Question Number: 31705

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 8/14/2017

RE: Select Under 16

Leon Jarvis of Canton, GA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 30789

Let's say the interpretation is that the ball tap is not considered a clear movement of the ball, no-one moves forward to infringe the kick (no other pre-kick offence) and the second attacker kicks the ball directly into the goal. This would be a goal kick and possibly a caution to the first kicker who delayed the restart of play?

Second scenario...same as above except the defense charges the ball after the tap. Blow the whistle to keep the ball from being in play and request 10 yards again? Caution to player who tapped for delayed restart?

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Leon,
I read some of the back chatter of preceding comments to understand where you are coming from.

The ball can be kicked and moved with any part of the foot as a kicking motion including the sole of the foot. Still given the recent directions from FIFA the wording of' clearly moves' it is incumbent for the referee to be aware if the players see such a movement as a stomp as sufficient and if so does he see it as such.

We are not looking to gotcha defender for breaking early or punish attacker for not kicking and rolling it a given distance to make us happy. We are simply interested in restarting play fairly.

In such a case as you described I see no need to caution anyone if you are giving the ball away to the opposition after taking back a goal if you are truly unsatisfied there was not 2 separate touches off an indfk putting the ball in play first then scoring the goal on the 2nd.

In the 2nd scenario I do not stop play I allow it to proceed. If the attacker were stepping on top and the defenders were in agreement why interfere? Again caution for what? Two cautions and the player is tossed be sure it means something important.

If the restart is creating issues just tell them what you need to be assured the ball is in play!

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Leon,
In your first scenario it would indeed be a goal kick but I agree with ref Dawson that there is no reason for a caution. In the second scenario you could stop play and have the kick retaken if you so desire. Again, no reason for a caution as far as I am concerned.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

I agree that no one has done anything worthy of a caution. They goofed up and didn't put the ball in play properly. We don't caution improper throw-ins, right?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Leon
My take on this is that as the ball was not put into play then the restart is a goal kick. As the player did not delay the restart nor committed any unsporting behaviour there is no need for any disciplinary sanction. The disallowing of the goal is sufficient.
Now on the second scenario I would be tempted to determine that the *kick* actually did put the ball in play and that the both teams accepted the *kick* as doing so with the defending team waiting to move forward until after the ball was *played*. Sometimes we can over assess the situation by making a determination that the kick was not sufficient yet if both teams accept that it was put into play then the *best* decision can be to go with that. Maybe put it another way. Is the defending team going to complain that the *kick* which its players accepted as putting the ball in play did in fact not do so? Highly unlikely.