Home Laws Advice Fitness SiteMap Links GuestBook Discuss Search corshamref.net   

Question 1: How is a Referee supposed to decide what is a foul under the auspices of Law 12, and what is not a foul? He would have to be a mind-reader to know the intentions going through a player's mind before a player makes each tackle - and whether a tackle was done deliberately or not?

Answer 1: The word 'intention' was deleted from the Laws in 1996/1997. It was thought inappropriate since the introduction of the terms "Careless and Reckless" into the Laws in 1995/1996. The use of the words 'careless and 'reckless' in Law 12 were included to allow Referees to interpret and award direct free kick offences easier. Weather conditions such as a waterlogged surface may also produce a chancy situation where a player is neither careless nor reckless at the onset of making a tackle against an opponent.  Law 12 now includes the terms 'careless, reckless or using excessive force' when players commit an offence. Apart from acts of simulation and deliberate handball, the word 'intention' is no longer used in the Laws to gauge whether a foul is a foul or not! In other words, Referees are no longer asked to consider the intention of a player - it is either a foul or it is not a foul.

Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct offences are mostly committed by a player, against an opponent whilst the ball is in play, and normally committed on the field of play. (Although there are other situations that can occur off the field of play, such as when the ball remains in play very near the touchline, but a player is fouled when he has travelled just outside the touchline following a misjudged 'follow-through' tackle which takes both players outside of the touchline - where illegal contact is then initially made).

The word 'deliberate' (in the sense of deliberately committing a foul) also no longer features in the wording of Law 12. (Deliberate handball is an exception; deliberate handball is not committed against a particular opponent, but against the opposing team). It is impossible for a Referee to judge whether a player commits a foul deliberately or whether a player intentionally sets out to kick, charge, push, trip, hold or impede an opponent. The wording 'careless, reckless or using excessive force' allows the Referee to make a judgement based upon what the player actually does (and not whether it was done deliberately or intentionally). The Referee can then make his decision based upon the player's action, and not upon what the Referee thinks was in the player's mind.

Go to top of this page

Question 2: If a player deliberately runs into the Referee what action should he take?

Answer 2: The Referee is a part of the field of play – so it could be argued that no offence has occurred. For example - if a player purposefully ran into a goalpost, this would not be deemed as an offence. You might think that the player is ‘barking mad’ – but all players are slightly ‘touched’ anyway!

Rumour has it - that the Referee was once a human being and not born inert!! If a player purposefully runs into the Referee, the first question is "Was it done on purpose to harm the Referee". I have been involved with players accidentally or  jokingly running into me – and I have reacted in a similar way and just laughed it off. Yes, Referees DO have a sense of humour!

If a player purposefully bumps into the Referee – then the severity, speed, whether the action influenced the game, whether it was done whilst the ball was in play or not etc. etc……. all need to be taken into consideration before the Referee makes a decision.

There are 4 actions that the Referee can take.

1. Do nothing and just smile.

2. Give the player a verbal 'roasting' for being a fool.

3. Caution the player for unsporting behaviour.

4. Send the player off for violent conduct.

Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct allow the Referee a huge amount of discretion when making decisions covering indiscipline. For example, ‘Unsporting conduct' can cover anything from larking about, to a more serious foul. Nevertheless, it is the Referee’s duty (Law 5) to take the appropriate disciplinary action against irresponsible players.

Another factor for the Referee to consider, is the player’s size in contrast to the Referee. For example: I weigh 16 stone, am over 6 feet tall, and build like a 'brick house'. A punitive bump by a 7 stone weakling (or a 7 year old player) is not likely to have much effect on me. I would probably not even notice it – in the course of battle. Conversely, a 16 stone player bumping into a 7 stone Referee will just as likely flatten the Referee like a cow pancake. Notwithstanding all this, it is the act itself and not the severity that must be primarily considered. Purposefully bumping into the Referee is deemed to be violent conduct warranting a red card. BUT as mentioned above, a great deal of Law 18 Common sense must be applied before taking the appropriate suitable action.

There is no easy solution, and each Referee will react differently.

If a player accidentally runs into the Referee – then there is not much that the Referee can do –except shout ouch! As a mobile part of the field of play, the Referee is responsible for getting out of the way during play situations. I have been bumped into accidentally on many occasions – and each one has been properly ignored with a touch of humour. If players berate me for being in their way – then I agree with them, and try even harder to stay out wide from the play action areas.

Now? –what about those situations where the Referee runs into a player – now that is a different question altogether?

Thanks to Dave Larder of Bulldogs Unleashed Western Australia for the interesting question

Question 3: As you know, it is nearly impossible to slide tackle someone without having your studs facing the ball. I know that this isn't normally a foul when slide-tackling from one side. But what happens if an attacker is running towards a defender who in turn is running towards the attacker, the defender slide tackles (with 1 foot), taking the ball, but sending the attacker flying. In my view if you touch the ball it shouldn't be a foul, what is your view?

Answer 3: Firstly, you CAN slide tackle with your knee. A slide tackle does not necessarily have to involve the studs facing the ball. For example, you can also slide tackle with the toes pointed downwards, with the studs facing down towards the grass. Referees should always penalise slide tackles when they are done in such a way that they jeopardise the safety of the opponent (it does not matter whether the ball is touched first or not). On 26 March 2001 in the English Nationwide Div. 1 game West Bromwich Albion v Tranmere Rovers, the Referee penalised two such slide tackles, neither, of which made contact with the opponent – but both made in a reckless way using excessive force (Law 12).

It does not matter whether the defender touches the ball first or not. If slide tackle was careless, reckless,   or made with excess force, the Referee should penalise the defender.  If two opposing players are running towards each other, and one of them decides to make a slide tackle from the front – then this is most certainly reckless and may on some occasions involve excess force. If a Referee decides NOT to immediately penalise such action, then he will give the 'Green light' for players to make reckless tackles during the rest of the game. And this cannot be allowed to happen.

The often heard shout of "But I played the ball Ref." does not necessarily mean free immunity for the perpetrator!

26 March 2001 - Great question from Tommy...........................many thanks Tommy.

Question 4: An attacker shoots the ball towards goal. Just as the ball is about to enter the goal, a defending full back standing in his own goal area, and holding his shin guard, uses the shin-guards to prevent the ball from entering the goal. What action should the Referee take?

Answer 4: The Referee should award a penalty kick to the attacking team. The shin-guards is regarded as an illegal extension of the defender's hand. The defender should be sent off for preventing a goal being scored. If in the above situation, a goal is subsequently scored after the ball hits the shin-guards, the defender should be cautioned for deliberate handball - and not sent off.

If in the above situation, the goalkeeper is the one who uses his shin-guards to prevent the ball entering the goal, the shin-guard is again regarded as an illegal extension of the goalkeeper's hand. The correct restart here is to award an indirect free kick (for unsporting behaviour by the goalkeeper) to the attacking team. The indirect free kick should be taken from the place where the infringement occurred. If it occurred inside the goal area, then the free kick should be taken from that part of the goal area line that runs parallel to the goal line, at the point nearest to where the infringement occurred. The goalkeeper should be cautioned for unsporting behaviour.

Question 5: An attacker and defender leave the field of play during the momentum of the game, and the ball remains in play. As the attacker tries to re-enter the field of play, the defender holds him back. As this incident is, off the field of play, and the ball is 'in play' what decision should a Referee make regarding this incident,

 
Answer 5: If an advantage can be applied, the Referee should allow play to continue, and during the next stoppage in play caution the defender and show him the yellow card, for unsporting behaviour. Where no advantage is to be gained, then the Referee should stop play, caution the defender and show the yellow card for unsporting behaviour and restart play with a drop ball from the place where the ball was at the time that the Referee stopped the game.

Question 6: Is an 'over-the-top' (or over-the-ball) tackle that does not connect with an opponents leg, deemed to be an indirect free kick for dangerous play, or a direct free lick for a penal offence (i.e. attempting to kick an opponent) ?

Answer 6: Direct free kick or penalty, depending where the offence occurred and by whom. The disciplinary action will rely on the Referee's view of the severity of the offence. This is classified under the penal offences, kicking or attempting to kick an opponent.

Go to top of this page

Question 7: Just exactly what is a tackle from behind?

Answer 7:

(d) Tackling from behind.   On 6 March 1998, and in preparation for the World Cup in the France, the FA Board brought in a new Law 12 Decision No. 5: (This clause now appears in later versions of the Law 12 Decisions of the International F.A as Board Decision No. 4).

"A tackle from behind which endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play."

This clause does not totally ban tackles from behind. It allows the Referee to use his/her judgement to penalise those tackles that 'endanger the safety of an opponent'. The introduction of this clause was to stop the many serious injuries occurring to players who were strongly challenged from behind by opponents using excessive force. This used to be a common sight on the football playing field, but thankfully, the clause put a very quick stop to this. And has undoubtedly prevented many serious injuries. These days, most players are aware of the punishment, and it is now very rare to see such tackles being forcefully made against opponents.

Referees during the 1998 World Cup in France, issued a mandatory red card for nearly every tackle made from behind (irrespective of the severity of the tackle). Since then, Referees are now more likely to only send-off a player when such tackles are committed using excessive force. Tackles from behind are carried out through a player's legs or between a player's legs, or around a player's legs. The Referee is the sole judge as to whether a tackle from behind is illegal or not. If the ball is played without the tackling player touching an opponent's legs first, this can sometimes be allowed, so long as the tackle is not deemed by the Referee to be dangerous to the opponent. For example, if two opponents are standing very close together, there is nothing to stop a player tapping the ball softly away whilst standing immediately behind his opponent who has the ball just in front of him. For a tackle from behind to be illegal, the tackling player normally either makes contact with the player before he makes contact with the ball or the tackle endangered (or potentially endangered) the safety of the player being tackled. Making contact with the opponent after touching the ball while performing a tackle does not necessarily mean that a foul has not been committed.

Foul tackles from behind made from distance should always be penalised with the award of a direct free kick (or penalty kick if committed by a defender in his own penalty area). An illegal tackle from behind also includes when the tackling player makes contact with the ball first, and then strongly follows through with his ‘trailing’ leg thus upending and potentially injuring his opponent. In such cases, it is possible that such a tackle can break a player's leg. The fact that a player makes contact with the ball first does not make a tackle from behind legal. On the contrary, players who loudly plead this case inevitably feel guilty and are trying to sway the Referee's judgement on the severity and legality of their tackle. Players carelessly and recklessly tackling opponents from behind should normally be cautioned at the very least! And red-carded if done in such a way that uses excessive force or endangers the safety of the player being tackled.

Law 12 states that a direct free kick (or a penalty kick) is awarded when a player kicks, trips, jumps, charges, strikes or pushes an opponent carelessly, recklessly or whilst using excessive force.  Therefore, if a challenge is made from behind, and the Referee deems the tackle to have endangered the safety of the opponent, the Referee must sanctioned this as 'serious foul play'.
A fine balance has to be reached between protecting players and keeping the game physically challenging for players. Red cards should be issued to players when tackles from behind are made using excessive force. But, the yellow card is more often the punishment when the tackle is reckless or careless. There is no doubt that the action taken by Referees over the past few years has resulted in less tackles from behind. Because of the combative nature of the game, this type of tackle will never disappear completely.

In short, not all tackles from behind endanger the safety of an opponent. A tackle from behind can range from a simple soft tap of the ball by a defender between an attacking player’s legs to a 'full blown' violent challenge from behind. As in all cases, the Referee makes the decision on the level of punishment to be applied depending on the severity of the tackle. Football is a physical contact sport – and although recent changes in Law interpretation have prevented many injuries from happening – too much emphasis on limiting physical contact will harm the combative element of the game. Both Referees and coaches have a responsibility to insure that the incessant (dangerous) tackling from behind (seen in the 1990’s) does not creep back into the game. And that the correct punishment is applied by the Referee who remains the sole judge in such cases.

The simple criteria to use, is the same criteria that the Referee would normally use for any other (Direct Free Kick) tackle made by an opponent in a manner considered by the Referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force. With the added reminder that tackles made from behind using excessive force must ALWAYS be punished by a sending-off.

Further to this.............

Go to top of this page

Tackling with two feet together. A two footed tackle made from a short distance away, does not always pose a danger to an opponent, because the ball itself acts as a natural cushion between the players. When the 'two footed' tackle is made from some distance in an uncontrolled manner when attempting to make contact with the ball (or not) - certainly entails a large element of danger to the opponent. Such tackles are reckless and will certainly incur the wrath of the opposing team if they are allowed to go unpunished. Two footed tackles should be penalised with the award of a direct free kick (or penalty kick) - this is more of a 'jumping' penal offence, as opposed to the less serious offence of dangerous play. Players who use excessive force to make two footed tackles should be sent-off. A two footed tackle made from a short distance away, does not always pose a danger to an opponent, because the ball itself acts as a natural cushion between the players. When the 'two footed' tackle is made from some distance in an uncontrolled manner when attempting to make contact with the ball (or not) - certainly entails a large element of danger to the opponent. Such tackles are reckless and will certainly incur the wrath of the opposing team if they are allowed to go unpunished. Two footed tackles should be penalised with the award of a direct free kick (or penalty kick) - this is more of a 'jumping' penal offence, as opposed to the less serious offence of dangerous play. Players who use excessive force to make two footed tackles should be sent-off.

(c) Tackling by sliding. With the advent of the Law 12 change in season 1998/1999 where 'a tackle from behind which endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play' - the use of the slide tackle has lessened dramatically. A slide tackle carried out with one or both legs outstretched can be allowed - but not if committed from behind. A player making a slide tackle from some distance can be construed as being dangerous, and if contact is made with an opponent, then there is a large element of danger to the opponent. A player making a slide tackle from some distance knows that if he misses the ball, he may bring down his opponent. If he does bring down his opponent, then this is a tripping offence (direct free kick) and not dangerous play (indirect free kick). Slide tackles can be allowed if made from the side and contact is made cleanly with the ball and not the player. An indirect free kick can be awarded when a slide tackle is made from some distance, and the tackler makes no contact with the ball or the player, but his action constitutes a potential danger to the opponent. Opponents are very adept at riding tackles (jumping over sliding tackles) - this does not mean that the Referee should ignore such tackles. The Referee can allow 'advantage' when sliding tackles do not contact or effect the flow of play for the team in possession of the ball. Of course, the Referee should have a strong word (or caution) the perpetrator at the next convenient moment. A player committing a sliding tackle with the sole purpose of inflicting damage on an opponent (even if he makes contact with the ball first) can be construed as 'serious foul play' and punished by a 'sending-off' depending on the severity of the tackle. I have seen many occasions when players who are looking for retribution, make violent sliding tackles against opponents, in the hope that the Referee will allow such action as part of the game itself. Be aware of players exacting this punishment on opponents. Serious foul play is "serious foul play" so do not be duped into thinking that such action can be masked by players attempting revenge within the Laws of the Game - because it does not exist - and is not allowed. A Referee who allows such action to go unpunished will quickly lose control of a match - and players will then very quickly realise that they can make serious fouls without worrying about being punished by the weak Referee. With the advent of the Law 12 change in season 1998/1999 where 'a tackle from behind which endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as serious foul play' - the use of the slide tackle has lessened dramatically. A slide tackle carried out with one or both legs outstretched can be allowed - but not if committed from behind. A player making a slide tackle from some distance can be construed as being dangerous, and if contact is made with an opponent, then there is a large element of danger to the opponent. A player making a slide tackle from some distance knows that if he misses the ball, he may bring down his opponent. If he does bring down his opponent, then this is a tripping offence (direct free kick) and not dangerous play (indirect free kick). Slide tackles can be allowed if made from the side and contact is made cleanly with the ball and not the player. An indirect free kick can be awarded when a slide tackle is made from some distance, and the tackler makes no contact with the ball or the player, but his action constitutes a potential danger to the opponent. Opponents are very adept at riding tackles (jumping over sliding tackles) - this does not mean that the Referee should ignore such tackles. The Referee can allow 'advantage' when sliding tackles do not contact or effect the flow of play for the team in possession of the ball. Of course, the Referee should have a strong word (or caution) the perpetrator at the next convenient moment. A player committing a sliding tackle with the sole purpose of inflicting damage on an opponent (even if he makes contact with the ball first) can be construed as 'serious foul play' and punished by a 'sending-off' depending on the severity of the tackle. I have seen many occasions when players who are looking for retribution, make violent sliding tackles against opponents, in the hope that the Referee will allow such action as part of the game itself. Be aware of players exacting this punishment on opponents. Serious foul play is "serious foul play" so do not be duped into thinking that such action can be masked by players attempting revenge within the Laws of the Game - because it does not exist - and is not allowed. A Referee who allows such action to go unpunished will quickly lose control of a match - and players will then very quickly realise that they can make serious fouls without worrying about being punished by the weak Referee.

Note: Tripping does not necessarily have to be instigated by the use of a foot. Tripping or attempting to trip an opponent includes situations were a player uses his body to unbalance or upend an opponent. Referees must carefully distinguish between the act of accidentally tripping from that of being deliberately tripped by an opponent. Deliberate tripping or attempting to trip is an offence, if it is clearly directed at an opponent and causes the opponent to falter or fall. Players may trip over themselves, or accidentally fall over an opponent as a result of natural play - and in these instances - no infringement of the Law has been committed.

Go to top of this page

Question 8: If a Referee awards a foul, but is unable to positively identify the exact player that committed the foul, what should he do?

Answer 8: When awarding fouls, it can sometimes happen, that although the Referee has awarded the correct decision, the speed and entanglement of nearby players (and the fact that players are all dressed the same) can prevent the Referee identifying the individual perpetrator of the incident. In such cases, the Referee still has a duty to act positively in penalising the offending team. There is no stipulation in the Laws that require the Referee to positively identify every culprit. However, recognising who the culprit is, can allow the Referee to take the appropriate action such as, having a quiet word, or issuing a caution etc. Notwithstanding this, any enquiry  from players of the innocent team to "positively identify" who committed the foul must be quickly and strongly dealt with - the Referee should not waver, he should not succumb to the 'badgering' of players seeking identification (when identification is impossible). The Referee has no obligation in Law to identify the unidentifiable!

As is often the case, decisions made by Referees are HONEST decisions made at that particular time. Referees, who penalise a team, have no option but to apply the correct restart - there is no other alternative. If approached by players seeking positive identification, the Referee is advised to back-off slowly a couple of yards, at the same time telling the oncoming players on a loud voice to "Move away!" using the (back-off) arm/hand signal - similar to that used when shooing chickens or cows away!  Referees are not advised to discuss anything with players following incidents of this nature. Doing so will only lead to further trouble for the Referee. As long as you (the Referee) are confident that the decision you have made against the guilty team is correct - what else can a Referee do. Not knowing for sure who committed the foul should not negate punishing the guilty team.

Question 9: If a player commits a sending off or a cautionable offence during the half time period, what action should the Referee take?

Answer 9: The half-time interval is considered to be part of the 'game time' itself. For example, if a player commits a sending off offence, he should be sent from the field of play. The player being sent off is not allowed to be replaced (i.e. the offending team will start the second half consisting of 10 players).
If a player commits a cautionable offence (such as dissent) during the half-time interval, that player should be cautioned as if the incident occurred during any other time in the game. The Referee should show the red and yellow card respectively when dealing with misconduct during the half-time interval.

Question 10: If whilst the ball is still in play, a goalkeeper standing inside his own penalty area, forcefully and purposefully uses his fist to strike an opponent in the face. The opponent was standing just outside of the goalkeeper's penalty area. What action should the Referee take?

Answer 10: The Referee should send off the goalkeeper for violent conduct. Play should be restarted with a direct free kick to the opponent's team, to be taken from the place where the offence occurred (i.e. where the goalkeeper's fist struck or would have struck the opponent.

When a player strikes an opponent with the use of any part of his body (fist, head, leg, boot, elbow etc.). The restart should be taken from the place where the strike lands, and not from the place where the strike was made from. For example, if a goalkeeper (or any other player) standing just inside his own penalty area strikes an opponent who is standing outside of the penalty area, the restart is a direct free kick to the opponent's team to be taken from outside of the penalty area (and not a penalty kick).

The point of impact is important in judging where a 'punch/striking' incident actually takes place. This illustrates the principle of penalising where the contact actually happens, and not where it was initiated.

For example:

(a) If a goalkeeper is standing in his penalty area (or directly on top of the penalty area boundary line) leans out to catch the ball outside the penalty area, the offence is committed outside the penalty area. The restart is a direct free kick to the attacking team, at the place where the goalkeeper handled the ball. If the goalkeeper was standing outside, and reached into his penalty area to catch the ball, there would be no offence.

(b) If a defender slide-tackles an opponent, and makes contact with the opponent before the ball, he would be penalised. The game should be restarted from the point where the contact was made - and not where the offending player began the sliding tackle.

Question 11: Whilst the ball was still in play, a defending player standing inside his own penalty area spits at an opponent who is positioned outside of the penalty area, what action should the Referee take?

Answer 11: The guilty player must be dismissed and shown the red card for spitting at an opponent. A direct free kick should be awarded to the attacking team, as the offence occurred outside of the penalty area where the spit struck the opponent (or would have struck the opponent had the action been successful). T

For spitting and striking offences and their restarts -  see here.

Question 12: If following an argument between team-mates, one of the players decides that he has 'had enough', and permanently leaves the field play claiming that he is injured and cannot continue (when this is obviously not the case) - is there anything that the Referee can do?

Answer 12: If a player says that he is injured and wants to leave the field of play, the Referee cannot make a judgement as to whether that player is injured or not. If the player says he cannot continue because of an injury, then the Referee has no option but to allow that player to leave the field of play without being penalised. Although simulating action (faking or exaggerating an injury) can be construed as a cautionable offence (Decision 6 Law 12 Fouls and Misconduct), the Referee is not advised to take disciplinary action against this supposed outgoing injured player! By the letter of the law, a player who enters or leaves the field of play without the Referee's permission should be cautioned - however in this case it would not be in keeping with the 'spirit of the game'. Just let the player leave and get on with the game.

Question 13: Is there any situation where an opponent is denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity, when the perpetrator is not sent-off? For example, what action should the Referee take if the eleventh team player arrives late after the game has commenced, and then enters the field of play without notifying the Referee. At the precise moment that this eleventh player enters the field of play in his own penalty area, an opponent kicks the ball in the direction of the empty goal. The eleventh player then manages to stop the ball with his foot just before it travels over the goal line and denies his opponents an obvious goal.

Answer 13: Law 12 clearly states that a player should be sent-off if he " denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player's own goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick". In this instance, the opponent who kicked the ball towards the goal had not been interfered within any way, so it would be very difficult to justify sending-off the oncoming eleventh player for deflecting the ball away from the goal. The wording "punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick" applies only to those fouls and misconduct listed under Law 12 Direct and Indirect free kick infringements, for example, kicking, tripping, pushing, impedance, handling etc.... in this instance, the eleventh player did not commit any of these offences. Coming onto the field of play without the Referees permission is punishable by a caution and the award of an indirect free kick to the attacking team (Law 3), to be taken from the place where the ball was when the Referee stopped play. The Laws are not written to stipulate conclusions for the many offences that can happen on the field of play. The the Referee is very often required to decide the correct action for peculiar incidents of this nature. Law 18 Common sense dictates that the eleventh player should be cautioned, and the match restarted with an indirect free kick to the attacking team.

Other dubious (preventing an obvious - or not so obvious! goal scoring opportunity) instances for your consideration are:

(a) When a goalkeeper who has released the ball at his feet, purposefully picks it up again to prevent an oncoming nearby challenging attacker gaining possession and shooting towards goal. Should the Referee Send off the goalkeeper for denying a goal scoring opportunity and restart with an indirect free kick, or should the Referee just give the goalkeeper a caution and restart with an indirect free kick for touching the ball a second time after it has been released?????? (For the answer to this, see the 'Playing the ball a Second Time page'.

(b) When a goalkeeper receiving the ball direct from a throw-in taken by a team-mate, has to dive and palm the ball away from entering the goal - and thus prevents an oncoming nearby attacker from making contact with the ball and shooting towards goal. Should the Referee Send off the goalkeeper for denying a goal scoring opportunity and restart with an indirect free kick, or should the Referee just give the goalkeeper a caution and restart with an indirect free kick against the goalkeeper for touching the ball after it has been received directly from a throw-in taken by a team mate?

I suppose it could be argued that had the throw-in entered the goal directly without touching any other player, then a corner kick would be awarded. BUT.... On the other hand, Law 12 clearly states that an indirect free kick is to be awarded if the goalkeeper touches the ball with his hands after he has received it direct from a team mate. So an offence "punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick" had been committed, and had prevented an opponent from an obvious goal scoring opportunity.
Send off or just an indirect free kick?????? (For the answer to this, see the 'Throw-in page'.

Go to top of this page

Question 14: Just exactly what parts of the body is a player legally allowed to use when deliberately passing the ball back to his own goalkeeper, without the goalkeeper being penalised for handling the ball.

Answer 14: This is commonly known as 'the back-pass Law'. Law 12 states that a goalkeeper is penalised with the award of an indirect free kick against him, if (inside his own penalty area) he touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately 'kicked' to him by a team-mate. 'Kicked' means if the ball was deliberately passed to his goalkeeper by a team-mate using any part of his foot (or shin). The goalkeeper should not be penalised if he touches the ball after it has been passed to him by a team-mate using any other part of his body, for example, knee, thigh, chest, head or shoulder - and in these instances, the Referee should allow play to continue. For a goalkeeper to be penalised during a back-pass, the ball must be played by a team-mate's foot (or shin), it must be played back deliberately by that team-mate, and the goalkeeper must touch the ball with his hands. Note, that the direction that the ball travels is immaterial, a 'back-pass' means that the ball is deliberately passed to the goalkeeper - and not that the ball must travel in a backward direction to the goalkeeper!

In some instances, a defender attempting to kick a ball away from his penalty area will inadvertently deflect the ball towards his goalkeeper. In such cases the goalkeeper MAY use his hands if the ball comes to him - because the defender did not deliberately kick the ball to the goalkeeper. The Referee is the sole judge as to whether a back-pass is deliberate or not. Referees are advised to be 100 percent certain before penalising for a back-pass.

If a team-mate seeks to circumvent the spirit of the 'back-pass law' by purposefully flicking the ball up in the air and subsequently heading the ball back to his goalkeeper, then if the goalkeeper touches the ball with his hands, the goalkeeper should still be penalised, even though the team-mate last touched the ball with his head. In this instance, circumventing the spirit of the 'back-pass law' should not be allowed, and an indirect free kick to the opposing team should always be awarded. The same goes, if a team-mate taking a goal kick, kicks the ball outside of the penalty area to his goalkeeper who subsequently dribbles the ball back inside of his penalty area and then picks it up. In this instance, the goalkeeper is still guilty of touching the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate. It does not matter whether a colleague during a goal kick or during open play has deliberately kicked the ball to the goalkeeper. This is still an infringement of Law 12. The correct restart is an indirect free kick to the attacking team.

A direct free kick should be awarded if the goalkeeper picks the ball up outside of his penalty area.

Question 15: Will technology enhance the game?

Answer 15: Albeit that I (webmaster Julian Carosi) can understand the commercial reasons for advocating the use of technology, I'm not personally in favour of ANY technology being used myself.

There has been talk particularly of using camera technology to decide if a ball crosses the line for a goal or not. This is all well and good at the top level, but what about the majority of Referees who officiate at Park level where such technology will never be used. I am a great advocate that genuine mistakes made by the match officials and the players are a fundamental part of the game itself - and this is why it has such a massive World-wide following. Take away the mistakes, and you might as well stay at home and mow the lawn!
Microphones and ear-pieces were experimented with in England during most of the 1999/2000 season, it lasted for a while, but match officials now generally do without them. Referees with their ears taped up, and Assistants talking to their flags made them vulnerable to more ridicule. I believe that technology needs to advance further to make such methods less intrusive and more comfortable for the users. Referees were very often seen adjusting their tapped ear-pieces - and this can only detract from the Referees' main task of concentrating on the game itself. The buzzing armband seems to work. During offsides, the Assistant Referee presses a button on his flag-stick, that in turn vibrates a concealed armband on the Referee's arm. This method is still successfully being used at the top level.
Before long, we will have remote controls that can be passed out to allow spectators control of the Referee himself!! Whatever next ?????????????
I suppose that one-day, we might even have video evidence that will be used to change the result of a game, because the player who scored the goal was 10 centimetres offside. I think we are heading down a very 'slippery slope' with the utilisation of technology - especially if our decisions are constantly overruled by the opinion of some glorified machine or a panel who sits two days after the game has finished.

Question 16: Teams playing in a Christian league, normally have connections with the Church in some way. If the club secretary of the home team informs the Referee that the football is of a high standard, but if any player uses the phrases "Oh God" or "For Christ's sake" the Referee will be asked by the Christian league to issue a red card for offensive and abusive language, as suggested by the Christian league rules. If this situation arises, should the Referee be more strict, and can the discipline report be passed to the Christian league for action, as opposed to sending it to the normal County Discipline Secretary for action?

Answer 16: The official line is, that any football team playing within a County should be affiliated to that County's Football Association. All the players belonging to that team, must also be registered with the County FA before they can play. As such, Church type leagues are no different to any other league - and come under the jurisdiction of their County Football Association in all matters - including discipline.

A qualified Referee should not officiate outside of his County without first obtaining permission from his parent County FA (the one that he is registered with). It is also a matter of courtesy for Referees to inform their parent County before officiating elsewhere.

Some 'Church' type league rules are more stringent towards improving discipline standards than those off normal league status. Nevertheless, 'Church' type leagues should adhere to the same standards as everyone else. Any suggestion that disciple will be dealt by the 'Church' league themselves (as opposed to sending in discipline reports to the normal County Discipline Secretary) is not proper.

Registered County Referees must send any discipline reports to the County Discipline Secretary and not to the 'Church' league secretary for action. 'Church' type leagues may try and persuade Referees to be more strict when dealing with swearing and dissent. Although one cannot deny the principles behind this, one of the hardest things for a Referee to apply is consistency. And in this matter, a Referee should not be more strict with the Church Team on a Saturday, than he would be with a normal league team playing the following day on a Sunday morning.

Problems will also arise when a player disciplined for saying "Oh Christ" whilst playing for a 'Church' team on a Saturday, also plays for his local pub team on a Sunday morning, where such an expletive will most probably be ignored by most Referees - if he repeats the "Oh Christ" on the Sunday whilst playing for the pub team, will the same Referee take the same action? I doubt it. If the same Referee officiates differently in both games, he leaves himself open to applying double standards - and this cannot be allowed to happen.

Notwithstanding the above, the sentiments of the 'Church' type leagues must be admired. Any move to install discipline and to cut down swearing and dissent must be a good move. The problem the Referee has - is in fulfilling the 'Church' league expectations for acting swiftly when deal with swearing and dissent. The level of swearing and dissent, should really be a matter for the 'Church; league to control and promote (as undoubtedly they do)......the Referee should not be expected to follow the 'Church' league sentiments without falling into the trap of using double standards when dealing with discipline.

It is a sad fact, that the 'factory' language of football has reached an unprecedented level of tolerance - it's a great pity that the standards of the 'Church; leagues cannot be imposed on all of the other leagues.

Question 17: Should Referees be made to do penance for mistakes made in games? For example -  during a Norwich City game in season 2000/2001 England,  a midfield player committed a second yellow card offence. The Referee dealt with the injured opponent first, and then proceeded to send off the offending player. Unfortunately, a defender with the same type of hair style as the perpetrator, had walked nearby and was sent off by mistake. Ok, his sending off was rescinded later, but what if he was the star man of the game and they lost because of his sending off. Would the club have any right to appeal against the wrongful dismissal?

Answer 17: As far as the Laws themselves are concerned - Law 5 clearly states that:
"The decisions of the Referee connected with play are final".
That's it really, as far as Referees are concerned.
What the question really alludes to is - how much money could be lost following a (genuine honest) Refereeing mistake - as far as the commercial business of that particular Club is concerned?
20 years ago, people would have accepted the honest mistake. Sadly, these days, money and success are the ONLY factors that seem to count at the top levels. Whatever happened to the spirit of the game"?
Why can't people just accept that mistakes will be made - instead of pillorying every Referee that "so much as farts" in a game?
This is not really a refereeing type question. The answer lies with the decision making football authorities.
At the end of every game, Referees have done their bit honestly at that particular time. You can't ask for any more than that - surely? The final outcome of such a game is the responsibility of the appropriate Football Association.
I suppose it is only a matter of time before one of the goalkeepers (or players) is made to pay out of his own pocket for letting in a goal that relegates his team from the Premier league to a lower division. And how many unpunished or talked-about mistakes do players and managers make in a year. More than Referees I'll warrant.
We are very much in danger of losing perspective over what in essence is still a game!
Imagine the furore that would occur if one team's relegation was rescinded by a panel of so called judges at a later date, at the expense of another innocent team who get relegated instead.
World War 3 comes to mind!

Question 18: I went to watch a game the other day.   Why can't Referees be consistent?

Answer 18: Consistency is not just what it "says on the tin".
Take two similar tackles by player ‘A’ and player ‘B’ for the same team.

Player ‘A’ fouls an opponent and the Referee has a quiet word with the perpetrator.
Player ‘B’ commits a similar foul 5 minutes later and the Referee shows him a yellow card.

Inconsistency or what!  Rubbish!

A spectator in the stands has no idea what grief and dissent and whinging, player ‘B’ has been giving the Referee throughout the match. And neither does the spectator keep a tally of minor infringements committed previously by player ‘B’.

The tackle by player ‘B’ is cautioned quite correctly under Law 12 , because player ‘B’ persistently infringed the Laws of the Game.

But to the spectator in the stand, this looks like inconsistency because the two individual tackles where similar.

What I am trying to point out, is that consistency is not quite so easy to understand as spectators make it out to be. Spectators only see what they see, and not what the Referee sees or hears.

Go to top of this page

Question 19: An attacker is in an offside position inside his opponent's penalty area but not involved in the active play. The ball is in play and near the half way line. This attacker is then violently thumped by an opponent. What action should the Referee take?

Answer 19: Because the offence took place inside the penalty area when the ball was in play, the Referee should stop play, send off the perpetrator for violent conduct, and award a penalty kick to the attacker's team.

Question 20: During a game, a defending player had left the field of play with the Referee's permission to receive treatment. Whilst he was outside of the field of play and very near his goal line, he deliberately puts a foot inside his penalty area and purposefully trips an attacking opponent who is inside the defender's penalty area. What action should the Referee take?

Answer 20: By putting his foot back inside the field of play, the defender has actually re-entered the field of play and has therefore placed himself back under the full jurisdiction of the Referee and the Laws of the Game - the defender will be treated as if he is fully on the field of play. The Referee should caution the defender for unsporting behaviour and award a penalty kick to the attacking team. If the tripping action took place outside of the penalty area, then a direct free kick should be awarded to the attacking team. If the tripping action prevented a goal scoring opportunity, the defender should be sent-off for preventing the goal scoring opportunity.

Question 21: What action should a Referee take when during play, two members of the same team start fighting and exchanging blows on the field of play?

Answer 21: The Referee should stop the match and send both players off for violent conduct. Play should be restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team from the place where the blood marked the spot!

Question 22: If when diving to gather the ball, a goalkeeper inadvertently slides towards the edge of his penalty area and his hands which are still holding the ball travel outside of the penalty area, what action should the Referee take?

Answer 22: The Referee should stop play and award a direct free kick to the attacking team. If the Referee believes that this action by the goalkeeper was done on purpose to prevent an opponent from having a clear goal scoring opportunity, then the goalkeeper should be sent-off the field of play.

Question 23: (From John Stockman 28 Jan 2001)
What does it mean when a Referee puts his elbow(s) in the air and starts waving them about?

Answer 23: This is not a standard recognised Referee signal, but it usually refers to when a Referee has blown for a foul, and is indicating to others, that a player had held another player down with his elbows whilst trying to jump up to head the ball. This usually happens when a high ball is coming towards two opposing players who are challenging for the ball with their head, then one of the players (the one standing behind) puts is his hands or elbows on the shoulders of the player in front and uses this as leverage to lift himself higher, or prevents the player in front of him, from jumping up properly by holding him down by the shoulders.

This is not a widely recognised signal, but nonetheless, is used by some Referees.

Thanks to John for an interesting question.

Go to top of this page

Question 24: An attacking player is seen running with the ball towards his opponent's goal just inside the opponent's penalty area. A defender is running very close behind the attacker. In the motion of running, their legs get tangled up - the attacker falls down in a heap. Is this a penalty or not?

Answer 24: This is a difficult decision for the Referee to make. It all depends on whether or not the Referee deems this action to have been committed accidentally whilst both players were solely intent on running after the ball the ball - or purposefully committed by the defender to prevent the attacker moving further towards goal. If the Referee believes that the collision was deliberately orchestrated by the defender, then a penalty kick (or a direct free kick if occurring outside of the penalty area) should be awarded to the attacking team - if the Referee believes that the purposeful action by the defender denied the attacker from an obvious goal scoring opportunity, then the defending player should be sent-off the field of play.

If the Referee deems that the incident was purely accidental, then he should allow play to continue. The Referee should be aware that when he takes the action to allow play to continue, he will undoubtedly receive a disparaging comment or two from the attacking player and his colleagues. The Referee should penalise any dissenting comments accordingly. During incidents of these types, Referees are advised to quickly run away from the near vicinity - this prevents players 'having a go' at the Referee. The further the Referee is after the incident, and the quicker he allows play to continue, the less moaning he will receive from players.

If the incident is purposefully done by a defending player outside of the penalty area, the Referee can allow advantage if the attacking player manages to stay on his feet with the ball after the collision and carries on unaffected towards the goal - the defending team should not be given the advantage of having the attacking play stopped, and brought back for a free kick. The Referee can also consider cautioning the defending player (or sending him off, if the action denied the attacking player an obvious goal scoring opportunity). The Referee will have to consider very carefully, when awarding advantage inside the penalty area following an incident of this nature. If the Referee does award advantage and allows the attacker to shoot towards goal, and the attacker subsequently misses the goal, (or the shot is saved) then the Referee cannot award a penalty for the original foul. This would be tantamount to awarding the attacking team two advantages - and this is against 'the spirit of the game'.

In football, there are many collisions and touching of bodies during play. Some are accidental, are part of the game and are accepted, others are deliberate illegal moves 'committed' by players to unfairly gain an advantage over an opponent.  An accidental collision cannot be said to have been 'committed', and therefore, is no foul. The decision to award a foul or not, is up to the individual Referee. He needs to decide whether the contact was 'committed' or accidental.

In the case of two players running alongside each other where body-contact occurs, or if they accidentally collide - it cannot be said that a foul has been "committed". If this were the case, then it could be argued that a foul always occurs when two players use bodily contact when challenging for the ball. This is not so. Fair bodily contact is part of the game. Therefore, it makes no difference if one player falls down or not. It is still no foul either way.

I have seen some Referees wrongly award an indirect free kick for dangerous play during these accidental! tripping type of incidents. It is either an unintentional accident or a deliberate foul. Either allow play to continue, or award a penalty kick (or a direct free kick if occurring outside of the penalty area). It is certainly not a dangerous play indirect free kick.

Question 25: What is the difference between an Indirect Free Kick and a Direct Free Kick?

Answer 25: ............... It is not the direction of the kick that counts or which goal it is aimed at.

A goal cannot be scored direct into the opponents' goal from an 'indirect free kick'. A goal is allowed, if following an indirect free kick, the ball subsequently touches another player before it enters the goal.

If during an indirect free kick, the ball  is kicked directly into the opponents' goal - then a goal kick is awarded.

A goal can be scored direct into the opponents' goal from a 'direct free kick'. The ball does not have to touch another player for the goal to be allowed.

If a direct free kick or an indirect free kick (taken outside of a team's own penalty area) is kicked directly into that team's goal by one of its players, then a corner is awarded to the opposition.

If a direct free kick or an indirect free kick (taken inside of a team's penalty area) is kicked directly into that team's own goal by one of its players, then the kick must be retaken - because the ball must leave that team's penalty area before it comes into play. In this instance, the ball did not leave the penalty area, and the kick should therefore be retaken.

The Referee should indicate an indirect free kick by raising his arm straight upwards. The arm remains in this position until the kick has been taken AND the ball has touched another player, or goes out of play.

There is no official Referee signal for direct free kicks. The fact that the Referee does not raise his arm indicates that the kick is direct.

If the Referee forgets to raise his arm during an indirect free kick, the kick is still indirect - even though he has not indicated so with his upraised arm. The indirect free kick does not become a direct free kick just because the Referee forgets to raise his arm!

A direct free kick awarded to the attacking team inside the defending team's penalty area is a penalty kick to the attacking team. In other words, if a defending team player commits a direct free kick offence against an attacking player inside the defending team's penalty area, the result is a penalty to the attacking team.

An indirect free kick offence committed inside the penalty area is always an indirect free kick.

A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following six offences in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:

kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
trips or attempts to trip an opponent
jumps at an opponent
charges an opponent
strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
pushes an opponent

A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any of the following four offences:

tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball
holds an opponent
spits at an opponent
handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
A direct free kick is taken from where the offence occurred.

Penalty Kick

A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play.

Indirect Free Kick

An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own penalty area, commits any of the following five offences:

takes more than six seconds while controlling the ball with his hands before releasing it from his possession
touches the ball again with his hands after it has been released from his possession and has not touched any other player
touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate
touches the ball with his hands after he has received it directly from a throw-in taken by a team-mate

An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player, in the opinion of the Referee:

plays in a dangerous manner
impedes the progress of an opponent
prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands
commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or dismiss a player.

The indirect free kick is taken from where the offence occurred.

For further advice on the difference between an indirect free kick and a direct free kick see the Indirect Free Kick or the Direct Free Kick pages.

Go to top of this page

Question 26: During a Cup-Final game, a particular attacking player had missed a number of good goal scoring chances. The score is 0-0 with only one minute remaining. This attacker then scores a goal. Immediately after scoring the goal, this attacker runs over towards the opposing team's supporters, lowers his shorts and shows his backside to the crowd and then towards the opposition's technical area. What action should the Referee take, and should the goal be allowed?

Answer 26: As this disgraceful action took place after the goal had been scored - the goal must be allowed to count. The Referee should send-off the attacker for committing an offensive gesture. Law 12 states that a player is sent of if he uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures. An offence of this nature does not have to be committed towards an opponent. It can be committed against anyone - and in this instance, the offence was committed against the opposing team's supporters.

Question 27: During play - if a player hits or spits at one of his own team mates inside their own penalty area - is this a penalty to the opposition?

Answer 27. No. A penalty kick is only awarded when a team commits one of the 10 (Penal) direct free kick offences against an opponent inside its own penalty area - and whilst the ball is still in play. A penalty (or direct free kick) offence must be committed against an opponent on the field of play, and when the ball is still in play. A penalty kick cannot be awarded when an offence is committed between players of the same team - as depicted in this example. The perpetrator of this offence should be sent off the field of play. The Referee should restart the match with an indirect free kick awarded to the opposing team - to be taken at the place where the infringement occurred.

If the above incident occurred when the ball was NOT in play, then the restart would be appropriate for the stoppage - e.g. goal kick, throw-in, corner kick etc....

When the ball is still in play, any offences committed by players on the field of play against officials, coaches, spectators or team-mates, must be restarted with the award of an indirect free kick to the opposing team. If the misconduct occurred off the field of play whilst the ball was still in play, the restart should be a dropped ball at the place where the ball was when play was stopped by the Referee.

For spitting and striking offences and their restarts -  see here.

Question 28: Is a player allowed to play the ball whilst he is lying on the floor - should the Referee stop play immediately to prevent any dangerous play occurring?

Answer 28: There is nothing in the Laws to prevent a player attempting to kick the ball whilst he is lying on the ground. In instances of this nature, the Referee will need to stop play immediately if he thinks that any player lying on the ground endangers himself (or any other players) by being in that position. Opposing players will not stop trying to gain possession of the ball just because a player has 'gone to ground.

There are several following scenarios that can develop when a player falls to the ground on (or near) the ball:

So long as a player is not completely covering the ball or stopping other opponents making safe contact with the ball,  play should be allowed to continue. Referees must err on the side of caution when situations of this nature happen in matches involving young children. The safety aspect is far more important than worrying about whether to allow play to continue or not. Referees are advised to be particularly quick in stopping play when children are involved. Children do not have the same perspective as adults when gauging what is a dangerous attempt to kick the ball near a prostrate player - and what is not.

If the player purposefully lies on top of the ball to prevent it being released, the he should be cautioned and an indirect free kick awarded to the opposing team.

If the ball becomes inadvertently trapped beneath a player (or players) then play should be stopped immediately and restarted with a dropped ball. Stopping play in this instance will undoubtedly prevent unnecessary injury to players. The Referee should not expect players to stop of their own accord - when a ball becomes trapped beneath a player who has fallen to the ground - the Referee must make a quick decision to stop play. In such situations, it is not uncommon to see three or four players all attempting to kick the ball at the same time. In the 'heat' of a football match, players can lose all sense of decorum, and have even been known to kick violently at the ball when it is near the head of a prostrate player. This is not necessarily done on purpose to injure that player - the speed of the modern game is such that actions to gain possession of the ball can be done a split second and instinctively. Nevertheless, the Referee should send off any player who he believes has purposefully endangered (or injured) a player lying on the floor, by committing a violent act or serious foul play when attempting to gain the ball.

The Referee can consider awarding an indirect free kick if a player lying on the floor is challenged in such a way that the challenging play is deemed to be dangerous. For example, if the ball is positioned very near the head of the player lying on the floor, and an opponent makes a rash attempt to kick the ball, then this could certainly be deemed to be dangerous play. A player does not have to be standing up for dangerous play to be committed against him!

Question 29: Should the Referee always caution a player if he leaves the field of play without the Referee's permission while celebrating a goal?

Answer 29: The Referee should administer a caution if the player gives an overly excessive demonstration after scoring a goal, such as  jumping over the boundary fence and wasting time, gesticulating at his opponents or spectators, removing a jersey, or ridiculing them using any other similar provocative action. When time wasting occurs, the Referee should continue to take actions in accordance with the Laws of the Game by issuing a yellow card.

Players should be cautioned for unsporting behaviour if their celebrations are provocative and intended to incite or ridicule opponents or opposing spectators. Players guilty of excessive time-wasting while celebrating a goal should also be cautioned. In 2004/2005 season, the IFAB reintroduced the mandatory caution for players who remove their jersey after a goal has been scored. 

Question 30: Is the Referee allowed to stop play to have a strong word with a dissenting player - but not give him a yellow card?

Answer 30: Legally no (and certainly not in senior games). Nevertheless, I have seen this done to very good effect on many occasions (and have used it myself many times to curb growing dissent). Play should be restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team taken from the place where the offence (dissent) occurred).

By Law, if the Referee stops the game because of dissent, the dissenting player should be cautioned, and play restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team taken from the place where the offence (dissent) occurred.

Question 31: Where should the Referee restart play, after he stops play to issue a yellow card to a player entering the field of play without his permission?

Answer 31: Play should be restarted with an indirect free kick to the opposing team, to be taken from the place that the ball was, when play was stopped (Law 3)

Question 32: What is the difference between a foul, foul play, and misconduct?

Answer 32: A player may carry out a combination of "Misconduct" and "Foul" and the 
Referee may sanction either or both. For example, when a player strikes an opponent, the offence is a direct free kick foul, but the action is also a misconduct leading to a sending off. Foul tackles committed recklessly or using excessive force, are also fouls and misconduct (caution and sending of offences respectively). A foul that is careless, is a foul, but not necessarily a misconduct!

A foul can only be committed against an opponent (except for deliberately handling the ball, which is a foul committed by the perpetrator against the opposing team as a whole).

Prior to season 1873-74, although foul play existed, it was assumed that no player would ever think of doing these unsporting things deliberately; but in 1873-74 it was found necessary to introduce a punishment in the form of a free kick 'forfeited to the opposite side from the spot where the infringe took place'. In those early days of football, there were very few offences punishable by a free kick, and this led to some players believing that anything, which was not specifically forbidden, was permitted. Players therefore, started to introduce other malpractices, which in turn, had to be legislated for.

The word 'foul' stems from the phrase 'foul play', and has been in the Laws from the very beginning. For example, the Sheffield FA Rule 12 of 1870, concerning the umpires, stated: 'They shall be sole judges of fair and unfair play and have power to give a PENALTY FOR FOUL PLAY OF ANY KIND' [Note - a penalty refers to a punishment in this case, i.e. a free kick.]

A foul is the generic group name (noun) given to a number of Law/Rule breach offences committed against an opponent. A foul can take place only on the field of play, within the area enclosed by the touchline and the goal lines, since this is the only place where play can take place. If the unfair action takes place off the field, then it can be misconduct, but not a foul. The place where a foul occurs is the place where the unfair action occurs.
A foul is generally an illegal action that occurs whilst contesting for the ball during play, and is committed by a player on an opponent. It can also refer to a throw taken incorrectly (i.e. a foul throw). It also refers to when a player commits a foul by deliberately handling the ball (in this case, the foul is not committed on an opponent, but is the result of an illegal action committed by the player on himself!) If the ball is accidentally touched by the hand or arm, this is sometimes stated as "ball-to-hand", and is no foul; "Hand-to-ball" is a foul.

Foul play (noun) - is an unfair act committed by a player during the game that breaches the Laws. For example: the following verbs:- pushes; kicks; jumps; charges; strikes; holds can be 'foul play' actions if committed illegally. In most cases, this involves physical movement or contact. But it is possible to commit foul play when no contact is made. For example, dangerous play, impeding a player, and making a reckless challenge, which is evaded by a dexterous opponent. All of these can involve no physical contact - yet all are 'foul play'.

A foul is therefore a 'foul play'; it is when one team gains an unfair advantage by "breaking the rules." The ball must be in play for a foul to occur. If the ball is out of play then there can be no "foul play" because there is no play.

In football, only players can be involved in the play. Therefore, only a player can commit a foul. Even if a substitute ran onto the field and tripped an opponent who was about to score, the substitute committed a misconduct rather than a foul, because he was a substitute, and not a player. In this circumstance the substitute is treated like an outside agent, such as a bystander or spectator, instead of a team-mate.

Another aspect of what constitutes a foul, is how severe does an action have to be, to be deemed a foul. The Laws of the Game are intended to provide that football should be played with as little interference as possible, and in this view, it is the duty of Referees to penalise only when the Law is breached. Constant whistling for trifling and doubtful breaches produces bad feeling and loss of temper on the part of the players and spoils the pleasure of spectators. Referees (as much as they can) need to let the players play.

Misconduct: Misconduct is any action, which brings the game into disrepute. Essentially misconduct very often accompanies a foul, which through the violent or unsporting nature of the action, the free kick is not a sufficient enough punishment. The most common form of misconduct is for unsporting actions, which do not fit the criteria of being a foul. A misconduct may be committed by players, substitutes, team officials, or others. Misconduct can be committed on or off the field of play. It can be committed before, during, or after the match, when the ball is in or out of play. It can be committed against opponents, team-mates, officials, or spectators.

If a team does something unsporting or gains an unfair advantage by an action, which occurred while the ball is out of play, or away from the play action, it is not normally a foul, but it more likely to be a misconduct. Time wasting whilst the ball is out of play, is a common misconduct offence (since this is done while the ball is out of play, waiting for a restart, it is a misconduct and not a foul). Leaving the filed of play is another misconduct offence, as is showing dissent towards the Referee. Misconduct can also be committed by player attempting to flaunt the law, by circumventing the spirit of the law.
Misconduct is therefore improper behaviour that generally occurs outside of the immediate playing action. Such as a player swearing at the Referee; a manager running onto the field of play in anger; a player misbehaving towards a team-mate; trouble at half-time or after the game has finished; or when a player commits violent conduct etc. It is also possible for misconduct to occur in a playing situation. For example, when a player uses abusive language against an opponent; or when he refuses to leave the field of play when asked to do so by the Referee; or if he shouts "Boo!" to distract an opponent; or when a goalkeeper holds the ball for more than 6 seconds. These are not necessarily fouls in the physical sense, but rather incidents of misconduct that breach the Laws.
In short, a foul usually involves some physical movement by opposing players against each other in a playing situation on the filed of play - whereas misconduct generally refers to action outside of the immediate play action, or non-physical misbehaviour in a playing situation. 
The International Football Association Board and FIFA have made it clear that infractions off the field of play are not fouls. Here are two situations specifically addressed in answers from the Board. An attacking player dribbling the ball along the touchline, kicks the ball ahead, and then goes off the field of play to go around a defender, and chase the ball. The defender goes off the field with the attacker. An infraction by either player could be a misconduct but cannot be a foul. A goalkeeper and an attacker are beyond the goal line, in the goal and underneath the goal net. An infraction by either player could be a misconduct but cannot be a foul.
It is more important to allocate the correct punishment and restarts when dealing with breaches of the Laws, rather than worrying too much about whether they are 'Fouls' or 'Misconduct'. 
A free kick is the correct restart when play is stopped to deal with a player's misconduct, which occurred on the field of play. If the misconduct was off the field, then the restart is a dropped ball, because there cannot be an indirect kick at the spot of the infraction since it was off the field.

Many thanks go to http://www.bmysa.org/Law12Explained.pdf for some of the detail in the above answer. 

Question 33: Why is it that some Referees have great difficulty in differentiating between an accidental collision and a careless foul?

Answer 33. Indeed, it is very strange, why some Referees are unable to accept that "an accident is an accident", instead, they attempt to transfigure the incidents into some justifiable non-existent Law offence.

To use the word 'careless', in describing any situation, insinuates that the perpetrator had knowingly made a premeditative manoeuvre outside of the Laws. In reality, most accidents are just plain accidental, and are not governed in any way by wrongful commitment as far as the player is concerned. The game of football is such a physical rough-and-tumble sport, that it is inevitable that many natural accidents will occur. These accidental situations normally occur NOT when players are intentionally challenging for the ball, but when they are in close contention. The word 'intent' refers to these challenging-for-the-ball situations; it has nothing to do with accidents.

The result of an accident can only ever be termed 'careless' if the perpetrator knowingly does something stupid such as running with his arms out like an aeroplane and then stumbling into an opponent. In this way, he has been intentionally 'careless' in the way he was running unnaturally. It is therefore very rare that an accident could be termed 'careless'. Thankfully, Referees are allowed to distinguish between an act that is accidental and one that is 'carelessly' deliberate.

Question 34: An attacking player’s momentum takes him off the field of play where he distracts the opposing goalkeeper, by shouting to him that the ball is going out of play. A goal is scored. What should the Referee do?

Answer 34: Because the unsporting conduct committed by the attacking player distracted the goalkeeper, the Referee should disallow the goal, and administer a caution to the attacking player. The offending player was still an authorised member of his team and though his absence from the field had been inadvertent, the transmission of unsporting behaviour was projected through his voice causing a direct consequence upon the opposing goalkeeper. The attacking player is still active player who had temporarily left the field of play but resorted to using an extension of his person to effect the infringement from distance i.e. his design was to either sabotage play or foul an opponent where the offence actually occurred.

RESTART?

(There are only 10 Direct Free Kick Offences and distracting an opponent is not one of them).

Answer (a) = No.

(For example, was the act committed by outside interference, or is it a serious injury occurrence etc.) It is not illegal if a player's momentum takes him over the goal line. The attacking player in this question is therefore still deemed to be one of the legal eleven team players (and not an outside interference). Considering the nature of this incident, it would be grossly unfair to award a 'dropped ball', where both teams would be given equal rights in challenging for the ball. This is clearly an offence committed by the attacking player, and as such, the attacking team alone should be penalised.

Answer (b) = No.

Answer (c) = No.

Therefore, the restart is not a goal kick, corner kick or a free kick.

If the goalkeeper was inside his goal area when the distracting incident occurred, an indirect free kick awarded to a defending team can be taken from anywhere within the goal area in accordance with Law 13:

If the goalkeeper was outside of his goal area, when the distracting incident occurred, then the free kick should be taken from the place outside of the goal area where the goalkeeper was distracted (Law 12 - from where the offence occurred).

 Note 1: Normally, the restart for offences committed outside of the field of play (when the ball is still in play) is a 'dropped ball' to be taken at the place where the ball was located when the Referee stopped play.

Although the verbal distraction was projected from outside of the field of play, the effects were felt by the goalkeeper who was on the field. This is similar to when a player who is outside of the field of play, extends his leg inside the field and feints to trip the goalkeeper, but pulls his leg away at the last moment. Even though the feint to trip is a physical action, and the verbal distraction is non-physical action, they both result in distracting the goalkeeper. Therefore, the effect of both actions (the verbal distraction and the feint to trip) actually occurs on the field of play (hence the indirect free kick restart). 

Note 2: The offending player's voice from behind the boundary lines was a direct extension of him, and was designed to affect direct play on the field. It would have achieved the same effect had the perpetrator been within the field of play.  The player’s actions were simply a vehicle to convey his unsporting intentions and if it had been possible for him to have done so on the field of play, the outcome would have been penalised as an infringement of the Laws. Essentially, the natural consequence of this misconduct, forced an illegal, foreseeable, and obvious direct effect on the goalkeeper. Had the attacking player been on the field of play when he distracted the goalkeeper, the restart would also have been an indirect free kick to the goalkeeper's team.  

Variation 1: A player who has been substituted, stands on the touchline and commits the identical distracting offence discussed in the above scenario.

Answer: Law 5 (The Referee) states:

The Referee has a duty in accordance with Law 5 to:

The substituted player no longer holds a playing status and he is therefore not entitled to enter the field of play. As his part in the game was terminated when he was substituted, his intrusion is akin to the ‘outside interference.’

As soon as the substituted player stands on the touchline, he has entered the field of play as an 'unauthorised person'. By distracting the goalkeeper, the substituted player has also committed 'outside interference'. Because substituted players remain under the jurisdiction of the Referee, and should continue to behave properly during the rest of the game, the perpetrator should be cautioned for unsporting conduct. Play should be restarted with a dropped ball at the place where it was located when play was stopped (i.e. the moment when the distracting incident occurred).

A dropped ball (see Law 8) is always the restart whenever the Referee has stopped play due to 'outside interference', or for any other offence not specifically mentioned in the Laws. A substitute, a substituted player (or anybody else) who enters the field of play without the Referee’s permission – is an "outside interference". I.e., they have not received the Referee's permission to enter – hence the dropped ball restart. Had the substituted player remained behind the touchline, the restart is the same, because he was the originator of the 'outside interference'.

Variation 2: An unused named substitute does likewise, again, what is the correct restart?

Answer: Exactly the same as the Variation 1 answer above. He neither has the referee’s permission to enter, nor is yet entitled to assume player status.

Question No. 35: A defending player's momentum takes him over the goal line. The defending player throws his dislodged boot at an opponent in the penalty area, who is just about to shoot for goal. The boot strikes the attacking player, and causes the shot to be miscued and a goal is not scored.

Answer No. 35: Following clarification for the Laws of the Game from FIFA 11 March 2002, the IFAB now instructs that such infringements are to be punished where the contact occurs or would have occurred if the action had been successful, provided this location is on the field of play. The Referee should therefore, stop play, award a penalty kick to the attacking team, and send off the perpetrator for either:

(a) Violent Conduct - if the boot was thrown in a violent way, or

(b) denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player's goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick. 

Variation 1: As above, but an unused (but named substitute), hurls a spare ball at the attacker with the same outcome. What is the correct restart?

Following clarification for the Laws of the Game from FIFA 11 March 2002, the following advice was received:

Question 36: What constitutes a foul in Law?

Answer 36 by - Daniel Munteanu (ex-FIFA Assistant Referee Romania)

A foul in Law is any of the following: If a player………….

• Kicks an opponent (in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force);
• Attempts to kick an opponent;
• Trips an opponent;
• Attempts to trip an opponent;
• Jumps at an opponent;
• Charges an opponent;
• Strikes an opponent;
• Attempts to strike an opponent;
• Pushes an opponent;
• Tackles an opponent to gain possession of the ball, making contact with the opponent before touching the ball;
• Holds an opponent;
• Plays in a dangerous manner;
• Impedes the progress of an opponent;
• Prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands.
• A Tackle from behind which endangers the safety of an opponent.

To be considered a foul one of the above offences must be committed during play, and on the field of play.

All other offences in Law 12 are misconducts.

• A player who takes a plenty kick is allowed to deceive the goalkeeper as to his intentions. But he is not allowed to stall his run-up and his kicking action in order to make the goalkeeper move in one direction and then kicks it to the other. The taking of a penalty kick should be completed in one continuous movement.
• Placing your body so as to impede an opponent whilst making no attempt to play a ball which is not within playing distance is not permitted, and should be punished with an indirect free kick.
• Giving a deceptive instruction to an opponent (in the guise of a colleague) in an unfair attempt to gain possession of the ball.
• A second last defending player purposefully steps off the field of play in an attempt to deceive the Referee into penalising an opponent for being in an offside position.
• A player goes to throw punch at an opponent but pulls his arm back at the last moment.

Question 38a: Is a fair shoulder charge, i.e. a shoulder-to-shoulder challenge still allowed?

Answer 38a: There is no such thing anymore as penalising by awarding an indirect free kick for a FAIR CHARGE. It is either a foul or it is not a foul.

The award of an Indirect Free Kick for a 'Fair Charge' challenge was taken out of the Laws of Associated Football during the 1997/98 season. Prior to this, the Referee could award an indirect free kick and the wording in Law 12 was as follows;

Football is a contact sport, and there will be many instances where players make contact with their shoulders. The Referee must allow a degree of shoulder use between players who are contesting for the ball. Such minor contacts are part of the game and should not be penalised. But if a player uses his shoulder to push, charge, or hold back an opponent, then this is deemed to be penal (direct free kick offence) and should be punished accordingly.

" Just shout '50/50' get on with it !! "

A large heavy player charging a very small player may look to be an obvious foul when compared to a small player blatantly charging a large heavy player.

Question 38b: Can a player charge the goalkeeper (not excessively), when he's not holding the ball inside the goal area?

Question 39: If a defending player taking a free kick just outside of his own penalty area, kicks the ball back towards his goalkeeper, but his goalkeeper misses the ball with his foot, but makes contact on the ball with his hands before it crosses his own goal line between the goal posts and into the goal net - what should the Referee do? Is it an indirect free kick for touching the ball after receiving it directly from a kick from his team mate (i.e. a back pass) or should the goal be awarded?

Answer 39: Law 5 allows the Referee to apply advantage and allow play to continue after an offence has been committed - thus in this incident (handling of the ball by the goalkeeper after receiving it from a team mate) -  play should be allowed to continue to the advantage of the attacking team. The goal should therefore be allowed to count.

Question 40: A defender takes a free kick just outside of his penalty area. He plays the ball back to his goalkeeper who unbeknown to the defender is lying injured on the ground. The ball is making its way towards goal, when the same defender manages to intercept it, but in doing so, the defender slices at the ball that then crosses the goal line between the goal posts, and into the goal. Does the goal count?

Answer 40: No, the award of a goal cannot be allowed in this instance. A goal has not been legally scored, as a player cannot play the ball a second time at such a restart, and an indirect free kick must be awarded. The normal restart by Law 13 for touching the ball a second time after taking a free kick is for the opposing team to be awarded an indirect free kick to be taken at the place where the defender touched the ball for a second time. If the defender touched the ball a second time inside the goal area, then the indirect free kick should be taken from that part of the goal area line which runs parallel to the goal line, at the point nearest to where the defender touched the ball a second time.

Notwithstanding the above, an astute Referee will have noticed that the goalkeeper is injured, and blow his whistle to stop play straight away before any of the above action ensues!

The answer to this question appeared on page 7 of the October 2001 issue of the (England) Referees' Association magazine 'The Football Referee'.

Because of the injured goalkeeper, it would not be a good idea to apply advantage (and allow the goal to count) in this situation.

Taking this a step further, if the player handles the ball, it could also be argued that there is no difference between:

(a) A player touching the ball a second time from a free kick with his hand
and it goes into the goal.
The Referee does not allow advantage and awards a penalty kick.

and

(b) A defender during normal play, touches the ball with his hand as it is
shot towards goal by an attacking player, and the ball deflects into the
goal. The Referee applies advantage and allows the goal to count.

The only reason why the answer to the original question seems correct, is that it involves an injured goalkeeper.

Question 41: If an attacking player shoots towards goal, but the ball skews off his boot and travels outside the defending team's penalty area - is the defending goalkeeper allowed to come outside of his penalty area, dribble the ball back inside his penalty area, and then pick it up?

Answer 41: Yes. In this instance, it was an opponent who last played the ball towards the goalkeeper. It does not matter that the ball was originally outside of the penalty area before the goalkeeper picked it up inside his penalty area. The goalkeeper has not committed any infringements and should be allowed to continue with play. The goalkeeper is entitled to pick up any ball within his own penalty area, so long as it was not kicked or thrown directly to him by a colleague.

Question 42: Why is there so much inconsistency between Referees when judging when to penalise a player for a pushing offence?

Answer 42: Let us not forget, that football is a physical contact sport where pushing of one type or another (with the hand or the body or shoulder etc.) is an integral part of the play. There have been many Law changes over the years which have endeavoured to protect the players and enhance the play action - if pushing is totally removed from the game, then it will never be the same. Pushing is not normally seen as a danger to players (unless it is done violently, or in a dangerous situation). If the Referee believes that a push has been done "carelessly, recklessly or done with excessive force" or done to unbalance a player or to prevent him from fairly challenging for the ball, then it is a foul in accordance with Law 12. (For example - when a player pushes an opponent to the ground, or whilst they are both jumping or challenging for the ball).

Players very often push by using a bit of their arm, shoulder or their elbow when they are fending each another off, or when they are trying to maintain balance or contesting side-to-side for possession of the ball. Referees will rightly ignore this accepted 'part and parcel' aspect of the game. As long as the two players involved are both 'sportingly'  having a go! at one another, Referees will usually ignore it, unless the action is done to such a degree, that a foul is eventually committed by one of the players.

The strength of pushing can range from barely making an indent on an opponent's shirt, to shoving someone 10 yards into the 'cheap seats'. The degrees of pushing allowed also varies immensely from match to match, and can depend on the age of the players, the standard of football, the nationality of the teams involved, the experience of players, the players' perception of what should and should not be allowed, the tolerance of the Referee, whether there is a full moon etc............................

It is therefore no wonder that each Referee measures pushing in a different way - after all, Referees' are not robots!. The best advice to Referees, is to learn by experience and by watching football matches - and to develop a consistent standard yourself based on the knowledge gleaned. But remember - pushing done "carelessly, recklessly or with excessive force" or done to unbalance a player or prevent him from fairly challenging for the ball - must be penalised as a foul.

Question 43: 'Studs up' - what does this phrase actually mean, and when should it be penalised?

Answer 43: It's not difficult to identify a 'studs-up' tackle. They are the type of tackles that make a Referee 'wince'. Players' intentionally raising their feet above the level of the ball when tackling, can cause untold (career ending) damage to an opponent's lower leg.

One type of tackle that we are describing here is the well known "over the top" tackle. This is where the perpetrator has little or no intention of playing the ball, and stamps down over the top of the ball without  making contact with the ball. This sort of tackle is the most hated by players - as it can do untold injury if the studs connect with a player's leg or ankle. Players will get very irate when a tackle of this nature is committed against them, or one of their team mates. The Referee must act very quickly to diffuse any further trouble following "over the top" tackles. The punishment for such a tackle is at the very minimum a yellow card - and more that often a red card. The restart is a direct free kick (or penalty kick) to the opposing team.

An 'over the top' tackle is a Law 12 Direct Free Kick offence (kicks or attempts to kick an opponent) - it does not matter whether the studs catch the opponent or not - the attempt is enough to warrant a direct free kick (or a penalty). "Over the top" tackles are not 'dangerous play' (indirect free kick restarts).

Tackles of this nature have no regard for the 'spirit of the game', and are usually committed in a pique of temper without any regard for the damage it may cause to an opponent. The Referee who does not penalise the perpetrator with at least a yellow card - will certainly regret not doing so, because players who feel that they have not been protected by the Referee against such spiteful tackles, will no doubt, take the Law into their own hands and seek retribution against the perpetrator and his team at the very next available instance.

Go to top of this page

Question 44: Should compassion be used by Referees in a youth contest when a young goalkeeper illegally handles the ball thus denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity,  -  i.e. can the Referee ignore the first occurrence of this offence and just teach the young keeper about the Law?

Answer 44: Although the sentiments above are understandable, there are many factors that make the statement very complex to apply fairly.

For example, at what age would you start applying the Law correctly?
What action would you take in a mixed-age team - and how would you know the ages of each player?
What would you do as a Referee say, if you failed to apply the Law to a 16 year old goalkeeper playing in a youth team on a Saturday - and the same player repeated a similar offence whilst he was playing for an adult Sunday team the next day.

By not applying the Law correctly, young players will expect to be treated the same when they get older - and if they are not, will undoubtedly protest to the Referee. Albeit that some leniency and understanding must be show during throw-ins and kick-offs when very young players are concerned - the goal scoring opportunity is a serious offence that can immediately effect the result of a game - and should therefore always be penalised properly.

Ignoring such incidents will inevitably lead to serious problems with astute parents and coaches.

Compassion in Youth games is a two edged sword that the Referee needs to use very very carefully - it relies on the goodwill of the coaches, managers, players, parents and spectators.
And goodwill can turn nasty in an instance.

As a general rule, goal scoring opportunities should be penalised properly at all ages - or else trouble is surely waiting around the next corner.

Many thanks to Karl Arps - a licensed referee in the U.S. for this interesting question.

Question 45: Is the goalkeeper allowed to bounce the ball once he has gained possession of it in his hands?

Answer 45: Yes, this is acceptable within the 'spirit of the game'. A goalkeeper has always historically been deemed to be in possession of the ball when he bounces it on the ground.

Question 46: What action should the Referee take if whilst the ball is still in play at the other end of the field of play, a player in his own penalty area deliberately kicks an opponent?

Answer 46: The Referee should stop play, send off the perpetrator and award a penalty to the team of the player who had been kicked.

Note - the ball does not necessarily have to be in the penalty area for a penalty kick to be awarded - it just needs to be still in play on ANY part of the field of play. It is the position of the offence and not the ball that dictates where the restart will take place.

Question 47: If a goalkeeper lying on the ground outside of his penalty area, stretches his arm inside the penalty area and handles the ball - what action should the Referee take?

Answer 47: None - play should be allowed to continue because the goalkeeper had not infringed any of the Laws. The goalkeeper can only be penalised for handling the ball if it is outside of his own penalty area - and in this instance the ball was inside the penalty area. It does not matter whether the goalkeeper is inside or outside of his penalty area - so long as the ball is inside the penalty area.

Of course - the answer to this question assumes that the ball was not kicked back deliberately by a team mate or received directly from a throw-in taken by a team mate. If this was the case, then an indirect free kick should be awarded to the opposition, to be taken from the place where the goalkeeper handled the ball inside his penalty area.

Question 50: If a defending player taking an indirect free kick just