[ayso45-refs] U-11 goal kick and substitution situation

[Randy Harr]

Brian,

A situation like you described sounds very odd for sure.  It appears 
like there may have been a sequence of errors.  If you have the game 
info, I can talk to the referee to better understand what he thought 
happened.  (Even let me know if it was a CY game as I work with and know 
most of the local staff there as well.)

There is no situation that I can come up with which would award an IFK 
the way you described.  Let me take you through the logic.

a) Lets assume the referee was not aware the substitution procedure had 
not completed (otherwise, he would have whistled telling them it was not 
a proper restart because the substitution had not finished.  The restart 
is the original restart -- the goal kick.)

b) Lets assume that no misconduct happened (otherwise, the referee would 
have visibly shown a card).  But even if misconduct did happen and that 
is why he stopped play, there is likely no way an IFK restart in the 
penalty area could have been the result unless the ball had already come 
into play by leaving the penalty area.

The only possible scenario for an IFK near the goal area as described is if:
a) the referee thought the substitution procedure had completed,
b) the referee stopped play for misconduct after the ball came into play 
(left the penalty area),
c) the misconduct was VC between two defenders where he awarded the IFK

But no cards were shown and no players sent off.  So given the 
information provided, one has to conclude there was a misapplication of 
the laws.  The only way to clarify this is to talk to the referee.

Randy Harr
Director of Referee Instruction
Area 2A Silicon Valley

Detailed Logic:
============
If the referee blew the whistle because the substitution was not 
complete, then he was simply continuing to delay the restart and not 
stopping play that officially did not start.  An incomplete substitution 
is 100% the referee's issue; no one else's fault.  He must call the 
substitutes onto the field and is instructed to do so only after the 
players being substituted have left the field.  If the referee waives 
the subs on before the other players have left the field, then the coach 
must listen to the referee on this.  It cannot be the coaches fault with 
that.  And the referee has to deal with consequences he creates by not 
following procedure.

If the referee told the defenders to wait for the substitution, and the 
defenders defied his order, then the referee could potentially give a 
misconduct to the defenders for openly defying his order and trying to 
restart.  But I would be hard pressed to do this unless I had my hand in 
the air indicating a held restart, I was watching and communicating to 
them and knew they heard and understood me, and then they were openly 
defying the order anyway.  Even if misconduct was given to the defense 
for this situation, the restart is still the goal kick because the ball 
was not ever in play by definition.  In fact, if misconduct is given for 
the improper restart against his order, the referee must be accepting 
the ball was never in play and thus restart with the goal kick.

So lets assume the referee thought the substitution had completed and 
that he was not holding up the restart.

The ball is not in play until it leaves the Penalty Area and only then 
is it a proper and completed restart.  Anything that happens before this 
and the original restart must simply be taken.  Including misconduct (or 
what would otherwise be a foul if the ball was in play).  Misconduct 
while the ball is out of play simply results with the originally planned 
restart after dealing with the misconduct.

If something happened after the ball left the Penalty Area (proper 
restart), then it must have been misconduct in the Penalty Area to pull 
the ball back there.  It could not have been a DFK foul (even though 
off-the-ball) because that would not be an IFK restart for the attacking 
team.  And there is no other off-the-ball IFK foul that could pull the 
ball back there either.  So it would have to be misconduct (unless the 
referee is compounding errors he made earlier).

The only scenario that I can think of is VC between two defenders in the 
goal area.  Then this could stop the game and result in an IFK awarded 
at the site of the misconduct to the attacking team.  (see table 12.35 
in the USSF Advice to Referees on VC and restarts.)  But you did not 
mention any cards, especially not any send-offs, so this does not seem 
plausible.  Hence I can only conclude with the information available 
that the referee was confused and did not apply the laws correctly.

Special circumstances would always move the restart by the attacking 
team out to the edge of the goal area.

So you can see how the logic goes (hopefully).  It sounds like the 
referee let things get out of control and made several mistakes that 
compounded.  (In fact, you never mentioned if the restart IFK went 
directly into goal or was a proper goal by touching another player 
before entering the goal.)  You are welcome to email me privately of the 
details (game time, field, teams if known) and I will try to follow-up.

But I think someone needs to ask the referee what they thought happened 
and what they applied.  The apparent and likely answer is they 
misapplied the laws and made a mistake.

Did I miss something in the laws or the description as given?