. That is rather poorly addressed by the slightly cryptic comment above - '(trying to gain an unfair advantage is more serious than leaving the field of play without the referee's permission)'. Whether a caution is in order or not is up to the referee's opinion as to whether the action rises to the level of unsporting.

In the instance above, the restart is an IDFK for the defense, as set out in Law 12, with or without the caution. In the original post, there is no need to stop play if the off and back on the field maneuver did not interfere with the keeper in the ref's opinion.