The Ref Stop

unusual scenario

pankaye

pankaye

Well-Known Member
Level 5 Referee
saw this on an American referees facebook group

A ball is crossed from the right side to two white attackers--one attacking the center and a teammate who is closer to goal and just outside the left post. The ball is too high for the central attacker to play and goes to white attacker near the left post. He attempts to head the ball, and--realizing he won't succeed--tries to pull a Maradona "Hand of God", punching it with his left hand which unsuccessfully goes past the goal line for what would otherwise be a goal kick. BUT....just as he moves to make this play, the AR's flag goes up for what would have been an offside.
Goal kick? Offside? Hand ball? what disciplinary action if any?

for clarity the handling was the involvement that resulted in the offside
 
Last edited:
The Ref Stop
Yeah, I'm with BC on this - the IDFK restart is the main important and non-negotiable bit.

Caution is supportable but not mandatory, so entirely up to the referee on the day.
 
If he didn't interfere with an opponent before the handling offence it reads like the handling was the moment he interfered with play.

Therefore handling offence simultaneous with interfering with play..
Yellow card for attempt to score a goal restart with a direct free kick (or a goal kick)
 
Am giving handball, caution, and direct fk to defender

someone doing that thinking they be saved a caution by the offside flag willl need get up earlier in the morning to hide their cheating
 
Becoming active is not the same as touching the ball. It's very plausible that the offside technically happened before the HB.
 
GraemeS said:
Becoming active is not the same as touching the ball. It's very plausible that the offside technically happened before the HB.
Click to expand...
Becoming involved in active by interfering with play, that is by playing or attempting to play a ball which is close, is the only possible offside offence here (unless there is another opponent whose ability to play the ball is impacted not mentioned in OP or course).
Therefore the offence only occurs at the point he handles it. That's simultaneously committing an offside offence and a handball offence. And the laws are prescriptive about what happens in this case, the more serious offence is penalised which is HB, caution and a direct free kick restart.
 
"Interfering with an opponent" covers a multitude of sins, none of which are expressly outruled by the scenario description. Hence "very plausible" that the offside is the first offence - in which case, to borrow an expression, the laws are prescriptive.
 
GraemeS said:
"Interfering with an opponent" covers a multitude of sins, none of which are expressly outruled by the scenario description. Hence "very plausible" that the offside is the first offence - in which case, to borrow an expression, the laws are prescriptive.
Click to expand...
Given there is no mention of an opponent, I think it's a stretch to assume an opponent was interfered with in one of the various ways they can be.
I do agree that an offside offence can occur before the ball is played, but given the most important person ie an opponent is omitted from the whole post I am left to believe thats not a consideration and the most likely offisde offence was interfere with play. At which point if that interference was a dfk offence that is taking precedence.
 
Fwiw, even if offside occurred beforehand I still think this is mandatory caution, as the player is attempting to score a goal with his hand, whether the offence is punished or not, the attempt in itself is unsporting behaviour. The only way I would not caution is if the player could clearly know they were offside, and therefore the unsporting nature of the behaviour is removed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ARF
The whole scenario is set-up to avoid interfering with an opponent being likely despite that I caveated my answer.

Let's not have endless hypotheticals to justify whichever answer you started with
 
bester said:
The whole scenario is set-up to avoid interfering with an opponent being likely despite that I caveated my answer.

Let's not have endless hypotheticals to justify whichever answer you started with
Click to expand...
I disagree completely that I'm stretching it. The original quote is "as he moves to make this play, the AR's flag goes up for what would have been an offside." So the flag is up before the handball occurs.

Maybe the AR has gone early or maybe there's a legitimate reason. I wouldn't want to offend you by over-speculating. But the fact as presented are explicitly that the flag goes up first.
 
GraemeS said:
I disagree completely that I'm stretching it. The original quote is "as he moves to make this play, the AR's flag goes up for what would have been an offside." So the flag is up before the handball occurs.

Maybe the AR has gone early or maybe there's a legitimate reason. I wouldn't want to offend you by over-speculating. But the fact as presented are explicitly that the flag goes up first.
Click to expand...
ARs flag early (incorrectly) all the time.
The OP clearly states for clarity the handling was the involvement for offside.

So that to me says 2 things, 1 the AR was incorrect to flag before the offence occurred.

2 the offence was interferin with play.
 
If we assume the ARs offside flag was correct, i.e. the player in the offside position has attempted to play the ball or interfered with an opponent, then technically the only possible restart is IDFK as the offside offence happened before the handling. Still a caution for unsporting behaviour though.

At the end of the day it makes no difference though, no one is scoring from a FK in their own penalty area, so DFK or IDFK is just a practicality.
 
some of the responses to this on another forum was that the handling and offside happened simultaneously therefore the correct response be to punish the more serious offence i.e restart should be DFK for handling rather than IDFK for offside.

a slight twist to the scenario: what if the handling (or attempt) was by a defender to try and stop a goal but there was an offside before it got to the said defender. can you take any disciplinary action?
 
RustyRef said:
If we assume the ARs offside flag was correct, i.e. the player in the offside position has attempted to play the ball or interfered with an opponent, then technically the only possible restart is IDFK as the offside offence happened before the handling. Still a caution for unsporting behaviour though.

At the end of the day it makes no difference though, no one is scoring from a FK in their own penalty area, so DFK or IDFK is just a practicality.
Click to expand...
If the action that caused the player to commit an offside offence was the handling, then if the flag was raised prior to that happening it was an incorrect flag. The AR should only flag when the offence is committed.
If it is a handball that commits the offside offence it's a DFK.
The only time a flag before would be acceptable is if there was an interfering with an opponent infraction.
We can assume it was an incorrect flag as the OP states the handling of the ball was the offside offence
 
pankaye said:
some of the responses to this on another forum was that the handling and offside happened simultaneously therefore the correct response be to punish the more serious offence i.e restart should be DFK for handling rather than IDFK for offside.

a slight twist to the scenario: what if the handling (or attempt) was by a defender to try and stop a goal but there was an offside before it got to the said defender. can you take any disciplinary action?
Click to expand...
No, as in that case the offside has definitely occurred first and the SPA / DOGSO offence didn't actually happen as play was stopped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top