Question Number: 25046

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 6/1/2011

RE: Intermediate Under 12

Phil of Tarzana, CA United States asks...

This question is a follow up to question 25024

I am still at little confused on this & want to change the facts slightly.

At a DFK by attackers, the wall infringes, but no attacker is put offside. The kick goes past the wall, so the referee doesn't call the infringement.

1) Would this be because the referee considered the encroachment trivial or because he applied advantage? If trivial, I assume play would continue as if there was no encroachment. If he applied advantage, then he could stop for the encroachment within a couple of seconds of the advantage not accruing, right?

2) Assume that the ball goes to an onside attacker on the DFK & is immediately passed to an offside attacker (while advantage is still being applied). Would the referee now restart with the DFK by the attackers for the original encroachment...or would it be an IDFK for the defenders because of the offside infringement?

I guess what I'm asking in the 2nd question is what should be the action by the referee if advantage doesn't materialize because of some violation by the attacking team?

Thanks for all the wonderful advice & all your time.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

1. Trifling and advantage are two different things. As you say, if trifling, just continue play. What advantage are you referring to as you say no one was put offside?

2. DFK goes to onside attacker. There is no advantage here, the attacker was onside. Regardless, that part of play is over and once this attacker touches the ball, everything has to be re-evaluated. This attacker now passes to offside teammate. Even if advantage was applied, it's over with. The next phase of play begins and now we have an offside situation,

You ask if advantage doesn't materialize due to a violation by the attacking team. If the violation negates the advantage, you come back to the original foul. But the point is, it has to negate the immediate advantage. Say the wall infringed and put an attacker in an offside position. The advantage would be the ball going to the offside positioned player legally. He now has the ball. Advantage realized. Suppose he has a shot on goal and shanks it? Are you going to now go back to the original free kick?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Phil
If the defending team encroach at a free kick and it is to the attacking team's benefit that play should be allowed to continue then that is what should happen. If it is not to its benefit then the free kick should be retaken.
A trifling infraction is one which, though still an offense, has no significant impact upon play. In these free kick situations once the ball gets past the encroaching player then the encroachment has had little if any effect on play and play should continue with the outcome accepted provided there is no other offence to be considered.
As regards the next phase of play the referee has to consider the free kick as completed and then evaluate what happens after that. Clearly again if the encroachment has had an effect on play such as placing opponents in an offside position then that infraction has to be called after the pass by the onside player to his team mate in an offside position and the free kick retaken.
If you look closely at players' reactions at free kicks they will never look for a retake on a shot that makes it to the goal or to the intended team mate or attacking area. It is only in the case of where the ball is stopped or deflected away from the intended target or blatant encroachment that they look for a retake.