Richard Martin's Soccer Referee Blog

Richard's Soccer Referee Blog

August 2, 2008
Lightning bolt kills 2 soccer players
6 others hospitalized for burns in Mexico after teams ignore storm warning

updated 6:59 a.m. ET, Sat., Aug. 2, 2008
MEXICO CITY - Two people died and six were injured when a lightning bolt struck a soccer match in southern Mexico, police said.

One player from each side died during Friday's local match in the southern state of Guerrero, officials said.

Mexican news media reported that the game between firefighters and civil protection workers went ahead despite reports of electrical storms in the area.

June 8, 2008
The 2008 memorandum was published late last week. You can see it at: http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/2008MEMORANDUM.pdf. There is nothing of substance in the memo. The "big" change involves the approval logos that should appear on approved balls.

You can find the instructor's PowerPoint presentation at: http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/2008MEMORANDUM.ppt.

April 24, 2008
Are you unsure about how much extra time to allow in games you officiate? Be aware many local league and tournament rules specify that extra time will not be added. If however you are in charge of games that allow extra time, such as State Cup games, here is the latest from U. S. Soccer:

To:	National Referees National Instructors National Assessors State Referee Administrators State Directors of Instruction State Directors of Assessment State Directors of Coaching
From:	Alfred Kleinaitis Manager of Referee Development and Education
Re:	Allowance for Time Lost
Date:	April 22, 2008

Allowance is made in any period of play (including extra time) for time lost through substitutions, assessment of injuries, removal of players from the field of play for treatment, time wasting and any other cause. The specific amount of the allowance is at the discretion of the referee, although the International Football Association Board (IFAB) has advised that the full time lost due to injuries should be allowed. By tradition, the primary focus of this provision in Law 7 is on delays in the restart of play which are excessively prolonged. Among examples of "other cause" would be the need for the officiating team to confer regarding the identity of players committing misconduct; confrontations with officials; the removal of streamers, debris or other objects thrown on to the field which interrupts the game; pitch incursions by spectator(s);and so forth.

In order to standardize the procedures by which "additional time" is being allowed in a period of play, the following guidelines are adopted:

During the two minutes before the expiration of each period of play the Referee must inform the Fourth Official, either visually or verbally, of the amount of time allowed. This time shall be stated to the closest lower minute (i.e., 1 minute, 30 seconds will be expressed as 1 minute).

The Fourth Official will be responsible for displaying this time at but not before the close of the affected period of play. Number panels or an electronic substitution board would be most commonly used for this purpose and the display of the remaining time should be prominent.

Other Fourth Official duties (e.g., managing substitutions) must take precedence over the display of time remaining.

In the absence of a Fourth Official, the referee will follow the above guidelines in all respects but will convey the remaining time to the assistant referee closer to the teams who will then so inform both coaches.

This minimum time does not indicate the exact amount of time left in the match nor does it preclude more time being added to the allowance for any subsequent injuries or additional delays (including time wasting). However, no further communication with or by the Fourth Official will be necessary.

Once the indication of the minimum time allowed has been given by the Fourth Official, this time cannot be reduced. It is the minimum expected by everyone involved in the game. Referees are therefore to ensure that a period of play is not ended prior to the expiration of the announced remaining time.

Clubs are reminded that the Public Address Announcer should announce “There will be a minimum of _____ minutes allowance for time lost. Official time is being kept on the field by the referee.”

April 7, 2008
We all can learn fron the dialogue from the MLS referees' weekly conference call. Here is the report from this week's call.

WEEK IN REVIEW

WEEK 2

MLS Week In Review

Week 2 – ending April 6, 2008

Summary

Overall, great work. Exciting games, lots of goals, lots of advantages (3 leading to goals), solid penalty kick decisions, good cautions, good send-offs, and STRONG offside decisions (called and not called)! Everyone is to be commended on your focus and performances. Games had ENTERTAINMENT VALUE with obvious examples of the referee team contributing to the flow of the match without endangering player safety and causing discontent on the part of the teams.

Note the following stats:

Goals scored per game (average): Week 2 = 4 / Week 1 = 2.5
Fouls called per game (average): Season to date = 23 / Last year to date = 31

What do these stats mean? Referees are allowing more flow and allowing the minor, trifling offences to go as long as game control is not impacted. Plus, with ARs keeping the flag down and making accurate offside decisions goals scored increased by 1.5 per game.

Week 2 Focus

ARs be focused on sharper on offside decisions. Show restraint and keep the flag down unless 100% sure.

Result > Great work. Focus was evident as not a single goal scoring opportunity or goal was denied due to an errant AR flag. FOCUS, FOCUS and FOCUS. This is critical in the increase of goals scored. WELL DONE!

Week 3 Focus

Referees using personality to “PREVENT THE NEXT FOUL.” Referees must use personality (not just blowing the whistle or waving “play on”) to deal with borderline fouls. The referee’s actions must be visual and send a message.

Video Clip 1: Kevin Stott talking with KC’s Lopez. A conversation that opens up a line of communication not just for the moment but later.
Video Clip 2: Real Salt Lake vs. Chivas (48:30) in which RSL’s Mantilla body checks Chivas’ Harris. This is borderline cautionable. The referee must do more than blow the whistle. Call player over and send a message. This is a tactical foul made by a defender who knows there is a lot of attacking space behind him if Harris gets by; hence, the defender decides “the ball may get by but the attacker won’t.”
Video Clip 3: Columbus vs. NY (56:20) in which the NY player is body checked off the ball in a manner that borders on “reckless.” Should the referee not caution, the player should be called over and preventative officiating applied.

Weekly Commentary

Advantages leading to goals: There were 3 goals resulting from the referee applying advantage. Holding the whistle and seeing how play develops works!
Video Clip 4: Dallas vs. Houston (43:55). Dallas second goal comes off a hard midfield foul. The advantage is excellent but consider further additional action on the part of the referee. Situations like this should not go unsanctioned. Referees must be creative but they must address the challenge with the player in question. Great advantage but even better with delayed caution or, depending upon the atmosphere of the game, a strong admonishment.
Video Clip 5: RSL vs. Chivas (31:55). Not 1 but 2 fouls in midfield are recognized. Excellent vision, great advantage but even better with delayed caution or, depending upon the atmosphere of the game, a strong admonishment..
Video Clip 6: Colorado vs. Kansas City. An advantage applied in the defensive third, against the goalkeeper, results in a long-range goal and assist to the keeper. Given the foul was in the defensive third, this is taking a risk that worked. Well done and a piece of top-class refereeing.
AR involvement on free kicks: ARs should not enter the field to manage free kicks (spot the ball) or move the wall back unless prearranged with the referee. ARs must be cognizant of a team’s need for quick restarts and early entrance onto the field by the AR will put you out of position. Note the following important aspects:
ARs and referees must have prearranged mechanics for when and how the AR can enter the field.
ARs should not intervene unless a team specifically and clearly requests 10 yards.
Referees must not signal for the restart until the AR is correctly positioned for the next phase of play (offside).
Video Clip 7: San Jose vs. Galaxy (2:00). Off a free kick, near the AR, a goal is disallowed because the AR entered the field to manage the restart and SJ took a quick restart. Note, that the ball is NOT touched by the sliding player. The AR is out of position to make the correct decision thus disallowing the game’s first goal 2 minutes in.
Penalty Kick Decisions: Officials showed the courage to make 2 penalty kick decisions this weekend. In one case, the score was 2-0 and the penalty was in favor of the winning team. The penalty was clear and the referee did not let the score influence the decision.
Video Clip 8: Columbus vs. NY (50:40). NY attacker is pulled down in the area as he turns past the defender. NY was winning 2-0 at the time.
Video Clip 9: New England vs. Chicago (34:35). Chicago attacker is brought down. Although subtle, contact is made in 2 manners: with the arm and then a clip on the heel.
Over-involvement by ARs: ARs need to continue to “feel” the game as the referee is and quickly ascertain “did the referee see it and does the referee need me?” First crack at the call belongs with the referee. If at all possible, look to see where the referee is prior to raising the flag. This was covered at National Camp.
Video Clip 10: Colorado vs. Kansas City (52:25). A challenge occurs near the AR but in clear view of the referee (the referee is close, has a clear line of vision). The defender seemingly plays the ball and the challenge is part of the normal flow of the game. The question, however, is: “Can the referee make the decision to award a foul or not?” The ARs call leads to a caution for dissent. ARs should read the situation and not be involved unless the referee needs you.
Foul Distinction: Progress continues to be made in allowing the game to flow with several instances of good foul discrimination – playing to what the game needs and the players are accepting. However, we can still take a few more calculated risks on some of the minor fouls in the midfield area especially when the game is under control and the players are responding to your management style and game control style.
Offside Decisions – positive: Improvement over week 1. Note the clip of appropriate flag by the AR.
Video Clip 11: Columbus vs. NY (31:12): close decision made even more difficult since the movement is directly in front of the AR. AR makes right decision to keep flag down. NOTE: AR position with body square to the field as the ball is played.
Fourth Official Position: At games were sign boards are present in front of the team benches and 4th official, the 4th official MUST position himself on the bench side of the boards as to provide better access to the teams and substitutions. In cases where the TV camera protrudes into the 4th official’s area and separates the 4th official from one team bench or another, effort should be made on the part of the 4th official to modify his position during the game so as to not be showing “favoritism” to one bench or another.
Red Cards: There were two red cards issued. Both can survive the scrutiny of review with the notes provided.
Video Clip 12: New England vs. Chicago (6:05). Although early in the game, the referee was well positioned to make a determination that the tackle involved “excessive force” and could have injured the player. Of note is that the referee also cautioned #21 for dissent and showing disrespect to the referee (review MLS email to teams/coaches).
Video Clip 13: Columbus vs. NY (80:45). The decision on the part of the referee was to issue a second caution; however, the National Referee Office prefers a straight red card for serious foul play. The tackle is from the front, over the top, and the speed and distance of the tackle make the likelihood of playing the ball minimal.
Kansas City – field alignment and impact on AR: The following is received by one of the ARs working the game at the new field in KC. Note the following critical components: (a) arrive at the stadium early to become comfortable with your surroundings; (b) be aware of the sun depending upon the time of day; and (c) be rested and well prepared.
It is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT for the SAR to maintain the proper position in this stadium. I took at least 5 minutes on my own when we were walking the field to get my bearings. As we know, the stadium is designed for baseball, and because of the field layout the stands make your eyes want to line you up with the SLD completely wrong. The field cut was helpful, but if they could make the cuts half the width of what they did - it would be better. During the field inspection, we asked the field crew to remove aluminum benches from in front of the baseball dugouts, as I felt they were even more distracting (my eyes being pulled to the light reflecting off of the bleachers (this was not a problem because they weren't there for a particular purpose).
I learned very quickly during the game that I would have to focus on the offside line in order to maintain the proper position. I made my focus point the touchline on the far side of the field...and that seemed to help. At halftime, I told the referee that to be properly positioned for offside decisions, it would be very unlikely that I could assist him with any fouls...and even with ball in and out of play decisions (to a certain extent) on my side, unless they were right in front of me. This communication was very helpful for things that happened in the second half.
This was an afternoon game, so I also had the sun and wind in my face the entire game.
Again, it took 90 minutes of 100% concentration just to maintain the proper position because of the dynamics of this stadium. All I can say is for people to know this going into that stadium and to make sure they are well-rested and prepared.

March 12, 2008
Here is the official word from FIFA on the law changes for 2008:

At its Annual General Meeting today (March 8, 2008) in Gleneagles, Scotland, the International Football Association Board (IFAB) has decided to put on ice goal-line technology and to stop tests in this area until further notice. Amongst others, the questions of the human aspect of the game, the universality of the Laws of the Game, as well as the simplicity and efficiency of the technology were taken into consideration.

However, the IFAB has approved a proposal from FIFA to conduct an experiment involving two additional assistant referees who will mainly focus on fouls and misconduct in the penalty area. The competition in which this test will be conducted will be decided at a later stage.

The Board also discussed a proposal from the Scottish FA regarding the use of video evidence to sanction simulation after the game. Although the suggestion was not approved, the IFAB members agreed that simulation is an act of cheating which must be intensively fought and sanctioned during the game and that all member associations would be encouraged to do so.

Furthermore, a proposal submitted by the FA and called Fair Play Convention, aimed at dealing with injured players while the game is in progress ,was acknowledged but not approved, mainly on the grounds that fair-play is an instinct behaviour rather than an attitude to rule.

Regarding the Laws of the Game, the IFAB approved the following amendments:

Law 1 - The Field of Play
In order to standardize the size of the football pitch for A international matches, the IFAB has decided to set a fixed size of 105m long and 68m wide (instead of a minimum and maximum length - from 100m to 110m - and a minimum and a maximum width - from 64m to 75m - as mentioned in the present text).

Law 2 - The Ball
Within the FIFA Quality Concept for footballs, the IFAB has agreed that the new 'FIFA APPROVED', 'FIFA INSPECTED' and 'International Matchball Standard' logos, which were launched in May 2007, will replace the former logos displayed in the present text.

Revision of the Laws of the Game
The last major revision of the text of the Laws of the Game was one 11 years ago. Since then, many additions and amendments have been made to the Laws themselves and various publications as well as teaching materials have been produced. As a result, a further revision was overdue. The IFAB has approved the revision which contains no major change in content but simplifies the wording of the Laws.

On other business, it's been agreed that a discussion about the look and design of the ball will be submitted to the agenda of the next sub-committee meeting.
Also, as it already did last year, the Board stressed that people in the technical areas should have no access and view to pitch-side monitors.

Finally, the FIFA President made a strong appeal against violent tackles on the field of play, reiterating that "players committing such acts should be banned".

The123rd Annual General Meeting of the International Football Association Board will take place next year in Northern Ireland.

The International F.A. Board, the custodian of the Laws of the Game, is composed of The Football Association (England), The Scottish Football Association, The Football Association of Wales, The Irish Football Association (Northern Ireland) and FIFA. Representing its 204 other members, FIFA has four votes on the body, while the four British associations have one vote apiece. A proposal requires a three-quarter majority (i.e. six of the eight votes) to be passed.