478 Responses to “Ask A Rules Question”

1. Is the following altercation between field players (a player pushes his opponent with the use of excessive force) – considered an act of Violent Behavior or Fighting?

   • Mike: Your description of the player’s behavior (pushes his opponent with excessive force) requires finite discernment on the part of the referee. If taken literally, a “push” DOES NOT conform to the behaviors set forth under Rule 12.16.1 – example, “…deliberate strike or punch…kicking, head-butting, hair pulling, open-handed strike…” but does qualify as serious foul play/violent behavior described in Rules 12.3.1 and 12.3.2. In any event, it may be purely academic inasmuch as all these behaviors fall under “ejections”. Hope this helps.

2. During the taking of a penalty kick, a member of the attacking team encroaches and the ball is deflected by the goalkeeper over the cross bar and over the goal line.
   The correct restart is Indirect free kick by the defending team.
   Haw ever In the COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RULES AND LAWS it indicate that Indirect free kick to defenders at point of infraction unless ball goes out of play over goal line, then goal kick, even if touched over goal line by the GK.
   Please clarify the correct restart.

   • Sam: It should be noted that the only source for interpretations is the NCAA Soccer 2014 and 2015 Rules and Interpretations. The COMPARATIVE STUDY OF RULES AND LAWS is a service provided by NISOA and, on occasion, is incorrect. The correct restart is IFK (See Rule 14.3.1.A.R.14.3.2) Also, please note the message has been sent to the editor of the Comparative Study and will be corrected.

3. Ok. Thank you for the clarification. Could you take a look at these scenarios (they are related to my previous question):

   Scenario #1: While dribbling the ball a player is physically challenged (legal contact) by his opponent. Unfortunately, the dribbler is unable to withstand the contact and STRIKES his opponent with an elbow in the face area. Does this constitute Violent Behavior or Fighting?

   Scenario #2: While dribbling the ball a player is physically challenged (illegal contact) by his opponent and a foul is called. Immediately after the whistle the dribbler (still frustrated by the foul) STRIKES his opponent with an elbow in the face area. Does this constitute Violent Behavior or Fighting?

   • Mike: Scenario #1, taken literally (by your description i.e. “STRIKES”) is a de facto definition of “fighting” albeit different from a more typical “fighting” scenario where one or more players are “squared off” against each other. To that extent, referee discretion will/should determine the nature of the violation. That notwithstanding, either/both behaviors fall under “ejections” the only remaining issue the referee’s report to the scorekeeper that will determine the suspension.
     Scenario #2: Fighting. (See Rule 12.6.1.)

4. As per definition “A fight is defined as a deliberate strike or punch or an attempt to strike or punch another player, official, coach or bench personnel”.

   What about a player, coach, or a bench personnel deliberately striking or punching or an attempting to strike or punch an outside agent (for example, a spectator, photographer or press representative, etc). Should a situation like this be reported as fighting (regardless of an outside agent not being included in the fighting definition)?

   • Stanislaw: Taking your scenario verbatim the Rule of Law is set forth in Rule 12.3.2.1 and is, therefore, a de facto description of Violent Behavior. Ambiguity is always an element when a specific term – lifted from another ruling – is included in the example given. By including the phrase “deliberately striking or punching” mitigating a clear answer is aggravated by the necessary inclusion of Rule 12.6.1. The good news is that the violation of either or both rules warrants election. Obviously, if the referee reports it as “fighting” and it is the player’s second “fighting” offense he/she cannot compete for the remainder of the season.

5. Do I understand this correctly: Fighting (Rule 12.6.1) can occur against ANOTHER player, official, coach, or bench personnel – Does the word ANOTHER mean ANY player, ANY coach, or ANY bench personnel (including my own teammates, my own coaches, my own bench personnel) OR does it rather refer to the opponents ONLY (that is, the opposing player, the opposing coach, the opposing bench personnel)?

   • Mike: The answer is: YES! ANYONE! The key word is “ANOTHER”. For more precise clarification see Rule 12.3.2.1 pertaining to Violent Behavior. The Rules committee will receive our recommendation to add an A.R. under Fighting to further augment the ruling in the 2016-2017 Rules and Interpretations. .

6. It is really difficult to separate those two terminologies (Fighting & Violent Behavior) when considering a player deliberately punching/striking a teammate or someone from the outside (ball person, spectator, etc). In my eyes, Fighting is a very specific representation of Violent Behavior. MY QUESTION: How can a deliberate punch/strike between players from the opposing teams be categorized as Fighting (as per Rule 12.6.1), whereas, in an exactly same scenario (a deliberate punch/strike) but this time between teammates or between a player and an outside agent (ball person, spectator, etc) be categorized as Violent Behavior (as per Rule 12.3.2.1). I would appreciate if you could clarify this for me, especially, that for the reporting purposes only one explanation can be chosen.

   • Stanislaw: There is no question about the difficulty in separating the two behaviors which is where referee discernment is required. The use of the word “deliberate” provides a dashboard item designed to assist any observer when attempting to distinguish between the two terminologies. A “scuffle” is not necessarily a fight nor violent behavior but can include deliberate actions the referee must determine in order to apply the appropriate penalty.

7. On a related note: What about a situation describing a retaliatory action, when a player violently throws (or kicks) the ball at the opponent right after the foul. Would that be classified as an example of a spontaneous reaction and therefore categorized as Violent Behavior, or rather as a deliberate action and categorized as Fighting?

   • Stanislaw: Spontaneous action is not included in the NCAA Rules and Interpretations and retaliatory action is not an issue. The referee shall penalize the action which is addressed in Rules 12.2.3.and A.R.12.6.5.b

8. My question is related to Scoring or Assisting a Goal by an Illegal Substitute: Let’s say a goal is scored. And right BEFORE the kick off, the referee finds out that the goal was scored (or assisted) by an illegal substitute – Is this the Correct Ruling: The goal is disallowed, the illegal substitute is yellow carded (and replaced by the original player), and the game restarted with a goal kick. What if the referee realizes AFTER the kick off that the goal was scored (or assisted) by an illegal substitute and decides to stop the play – Is this the Correct Ruling: The goal stands (since it was NOT discovered before the kick off), the illegal substitute is yellow carded (and replaced by the original player), and the game restarted with an indirect free kick is by the opposing team. Do I have all of that right?

   • Jeff: There is a conflict in the current (2014-2015) Rules and Interpretations between Rules A.R.3.2.2.d. and A.R.10.4.j.In the former, the referee has until the “end of the game…” to rectify the error. Your interpretation (based on the latter) – except for one item – is also correct. (The one item is that 10.4.j. – although logical – does NOT de facto include removing the player from the game.) For the moment, the best view might be to consider the issue a mater of “parallel truths”. The GOOD NEWS is that, when a rule is not clear, Secretary-Rules Editors are empowered to provide interpretations between annual meetings. (Soccer SRE is Ken Andres [email protected])

9. My inquiry is related to one of Stanislaw’s questions (as I am having trouble with this topic myself): How is that exactly the same action (as described by Stanislaw – a deliberate strike or punch) be reported as FIGHTING if committed against another player, official, coach or bench personnel, whereas, when committed against an outside agent (ball person, spectator, or anybody else) be reported as VIOLENT BEHAVIOR (as explained in one of your comments)?

   • Chris: You need to reread the response to Stanislaw’s scenario. The response does not state that the ruling is VIOLENT BEHAVIOR; it merely informs that, albeit the rule pertaining to fighting does not include “others” than “another player, official, coach or bench personnel” while there is a reference to “spectator” in Rule 12.3.2.1.which falls under violent behavior. Clearly, the act of striking or punching is defined as fighting. You will note that the response also included a statement that a report will be made to the Rules Committee suggesting that in the 2016-2017 Rules and Interpretations edition the section on Fighting include references to “others” including spectators.

10. I am a little confused about Rule 7.4 (Forfeit after 70th minute). Who gets the victory & what is the final score if a game gets terminated after 70th minute? Rule 7.4 says that if a game is forfeited after the game has concluded (Does this mean: Having 70 or more minutes played in the game?) the team that won the game on the field still gets the victory while the team that lost on the field still gets the loss. What if a game is tied at the described termination point (that is after 70th minute) – who gets the victory then and what is the final score? Like I said, I am confused. Logically, I would assume that the opponents shall always be credited with a forfeit win regardless whether the game gets terminated before or after 70th minute? I would appreciate if you could clarify this for me. Thank You.

    • Mike: I can understand your confusion inasmuch as the forfeiture rule has been many moving parts some, of which, are anomalous at best. The soccer rules committee developed its forfeit rules in keeping with the need to maintain discipline policies that prevent late-game infractions that might serve as counter forces to things like game suspensions. For example, if a player knows he/she will not have to sit out the next game their behavior in the waning minutes of a game they are losing could become overly aggressive if not violent. If a team knows there is no penalty following a given match their behavior might also be less than positive. That notwithstanding, there is a problem with what the rules committee has proffered that is related to broader NCAA Bylaw on forfeits: In soccer, selection committees are instructed to omit forfeitures from the records when determining won-loss records for postseason play. For your further edification, the narrative below is taken from the NCAA Bylaws.

      Games later forfeited due to post-game administrative actions do not alter any NCAA statistics and/or records unless they are penalties passed down by the COI or NCAA executive action, or are dictated by the rules of the game. It is suggested schools and conferences denote such games by using an asterisk and a footnote, but continue to list the actual contest results.
      Forfeit Scores
      If a forfeit is declared by the game official while a contest is in progress or a situation occurs that forces a premature end to the contest by the game official, all statistics (other than won-lost and coaches’ records) are voided unless the contest has progressed to a “reasonable point of conclusion” (see the chart below), in which case all statistics shall count and shall be reflected in all records. If the game had progressed to a “reasonable point of conclusion” and the team that was in the lead at the time was declared the forfeit winner, the score shall stand. If the score was tied or the trailing team was declared the forfeit winner, refer to the chart below for the final recorded score. Also in these cases, in sports where individuals receive wins or losses such as baseball, softball, field hockey, ice hockey and lacrosse, if the forfeit changes the outcome of the game according to the score, do not credit an individual with a win or loss, but rather enter a team line for these statistics. If the declared winner is in the lead, then individuals will receive the win and loss they would have received if the game had ended at that point. In baseball and softball, if the score is reverted back to the end of the previous full inning, then only the statistics up to that point shall count.
      If a game in progress is declared a forfeit win for one of the teams by the game officials and the game has not progressed to a “reasonable point of conclusion,” then the official game score should be recorded from the following chart. The team’s won-lost record shall include the forfeit, but if the statistics are voided, all averages in future rankings shall be computed without inclusion of the forfeited contests

      NCAA STATISTICS POLICIES AND GUIDELINES Forfeits and Vacancies refer to the chart below for the final recorded score. Also in these cases, in sports where individuals receive wins or losses such as baseball, softball, field hockey, ice hockey and lacrosse, if the forfeit changes the outcome of the game according to the score, do not credit an individual with a win or loss, but rather enter a team line for these statistics. If the declared winner is in the lead, then individuals will receive the win and loss they would have received if the game had ended at that point. In baseball and softball, if the score is reverted back to the end of the previous full inning, then only the statistics up to that point shall count.
      If a game in progress is declared a forfeit win for one of the teams by the game officials and the game has not progressed to a “reasonable point of conclusion,” then the official game score should be recorded from the following chart. The team’s won-lost record shall include the forfeit, but if the statistics are voided, all averages in future rankings shall be computed without inclusion of the forfeited contests.
      Forfeit Scores
      Baseball…………………………………. 9-0 Soccer…………………………………… 1-0
      Basketball………………………………. 2-0 Softball………………………………….. 7-0
      Field Hockey…………………………… 1-0 Swimming & Diving………………… 11-0
      Football………………………………….. 1-0 Tennis……………………………. Withdraw
      Golf………………………………. Withdraw Volleyball……………………………….. 3-0
      Ice Hockey……………………………… 1-0 Water Polo……………………………… 5-0
      Lacrosse………………………………… 1-0 Wrestling……………………………………………………………… 60-0

      • Cliff – The latest Rule Book Rule 5.6.5 changed the word forfeit to “terminate” for 4 situations. Under what conditions is there now actually a forfeit declared by the referee>

        • Don: First, you are correct concerning the changing of the word’ forfeit’ to ‘terminate’ in Rule 5.6.5. However, a conundrum exists due to the fact that the 2014 and 2015 Soccer Rules and Interpretations still contains Rule 7.4 Forfeit, No Contest. It was with this in mind that I responded to Mike Broen’s question.
          With reference to the rulings involving forfeits there is a longstanding conflict between the NCAA s Policies and Guidelines STATISTICS statements and the language in our soccer rules and interpretations. During my approximately 40 years tenure as SRE there were many exchanges – to no avail – with the statistics people attempting to resolve the conflict. Soccer needed a forfeit option to provide strength to game suspensions as well as a deterrent to late-game theatrics from coaches/players/fans. For example, a player facing ejection could initiate a late-game fight (riot) leading to a terminated game that would expunge a potential loss. Based on the Statistics Rulings there would be no change in the game result (record) if the game had progressed to a reasonable length of termination (in soccer’s case, 70 minutes). In addition, there did (and does) exist a forfeiture option that can be imposed by the Committee on Infractions (COI) for reasons listed in the NCAA Bylaws (Appendix Policies and Guidelines STATISTICS page 23). For practical purposes, it appears that the change of language notwithstanding, there still exists the possibility that a forfeit can occur albeit only from a source remotely linked to championship play and, then, only from a ruling body such as a championship committee and/or the COI.
          ONE THING REMAINS:INASMUCH AS THE PRODUCTION OF THE 2016 AND 2017 RULES AND INTERPRETATIONS WILL BE THE PRIMARY AGENDA ITEM ON THEIR SCHEDULE THE MEN’S AND WOMEN’S SOCCER RULES COMMITTEE SHOULD GIVE THE MATTER SERIOUS ATTENTION AT ITS ANNUAL MEETING NEXT JANUARY.
          Final note: I have all the language of the Forfeits and Vacancies rulings in a Word document. If you would like to have it (without the arduous search of the publication I’ll be happy to email it to you.). .

          • Cliff – if it’s not too difficult, i would certainly appreciate this material for my rules documentation.