Law 12

[JamesL]

To bring it back to the OP, I'm only trying to think of a way that an IFK could be the correct restart - I'd be going DFK all day as soon as a punch is thrown.

In respect of OP. The answer to the question is out of date. Last years edition did say if the player left the field of play to commit an offence it was idfk from.where the ball was.

 

[one]

Several of the responses here seem to suggest that because the player leaving the field occurred first, that's the offence that dictates the restart. I thank that's both flawed logic and goes against what the laws of the game clearly say. When a player leaves the field without permission it's an offence to be sure, but not one for which you need to stop play - for instance, if the player leaves the field and does nothing, you don't have to stop play, you can just wait for the next stoppage before taking whatever action you deem necessary.

While you don't need to and you don't have to stop play, you can stop play if you you see fit (see my later reference to law).

The various passages from the law that are quoted above, also say that the type of restart after a player leaves the field and commits an offence while off the field, depends on the the nature of that subsequent offence, not the leaving the field offence. It's not so much a question of playing the advantage as it is the simple fact that you don't need to stop play at all for the player leaving without permission, only if they then commit another offence.

Below is the passage of law that determines this:
Law 13.2

"• free kicks for offences involving a player entering, re-entering or leaving the field of play without permission are taken from the position of the ball when play was stopped. However, if a player leaves the field of play as part of play and commits an offence against another player, play is restarted with a free kick taken on the boundary line nearest to where the offence occurred; for direct free kick offences a penalty kick is awarded if this is within the offender’s penalty area

"free kicks for offences involving a player entering, re-entering or leaving the field of play without permission are taken from the position of the ball when play was stopped."
This passage clearly indicates a free kick can be awarded for leaving the FOP without permission and by implication play can be stopped.

The remainder of the quote indicates restart of play is according to the offence after leaving the FOP only if leaving the FOP was as part of play which is not the case in the OP.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

While you don't need to and you don't have to stop play, you can stop play if you you see fit (see my later reference to law).



Below is the passage of law that determines this:
Law 13.2


"free kicks for offences involving a player entering, re-entering or leaving the field of play without permission are taken from the position of the ball when play was stopped."
This passage clearly indicates a free kick can be awarded for leaving the FOP without permission and by implication play can be stopped.

The remainder of the quote indicates restart of play is according to the offence after leaving the FOP only if leaving the FOP was as part of play which is not the case in the OP.

But in the OP, you wouldn't stop for leaving the FOP, you'd stop for the VC

 

[one]

But in the OP, you wouldn't stop for leaving the FOP, you'd stop for the VC

Why wouldn’t I stop for leaving the FOP? Is there anything in the OP or in the LOTG saying I didn’t or shouldn’t stop for leaving the FOP?

I think we are going around circles on this. If I see a player leaving the field of play intending an engagement with the opponent team officials (due to prior incident, provocation etc.), my concern will be preventing the confrontation. I can and I will stop play immediately for the offence of leaving without permission and restart with an IFK regardless of any subsequent VC acts.

The OP doesn’t give any details of when play stopped or any other details so both DFK or IFK can be correct answers depending on when play was stopped.

 

[Peter Grove]

In respect of OP. The answer to the question is out of date. Last years edition did say if the player left the field of play to commit an offence it was idfk from.where the ball was

No, it didn't. Last year's edition was the one that changed it from an IFK to a DFK. You're thinking of the edition from two years ago.

"free kicks for offences involving a player entering, re-entering or leaving the field of play without permission are taken from the position of the ball when play was stopped."
This passage clearly indicates a free kick can be awarded for leaving the FOP without permission and by implication play can be stopped.

The remainder of the quote indicates restart of play is according to the offence after leaving the FOP only if leaving the FOP was as part of play which is not the case in the OP

I think you're misreading this. It seems to me that it doesn't refer to free kicks for the offence of leaving the field without permission, it refers to offences that were committed off the field and where, in the course of committing this offence (or just prior to doing so) the player left the field of play without permission. Also that passage, taken in conjunction with the one which comes after it, relates only to the position of the restart (in the one case it is where the ball was when play was stopped and in the other it is on the boundary line) but in both cases it is talking about the free kick being awarded for the offence the player committed after leaving the field, not the offence of leaving the field in and of itself.

For me, to only give an IFK here also goes against the whole philosophy that the IFAB has been pushing with the last two sets of changes, to specifying that physical offences against any participant should result in a direct free kick, not an IFK or dropped ball. This, for me is summed up in the following two bits of wording from the 2016-17 laws edition: "The punishment for an offence against another participant reflects the seriousness of such an action" and "No one would understand if the referee gave a RC/YC and then restarted with a dropped ball (or IDFK)." Yes, yes, I know that these particular extracts are not stated directly in reference to this particular scenario but I think the principles (and the IFAB philosophy that underpins them) would still apply.

If I see a player leaving the field of play intending an engagement with the opponent team officials (due to prior incident, provocation etc.), my concern will be preventing the confrontation. I can and I will stop play immediately for the offence of leaving without permission and restart with an IFK regardless of any subsequent VC acts.

Now you're introducing a different scenario and inventing a set of circumstances specifically tailored to buttress your argument. In most cases when a player leaves the field, you're not going to know exactly why he's doing it and so you wouldn't just immediately stop play for it since (as I mentioned in an earlier post) a player could easily leave the field and do nothing. I accept that if you already knew what the player was going to do before he did it, you could be proactive and blow up before anything happens but I would say that in most cases you're not going to be that prescient and you'll be taking action after the subsequent offence occurs.

 

[JamesL]

No, it didn't. Last year's edition was the one that changed it from an IFK to a DFK. You're thinking of the edition from two years ago.
.

Yes sorry I meant 16-17 which i would consider as last years (some FAs are still on 16-17). The copy and paste from earlier was from 17-18 which leads me to believe that the answer was correct last season.

And just to check my own sanity I have checked and it was in 16-17 that leaving to commit an offence was idfk restart. This was removed in the current edition (17-18) although they say its a no change to law just clearer wording. It might have been on the faqs or a circular somewhere but certainly is changed between the two editions.

This is the point i am making is that at the end of the day the issue for the OP is that the question is out of date between the last two editions. Until June of this year the answer was correct. It is no longer due to the update.

 

[one]

I accept that if you already knew what the player was going to do before he did it, you could be proactive and blow up before anything happens but I would say that in most cases you're not going to be that prescient and you'll be taking action after the subsequent offence occurs.

Finishing with that I think we can come up with some sort of agreement. I never argued against a DFK restart being correct and the 'more acceptable' restart. I was just saying an IFK can also sometimes be the correct restart (not having any further detail on OP question) which I think is what you are also saying in the quote.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

Why wouldn’t I stop for leaving the FOP? Is there anything in the OP or in the LOTG saying I didn’t or shouldn’t stop for leaving the FOP?

I think we are going around circles on this. If I see a player leaving the field of play intending an engagement with the opponent team officials (due to prior incident, provocation etc.), my concern will be preventing the confrontation. I can and I will stop play immediately for the offence of leaving without permission and restart with an IFK regardless of any subsequent VC acts.

The OP doesn’t give any details of when play stopped or any other details so both DFK or IFK can be correct answers depending on when play was stopped.

You wouldn't stop for leaving the FOP because unless you happened to be looking at the person as they left, it's unlikely you would know they had left the FOP. Also, the offender wouldn't have to be moving at the speed of light to cover the almost certainly short distance from the touchline to where the striking offence took place. Was probably moving faster than you could get your whistle to your mouth to specifically stop the game for his/her leaving the field. In practical terms, the departure and striking would probably take less than a second. This also means you're unlikely to have seen the VC until the uproar attracted your attention to it, but I'll leave that one for you to ponder.

You carry on doing your own thing, but I guarantee everyone, on seeing a VC offence will expect a DFK and as I said in what seems a lifetime ago, that means giving a DFK. Sometimes doing the right thing is a little different from doing the thing right. Don't worry though, you'll leave more space for other referees higher up the pyramid.

 

[one]

You carry on doing your own thing, but I guarantee everyone, on seeing a VC offence will expect a DFK and as I said in what seems a lifetime ago, that means giving a DFK. Sometimes doing the right thing is a little different from doing the thing right. Don't worry though, you'll leave more space for other referees higher up the pyramid.

There is no chance of that happening here because assessors here, unlike you, assess to the application of the laws of the game over the expectations of others.

Either way I don’t referee to move up the pyramid. I referee to do the right thing AND do it right. The pyramid takes care of itself.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

There is no chance of that happening here because assessors here, unlike you, assess to the application of the laws of the game over the expectations of others.

Either way I don’t referee to move up the pyramid. I referee to do the right thing AND do it right. The pyramid takes care of itself.

Good job I'm not an assessor then isn't it? I'm an observer; I observe and report. You carry on doing whatever it is you do.

 

[Peter Grove]

And just to check my own sanity I have checked and it was in 16-17 that leaving to commit an offence was idfk restart. This was removed in the current edition (17-18) although they say its a no change to law just clearer wording. It might have been on the faqs or a circular somewhere but certainly is changed between the two editions.

I'm not sure where you're looking at the 2016-17 laws but that's still not right. As mentioned, it hasn't been always and only an IFK since 2015-16 when it said:

• if the player leaves the field of play to commit the offence, play is restarted with an indirect free kick from the position of the ball when play was stopped (see Law 13 –Position of free kick)

The wording for 2016-17 says:

However, if a player leaves the field of play as part of play and commits an offence against another player, play is restarted with a free kick taken on the boundary line nearest to where the offence occurred; for direct free kick offences a penalty kick is awarded if this is within the offender’s penalty area.

I'm not 100% sure why they use the imprecise term "free kick" but it could be that they're saying it could be either an IFK or a DFK, depending on the offence. On the other hand, in the explanation that follows, it seems it refers to a DFK as it says:

No one would understand if the referee gave a RC/YC and then restarted with a dropped ball (or IDFK). The FK is awarded on the touchline/goal line nearest to where the foul occurred; if this is on the goal line in the offender’s penalty area a penalty is awarded.

Anyway, I sent an enquiry to the IFAB asking 1) should a referee stop play when a player leaves the field without permission and 2) If a player leaves the field without permission and strikes an opposing team official what would the restart be after dismissing the player for VC. Here are the answers I got.

Dear Mr Grove
Thank you for you questions.

The answers are:

1. The referee is not required to stop play when a player leaves without permission
2. The restart would be a direct FK on the boundary line closest to where the offence occurred

Best wishes

David

David Elleray
Technical Director of The IFAB

 

[JamesL]

I'm not sure where you're looking at the 2016-17 laws but that's still not right. As mentioned, it hasn't been always and only an IFK since 2015-16 when it said:

The wording for 2016-17 says:

I'm not 100% sure why they use the imprecise term "free kick" but it could be that they're saying it could be either an IFK or a DFK, depending on the offence. On the other hand, in the explanation that follows, it seems it refers to a DFK as it says:


Anyway, I sent an enquiry to the IFAB asking 1) should a referee stop play when a player leaves the field without permission and 2) If a player leaves the field without permission and strikes an opposing team official what would the restart be after dismissing the player for VC. Here are the answers I got.

Yes.. but.. the op question says team official. And if a player leaves the field of play to violently strike someone else including a player then that actions are not part of play (ok its possible but unlikely) - a requirement for a dfk was a player and as part of play. Thats what has changed it is now a dfk in all dfk type offences where as 16-17 there was a set requirement for dfk.
So going back to my point that as of last year before June the answer on the quiz was correct but is no longer since the update for 17-18. I do wonder if areferee are america based and therefore only update once they start using the updated version of laws.

 

[MJW89]

I've been using the quizzes quite often as prep for my LOTG exam. One of the questions asks what action would you take if a substitute warming up behind the AR spits at a player on the field of play and what would the restart be. The answer on areferee is being marked correctly as RC and IDFK. But surely spitting is a DFK restart?

 

[Peter Grove]

I've been using the quizzes quite often as prep for my LOTG exam. One of the questions asks what action would you take if a substitute warming up behind the AR spits at a player on the field of play and what would the restart be. The answer on areferee is being marked correctly as RC and IDFK. But surely spitting is a DFK restart?

It looks like another one where they're still giving an answer that's based on an older version of the laws.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

Why wouldn’t I stop for leaving the FOP? Is there anything in the OP or in the LOTG saying I didn’t or shouldn’t stop for leaving the FOP?

I think we are going around circles on this. If I see a player leaving the field of play intending an engagement with the opponent team officials (due to prior incident, provocation etc.), my concern will be preventing the confrontation. I can and I will stop play immediately for the offence of leaving without permission and restart with an IFK regardless of any subsequent VC acts.

The OP doesn’t give any details of when play stopped or any other details so both DFK or IFK can be correct answers depending on when play was stopped.

Hey @one the IFAB says you wouldn't stop for the player leaving the field and the restart would be a DFK. What's that? I was right, oh ok...

 

[one]

Hey @one the IFAB says you wouldn't stop for the player leaving the field and the restart would be a DFK. What's that? I was right, oh ok...

Hey @Brian Hamilton
If you read my posts you will find I never claimed you were wrong. I have said that DFK is not the only right answer given we don't know when the referee stopped play.
As for stopping play, if you look at the subtle differences between "wouldn't" and "not required to" then you realise I have not said anything conflicting IFAB's statement.

If you do respond to this post, to remain civil, please play the ball not the man.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

Hey @Brian Hamilton
If you read my posts you will find I never claimed you were wrong. I have said that DFK is not the only right answer given we don't know when the referee stopped play.
As for stopping play, if you look at the subtle differences between "wouldn't" and "not required to" then you realise I have not said anything conflicting IFAB's statement.

If you do respond to this post, to remain civil, please play the ball not the man.

And if you read my post, I never said you were wrong, just that I was right. #subtleasabrick