Showing dissent by word or action (beware: Here there be football, and FIFA's Q&A)

http://www.ndr.de/wm2002/wmgeschichte/images/fussball_wm90_history_rijkaard_voeller.jpg

You have some of this right, but not all. Anyone else?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/euro_2004/italy/3818559.stm
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/21/spit_with_totti/

The answer then is:

Stop the game as Nabisco describes (waiting for the next natural stoppage if necessary).

Send the player off.

and then, assuming the referee stopped play rather than playing advantage, play is restarted with a drop ball. The opposing team only receive a (direct) free kick if one of their players was spat at. Internecine spitting is presumably not considered to have inconvenienced them too much.

I got this question exactly wrong. I gave no card and a direct free kick.

A defender obstructs an attacker. What kind of freekick do you award? The freekick is taken, hits you (the referee) and goes directly into the goal. What do you do?

I love this kind of question! (Not sure I got that one right though.)

A corner kick goes straight into the taker's own goal. What verdict, your honour? (this is probably a piece of caek, hence he should not answer before others have had a go).

As for your question about scoring an own goal directly from a corner kick, I don't think there's anything special about a corner (unlike a free kick), so the goal stands. Is that right?

And keep people out who are expecting actual discourse, like.

I don't think there's anything special about a corner (unlike a free kick), so the goal stands. Is that right?

Hmm I was going to say no, it's a corner kick to the opposing team. I can't seem to find this stated explicitly in the Laws, though. What the Laws *do* say, however, is that "A goal may be scored directly from a corner kick, but only against the opposing team", so my guess is I'm right.

... unless you have a hell of right foot!!!!!!

Here's a couple more.

You award a freekick to the defending team in their own penalty area. The defender passes it back to the goalkeeper, but the goalkeeper is not ready and the ball goes directly into the goal. What do you do? (I know you know, Lipogram!)

A player is running toward his opponents goal with the ball when the
referee realises this is a substituted player, but the referee has
not been informed of the substitution. What, if anything, should he do?

I am hardcore.

Stop play, caution the player, kick him off the pitch.

Look upon my level five, ye mighty, and despair...

The ball isn't in play until it leaves the penalty area. It's not a goal believe it or not and the free kick (direct or indirect) is retaken from the original spot.

A player is running toward his opponents goal with the ball when the
referee realises this is a substituted player, but the referee has
not been informed of the substitution. What, if anything, should he do?

This question is even more fun if the substituted player scores and the ref realizes he was a subsitute only after he scores but before the restart of play. Then what do you do?

But in this case: since the "player" has the ball the opposing team probably doesn't have the advantage, play is stopped, the substituted player is cautioned for entering the field of play without permission, removed from the field, and play is restarted with an indirect free kick for the opposing team.

If this ever happens to you on the field, stop the game, give the tool who spat a sending off for 'spitting at an opponent or other player', restart the game with IFK. Don't even bother thinking about advantage because their won't be any advantage once the resulting brawl starts. I still can't believe its only a DFK when you spit at an opponent.

IFK for the opposing team from where the player touched it for a second time.

But I guess there you get into a philosophy-of-rules thing, like whether a free kick should only be used to compensate a team for opportunities lost or also as a way of penalizing the opponent.

(Haha sorry I might still be traumatized by the time when I was 8 and I got carded as a spectator.)

If you stopped the play to administer a caution or dismissal where no other offense has occured (ie Unsporting behaviour (formerly Ungentlemanly/Ladylike Conduct), Dissent, Violent Conduct, Offensive, Insulting or Abusive Language/Gestures), the correct restart is indirect free kick (IFK) to the opposing team from where the offense occured. SUbject to the overriding conditions of Law 8.

At this point the offense occured outside the field of play so its looking more like a drop ball where the ball was when the play was stopped. A penal offense (outside of handball) can only be committed against an opponent on the field of play while the ball is in play. You can still administer a caution or dismissal for other things though against a player, substitute or substituted player. Such as flying karate kicks at spectators.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38503000/jpg/_38503137_cantona238.jpg

Also, if a player and the goalkeeper switched places (somehow putting on their different jerseys) without telling the ref what happens if:
a) The ref notices before either player is involved?
b) The player now in net touches the ball with his hands in the penalty area before the ref wakes up?

Consider my mind blown. I got that question really, really wrong in the exam then. Results next week, I think.

Those massive screens above the pitch . . . . if the ball cannons off there (from open play) and the ball goes in the goal, is the play stopped? Some say yes, because it's outside interference, so no goal. I say no, because the screens are technically on the pitch, so the goal would stand. What's the answer?

As for the Engerland goal kick:
In indoor soccer I know you stop play when that happens (local rules), in outdoor its probably just part of the field. I'll have to go check on the On Demand service (all games are available on Pay Per View service for free) to see what the ref did.

I've only had two fights break out beyond handbags (and one riot in the parking lot). One was during USA '94 where the parents of an under 12 team started beating on each other with lawn chairs because one Italian dad said the other kid dived like a Mexican. A couple of them actually came onto the field chasing each other with lawn chairs. No one was hurt beyond some bruises but their kids were severely confused and just kind of stood around watching. A couple of them started crying including the kid that dived.

haha. i almost said "drop kick"

I'm ten games into the career that started with this thread. Four cautions, one sending off and £240. Good times.

My first game of the season today. Our league has sent round specific instructions to the teams about swearing at referees (i.e. straight red). Good times.

You're a power-crazed madman! I quite fancy being one too.

7-1, and the winners were still complaining about the penalty I gave against them at full time. One broken thumb (not mine).

6am alarm = start of college football season. good times.

You award a freekick to the defending team in their own penalty area. The defender passes it back to the goalkeeper, but the goalkeeper is not ready and the ball goes directly into the goal. What do you do?
The ball isn't in play until it leaves the penalty area. It's not a goal believe it or not and the free kick (direct or indirect) is retaken from the original spot

A bit late, but I believe that Estudiantes La Plata used to do exactly this to wind up already-frustrated opponents. Even if that is the rule, I find it hard to believe they'd be let off with it these days

Yes, probably a caution for unsportsmanlike conduct.

(Neither side showed up to my game. I still get paid, so I'm not complaining.)

Actually, ignore that. I just reread the email. I was precisely a week early.

Is this right? That if video evidence shows that the player stopped a certain goal that the video evidence shows wasn't going to be a goal because it proves that the player that would have scored was in an offside position, it is still correct that the player was sent off?

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/disciplinary_news.cfm?curpageid=1272

Well, he obviously shouldn't have been sent off, but I think "wrongful dismissal" has a technical meaning here. Basically, if the referee acted in good faith then the decision stands. I think. I've not been involved in much disciplinary stuff.

Apart from the the time the guy repeatedly told me I was shit, so I sent him off, and he had the smarts to appeal, earning him a three match suspension.

the referee acted in good faith

If you are aware of the background of Mike McCurry, this is a brilliant turn of phrase :-)

btw, a penalty was also awarded, and Hibs scored from it. Most entertainingly of all, the Aberdeen manager said he thought the referee had an excellent game, despite this cock-up handing the game to Hibs.

I guess the assumption is that if the referee sees an incident and his decision isn't willfully perverse and corrupt then it should stand (although presumably there are procedures if that's the case). It's relatively common for people to get bans for things the ref didn't spot, but it's extremely rare for a referees decision to be overturned, even if it was obviously wrong.

OK, having turned up a week early last saturday, my first game of the season is definitely tomorrow. I am going to yellow card some mother fuckers.

it's extremely rare for a referees decision to be overturned, even if it was obviously wrong

Here in wonderful and fair Scotland, the referee can get to review his own decision and decide whether he was wrong or not if the decision is appealed. I actually revived this thread to ask you what you thought of Madjid Bougherra's red card for going in studs-first on the Aberdeen goalie's face getting downgraded to a yellow after the referee himself was asked to reconsider his decision (made for him by his linesman) by the review panel. I wondered what grounds it was for being a yellow not a red, but the footage has been taken down from YouTube :-(

i love to see a good studs-in-the-face challenges, so if the youtube footage resurfaces give me a shout.

One quick query being discussed over on the SPL thread. If a game is abandoned due to crap weather, any cards issued when the game was still going are still valid and count towards ongoing disciplinary totals, right?

One other quick query. Yesterday, Celtic named Lee Naylor on the official team sheet as a substitute. He wasn't on the bench, instead Niall McGinn was (who wasn't named on the official team sheet), and he (McGinn) later came on as a sub. Is it OK to play a player who wasn't notified as being in the team?

what's the process with finishing abandoned games? (I don't know why I don't know this.) Do they resume from the point it was called off (i.e. will Utd and Rangers play a 45 minute match starting at 0-1)? If that were the case, retaining the cards issued would make sense, but not so much if they just play the whole game again, since that's an additional 45 minutes added to their season wherein to get disciplinary stuff.

Since this has been bumped, I have the kind of question an eight-year-old would ask: what would happen if all, or a number, of the players in a team surrounded their teammate who had the ball, and walked it into the net? Some kind of obstruction-related foul?

Players should try not kicking people or diving if they don't want to add to their disciplinary totals (actually there were no bookings in the 45 minutes played today, it was a more general query really).

They have to replay the whole game. My thought process re. the bookings is that if red cards get rescinded if a game's abandoned, if one of your team-mates is red-carded, tons of you just start kicking fuck out of the opposition until enough of you (5?) get sent off and the game gets abandoned and you can all start again.

I like the thought process of Merdeyeux's theoretical situation.

Did some further research on my early question about the corner kicked straight into own goal, and found that free kicks* and throw-ins** into own goal result in a corner for the opposition***. This seems to give support to my original answer being correct -- that the same is indeed the case for corner kicks -- although it's only semi-explicitly stated in the Laws****.

*) Laws of the Game, p. 36
**) Laws of the Game, p. 126
***) except in caek's case of the free kick being taken inside the penalty area
****) Laws of the Game, p. 48: "only against the opposing team"

I have a question which was prompted by watching the highlights of Sunderland-West Ham just now, specifically Kenwynne Jones' red card: do the laws of the game allow for a player to get booked for basically diving (unsporting behaviour I guess) even if the opposition player has committed a red card offence in the process? I mean, I guess the letter of the law might have meant that Jones 'had' to be sent off but Ilunga's reaction to being lightly pushed was comical and if players knew they'd get carded for these sort of tiresome dick moves it might put the brakes on it a bit

ailsa, i would imagine cards in abandoned games are still added to disciplinary totals, but i don't know. it would depend on the league.

i'm also hazey on your other question, but my strong suspicion would be that no, he was not eligible to come on the pitch (if that's what you mean by "play a player", rather than just have him sit on the bench in shin pads, which anyone can do). did he come on?

meydereux: yes, obstruction, possible yellow cards for being silly buggers too.

yes, Ilunga could have been carded for simulation or perhaps ungentlemanly conduct. i've seen the replay, he certainly deserved at least a strong talking to. would love to see this enforced.

caek, yeah, the not-named sub came on. I suspect the version of the team sheet given to the stadium announcer and the press wasn't the same version as was given to the officials - aren't they meant to check to see if a player is eligible to come on?

fourth official should have stopped him coming on if he wasn't on the team sheet, yeah.