Question Number: 27264

Law 13 - Free Kicks 3/21/2013

RE: Adult

Chris of Leesburg, VA USA asks...

I was center on a U15B competitive travel game and had awarded an IDFK to the attacking team. Prior to the restart, all defenders were properly 10 yards back from the ball.

The attacking team then had a player tap the ball (it did not move) followed by a teammate taking the shot. I recognized that the ball was not in play until the second player kicked it and, thus, would not have awarded a goal had it gone directly in the net. What threw me off, though, was that the defenders charged out from the wall at the moment of the first touch so, at the time the ball was struck, they had narrowed the distance from 10 yards down to just 5 or 6 yards.

The shot missed, which made my job seemingly easy. I signaled goal kick and we all went on. I did not consider cautioning the defenders for failure to respect the distance because the attacking team's touch on the ball (even though it did not move) was clearly what drew them off their position.

In your opionion, was I correct to let this go and not order a retake of the kick (with possible cautions to the defenders) or should I expect the defenders to recognize that the ball did not move and was therefore not in play? My thought process was that the attacking team was either ignorant of the Law or atttempting to deceive me or the defenders and, therfore, their missed shot was their loss. But I could see the alternative viewpoint that they have a right to 10 yards until the ball is in play no matter what.

Had I been quicker, I suppose I could have blown my whistle to stop the kick, re-set the wall and remind all concerned that the ball has to move but this was a very fast sequence of play so that really wasn't an option.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Chris
Sometimes there is a difference between the correct technical decision and the 'best' onfield decision. If you were of the opinion that the encroachment did not effect the play then you made the 'best' decision in the circumstances. The greater difficulty might have occured had the goal been scored.
Sometimes the referee has to respond to situations such as this by making the decision that is expected by the players. The defending team would feel that the ball was put into play with the touch on the ball with some movement and that the attacking team gets a 'second chance' when a retake has been ordered. They believe that they waited for the ball to be put into play so they would feel hard done by if a defender is cautioned and the opponents get another go.
If a goal was scored and there was 'kicked and moved' with no complaint by the opponents then perhaps the 'best' decision would be to award the goal.
The correct technical answer is to stop play in all circumstances and to order a retake. No caution is required as the ball is not in play correctly. There is a huge difference between 'feinting' with no touch of the ball and the player actually touching the ball with his foot.
At one time the ball had to roll its circumference to be in play and the issue there was how far did it have to move to be in play. Now kick and moves means that the distance to be moved is minimal and the "kick" need only be a touch of the ball with the foot in a kicking motion. There is much discretion in what is meant by 'minimal'.

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Chris,

It's a difficult situation to be in, and the fact that the shot wasn't clearly affected (say, by striking one of the encroaching players) does leave you in a position to exercise a bit of discretion.

The textbook answer would be that whether deception or something else had occurred, it's the responsibility of the defenders to ensure they do not encroach - it also means ignorance of the law is no excuse.

The encroached (and it's hard to claim that an encroachment of 4-5 yards is trifling, even if they didn't touch the ball), so the caution is definitely there.

But, I also agree with Ref McHugh. The initial touch not actually putting the ball into play is an unusual situation and a confusing one for all concerned. As such, I think you did have a bit of leeway for discretion - particularly given the young age of the players.

Not saying this is always what should happen in this situation, but from your description it sounds like you managed the situation.

Perhaps at the next such free kick you may want to clearly state to the players, as an implied warning to 'wait until it's kicked and moves'.

However, had the ball been kicked straight into the net then you must award a goal kick (Assuming you don't want to go down the retake/caution path) - if the ball didn't move from the first touch then a goal cannot be scored.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

It's up to the defenders to wait until the ball is in play before they charge the ball. They saw the attacking team put foot to ball. Doubtful they could tell if the ball had been kicked and moved so I would not punish them.

Had the ball scored, it must be taken out of the net and no goal allowed.

Unfortunately, even now in 2013, MANY coaches think tapping the top of the ball puts the ball into play and teach their players to do this and then blast the ball to the goal believing if the ball goes in it's a goal. With that in mind, I would talk to BOTH coaches at the half or after the game had this occurred during the second half and explain what 'kicked and moved' means