Welcome to the 38th edition of The Corsham Referee monthly International Football/Soccer Referees' newsletter. 

This August 2006 issue is delivered to you early this month, as I am due to attend an FA Referees' Instructors Course for a week shortly, so would be unable to issue this newsletter to you at the normal time. Hence, you have it two weeks early!

I hope that all of you continue to enjoy your role in the world of refereeing. Please let me have any contributions for the newsletter, as readers are always interested in hearing about Refereeing from around the world. Please let me know if you have any difficulties in receiving or reading the newsletter; and let me have any suggestions on how it can be improved. It is issued free by email in both html (web page format), and plain text format. Previous issues (and printable pdf versions) can be seen by using the 'Previous Newsletters' link on the home page of my http://www.corshamref.org.uk web site. This newsletter is issued approximately on the 1st day of each calendar month.

Keep up the good Refereeing work wherever you are in the world; and my best wishes go to you all. Editor Julian Carosi.

WHAT DID I THINK OF THE REFEREEING IN THE WORLD CUP?

I thought that in general, the standard of Refereeing was excellent. The Referees from South America performed much better that I have ever seen them perform before.

The fitness was amazing. In nearly every major decision, the Referee was only yards away, thus adding great credibility to the decision-making. For me, fitness was the key to this World Cup as far as Referees were concerned. It was fantastic. This is certainly something that will not have gone unnoticed by grassroots Referees.

The area that I would have liked to have seen more involvement in (particularly as it was a FIFA directive at the start), is dealing and being brave enough to punish simulation. I know that it is very difficult to be 100% sure, as players are good enough to get Oscars these days. But the lack of drive in punishing simulation (and cheating) will not encourage grass roots Referees to have a go at rooting out this problem!

There were more cards issued than any other World Cup, and this was due to the strong early stance taken by Referees (as instructed by FIFA) to stamp down on lunging tackles and time-wasting. It took a while for the Referees to get a right balance, but by then, the card count had already broken previous records. In the latter games, the Referees were more lenient, and allowed the game to flow more, as it should do.

Julian Carosi

BARWICK FEARS REFEREE CRISIS

The FA (England) chief executive, Brian Barwick, yesterday issued his blueprint for English football for the next 12 months, including a call to all those involved in the game to give referees more respect. In the wake of the World Cup where record numbers of red and yellow cards were handed out, Barwick yesterday urged players, managers and supporters to treat officials with greater courtesy. If not, there could be a refereeing recruitment crisis.

In a keynote address to the annual summer meeting of the full FA Council, Barwick, appointed in November 2004 in succession to Mark Palios, laid out an 11-point plan which he hopes will clean up the game and move the FA into a new era of transparency and accountability. Top of the list was making sure that match officials are not deterred by the kind of gamesmanship and abuse that often occurred during Germany 2006.

Without specifically referring to the World Cup, Barwick said it was essential "to support referees at all levels of the game and continue to recruit them''.

An example of the type of incident Brawick was referring to occurred during Australia's 2-0 defeat by Brazil in the World Cup. Harry Kewell was reported for swearing at German official Markus Merk and the Liverpool winger was pictured jabbing his finger in Merk's direction.

Kewell, who was later cleared due to inconsistencies in the referee's report, later dismissed his outburst as "just heat of the moment stuff''. He added: ''You're frustrated, you're losing the game, every referee puts up with it.''

Barwick indicated that, in future, it would be unreasonable to expect officials to tolerate such behaviour. Cristiano Ronaldo was another player who showed scant respect for officials during the Wolrd Cup. Following Portugal's 1-0 defeat by France in the semi-final, he was heavily critical of Uruguayan official Jorge Larrionda.

The Manchester United winger was quoted as saying: "We played well and did our best but the referee didn't help us. Everyone who saw the match could see that the referee wasn't fair. He should have show yellow cards but he did not because Portugal is a small country.''

(16 July 06 Source www.telegraph.co.uk) 

WORLD CUP CHEATS

What no one can be proud of is cheating and the World Cup seemed to be riddled with it, even normally clean players like Thierry Henry resorting to gamesmanship. People have been talking about retrospective punishment but I think action has to be taken at the time of the offence.

Conning referees has gone on since time immemorial and we often take the moral high ground on this sort of behaviour. And I think when it comes to diving and feigning injury, we do have the right to take the moral high ground. If Wayne Rooney had been playing for any other team, he would have gone down as Ricardo Carvalho was trying to chop him from behind instead of trying to battle free. Carvalho would have had a yellow card and Rooney would still be playing.

I have played in Spain and I know they will not be having this discussion. Simple as that. When I spoke to Diego Maradona before the finals, he told me that-, outside of Northern Europe, it is considered clever- if you can get away with it. You are looking at changing half the world's attitude.

Don't get me wrong, it drives me absolutely mad. FIFA must take some responsibility for trying to rid the game of physical contact. That has given the cheats licence to go over at the slightest touch and get opponents booked for it. You have to try and clamp down on it but it is tough. Sometimes it is clear but there are times when it is difficult to tell. I never threw myself to the floor as a player, but there are times when your momentum can take you over or you simple fall. With everything moving at such speed, it is hard for the referee to detect who is trying to cheat. To be honest, I think it is pretty well policed in the Premiership.

So the first thing that must happen is preventing the berating of match officials. There should be bookings for crowding the referee, which should be an easy change to manage. It might mean chaos for a few weeks but it would be worth it. Players would soon learn how to behave like competitors in other sports.

( 16 July 06 Gary Lineker www.telegrapg.co.uk)

VIDEO REPLAY OR NOT? ZIDANE'S SENDING OFF

FIFA have been quick to deny that video replays were used in the sending-off. 

Argentinian referee Horacio Elizondo and his linesmen missed the incident but it was spotted by the Fourth Official, Luis Medina Cantalejo from Spain. 

France coach Raymond Domenech suggested that Cantalejo took action only after seeing a video replay - something that is not permitted under the rules of the game. 

But FIFA spokesman Andreas Herren said: "The Fourth Official saw the incident with his own eyes and told the referee and the assistant referee directly though their headsets." 

FIFA said that although the fifth official does have a TV monitor, he is not permitted to intervene, and the Fourth Official has no access to video replays. 

In his post-match interview, the French manager Domenech said: "The referee saw nothing, the assistant referee saw nothing and then we have the Fourth Official saying to the referee what happened. We have video replays in football and then the Fourth Official tips off the referee."

( 10 July 2006 Source www.telegraph.co.uk) 

REFEREEING FAMOA DAYS IN ENGLAND FOR 2006

FAMOA events...............but not as we know them!  Make a note in your diary England Ref's.

Times are changing, and as always The FA Referees' Department are looking of ways to improve the method of educating match officials. An exciting series of FAMOA Development Days has been developed in assistance with the Regional County Development Managers, and will be taking place across the local County FA's in 2006.

The events are listed below, and to book a place you should contact oyur County Football Associaiotn for further details or go to www.TheFA.com/FAMOA

South & Forces Region - Janie Frampton

16th July: Berks & Bucks  (This date has since been cancelled/postponed due to low registrations (from Ernie Moore)
23rd July: Berks & Bucks (This date has since been cancelled/postponed due to low registrations (from Ernie Moore)
10th Sept: Middlesex
16th Nov: Surry
23rd Nov: Sussex

North West Region - Steve Swallow

16th July: Cumberland
16th July: Westmoreland
2nd Aug: Cheshire
24th Aug: Lancashire

East Midlands Region - Keith Hill

2nd July Hertfordshire
20th Aug: Leicestershire
3rd Sept: Northamptonshire
11th Sept: Cambridgeshire
25th Sept: Huntingdonshire
23rd Oct: Lincolnshire
26th Oct: Bedfordshire

Midlands Region - Ray Oliver

16th July: Nottinghamshire
14th Aug: Herefordshire
14th Sept: Birmingham
9th Oct: Worcestershire
16th Oct: Shropshire

South East Region - Edward Stone

20th Aug: Norfolk
3rd Sept: Essex

South West Region - Roger Vaughan

15th July: Gloucestershire
1st Aug: Cornwall
13th Aug: Somerset:
3rd Sept: Dorset

North East Region - Alan Wilkie

16th July: North Riding
6th Aug: East Riding
13th Aug: West Riding
26th Oct: Northumberland
23rd Nov: Durham

If you wish to speak to anyone concerning any of FA Learning Courses, please call their hotline on 0870-8500424  or by email falearningnews@thefa.com

(Source - FA Learning News July 2006  http://www.thefa.com/static/ezine/2006/july/ )

ARE PLAYERS ALLOWED TO WEAR A TAPPED UP WEDDING RING - OR NOT?

Law 4 - The Players’ Equipment

Law 4 of The Laws of the Game states that “A player must not use equipment or wear anything which is dangerous to himself or another player (including any kind of jewellery)”

It has been the practice in some matches, particularly within the professional game, to allow players to wear a plain ‘wedding ring’ provided it was taped. However, it is clear that this practice contravenes Law 4 as laid down by the International Football Association Board.

This Law exists to protect the safety of players. Its importance was highlighted last season when, yet again, a number of players were injured as a result of jewellery being worn by themselves or other players.

Therefore, with immediate effect, all items of jewellery must be removed by players, in all matches under the jurisdiction of The Football Association. It is thus not permissible to tape over any form of jewellery.

Would you please communicate this decision to all relevant parties within your county, including leagues, clubs and referees? 

(Source: Neale Barry Head of Senior Referee Development The FA England
Reference NSB/GEN/26 5 July 2006 Copy sent to all County Football Associations.)

SHOULD IT HAVE BEEN A DROPPED BALL RESTART?

Overall, it was a brilliant display of refereeing in a highly charged game, at the very top of the footballing world. It was a performance with an accuracy level in the very high 90's that all referees can aspire to.

In the 110th minute (first period of extra time) of the 2006 World Cup Final, between Italy and France, referee Horacio Elizondo (from Argentina) brought play to a halt and marched to the other end of the field, where, after consulting with his match officials, he sent off France's player Zinedine Zidane for an off-the-ball incident in which the Italian player Marco Materazzi was butted in the chest by Zidane. 

The referee did no actually see the head-butt, and originally stopped play to deal with what looked like a serious injury to Materazzi - which in normal circumstances, would result in a dropped ball restart in accordance with Law 8.

The referee restarted play with a dropped ball.

In accordance with Law 12, the restart for striking an opponent is a direct free kick. 

(By Julian Carosi)  ;-)

EXCUSE ME WHILST I GET MY TISSUES OUT!  

Wayne Rooney is adamant that his challenge on Carvalho was an accident, saying: "In being forced back, I had trod on the player on the ground. 

"It turned out to be Carvalho. And I was aware that my foot had landed between his legs, which, of course, is about the nastiest place to get hurt, but it was an accident. 

"I couldn't believe that the ref, who was so near, hadn't realised that. Perhaps he was too near. 

"I'll go to my grave and still maintain it was a complete accident. I hadn't intended to do it. I had my back to the player. I couldn't see him, or where I was putting my foot." 

Rooney also insists that he bears no malice against his Manchester United colleague Cristiano Ronaldo, who he shoved under the eyes of the referee moments before receiving his red card. Ronaldo was afterwards seen winking at his dug-out as if to suggest that he had riled Rooney, causing a media storm and leading to reports that Rooney would seek revenge.

However Rooney writes: "They reported that, after the game, I had tried to get into the Portuguese dressing-room in order to hit Ronny [Ronaldo]. That's not true. What the papers didn't know and probably will never believe, is that on the coach on the way home I sent a text to Ronny. I told him to forget about what happened. I wasn't blaming him for interfering. Then I wished him good luck in the semis. And I meant it.

(Source www.telegraph.co.uk )

SIMULATION (Diving) - AND HOW TO IDENTIFY IT

Any player who is tripped will pitch forward, his head will go forward and down, his back will arch away from the ground, his arms will fly forward and down and he will try to recover the tripped leg under him to avoid an uncontrolled fall. 

Any player diving will do the opposite of these things to one degree or another. He pitches forward, of course, but he throws his head up and back, he arches his upper back away from the ground, his arms fly up and back and the leg apparently tripped, he leaves behind him with the toe pointing towards the ground like a ballerina, because he is deliberately engineering a controlled fall and curving the body away from the ground minimises the impact. 

A further significant feature in all cases of tripping versus diving is that a trip is abrupt and sudden, whereas a dive is relatively slow and graceful. 

Nearly all the trips  seen in the 2006 World Cup in Germany, have been dives, or at least falls with no real effort made to avoid falling. 

If proof is needed and the evidence is still around, an excellent example of a trip occurred in the Holland/Portugal match when, near the Portuguese left touchline, Boularouz took down Holand player Cristiano Ronaldo. Ronaldo had no idea it was coming and could not, therefore, prepare to dive. His fall has all the characteristics in every respect which I have listed of a true trip. 

If this trip is contrasted with just about every other recording of players falling when apparently interfered with by another, it will be seen that most falls are dives. Clearly, some are fouls, but, equally, many could have been survived by the fouled player without going down. 

If referees rejected appeals in all cases where a player went down exhibiting the dive characteristics which are listed above, diving would soon stop, especially if accompanied by a caution.

 
(Source R.D. Britton on the Referees' Association discussion page 3 July 2006)

CORSHAM REFEREE WEB SITE VOTING POLL RESULTS

The results for the latest poll are shown below.

Who do you think will win the World Cup?

Answers: Votes: Percent 
1. Brazil 40: 29% 
2. Italy 24: 17% 
3. Germany 20: 14% 
4. Another country 15: 11% 
5. France 12: 9% 
6. England 10: 7% 
7. Argentina 7: 5% 
8. Holland 4: 3% 
9. Spain 4: 3% 
10. Mexico 2: 1% 

A new poll is now showing on the http://www.corshamref.org.uk web site

The new question is................

"What area of soccer would you like to see stamped out?

(I watched Italy win the World Cup in a riverside pub in Bath with one of my soccer mad daughters, along with a large crowd of friends. It was a beautiful warm evening, and a great day for Italy, and for me (as both of my parents were Italian.)

When Italy scored the wining penalty kick, I lost my head, like a few others that night!!!!.........Julian (Giuliano) Carosi 

THIS MONTH'S TOPICS:

This month, we look at: how far a player must retreat from the field of play when he is sent off; a manager being struck, players kicking the ball out when an injury is suspected, and offside or not?

HOW FAR IS FAR ENOUGH?

Question: As often happens in local football, a player can be sent off. But what is the requirement of this player, bearing in mind that changing rooms at local level are often locked, and in some cases several hundred yards from the field of play?  My question arises, after a player in the 2006 World Cup was sent off, and appeared to sit in the technical area for a while; which I believed was not allowed. Or are we allowed to use reasonable common sense, at local level?

Answer: Players are certainly not allowed (at any level) to sit the technical area after being sent off.

Law 12 stipulates that a player, substitute, or substituted player who has been sent off, must leave the vicinity of the field of play and the technical area. 

The wording is written in such a way, that it allows the Referee to use his/her discretion, to allow for the various venues that football games take place in at local level. 

The actual words "leave the vicinity of the field of play, means that a player must be far enough away, so that he cannot directly influence the game. This can range from standing behind a barrier, to being asked to go back into the changing rooms. Another factor for consideration, is that a player who has committed an act of violent conduct, is more likely to re-offend, than a player who is sent off for instinctively using his hand to stop a ball entering the goal. 

At local level, a great deal of common sense is therefore required. But the bottom lines is, that the more likely a player is to cause further problems, the stronger you should apply the Law, and order him/her far enough away so that they can have no effect at all on the remainder of the game. 

MANAGER GETS ONE IN THE CHOPS!

Question: The ball is in play. A manager leaves the technical area, enters the field of play and strikes one of the opposing players in the face. What action should the referee take?

Answer: In these types of scenarios, in real life, a Referee can almost do what he instinctively thinks is right (e.g. dropped ball, indirect free kick etc) and nobody on the day, would be any the wiser! 

Nevertheless, let us look at this scenario logically in accordance with the Laws:

A free kick can only be awarded for an offence committed by a player or a substitute (Law 12).

Is the manager a player or substitute? No. 

Therefore, the Referee should stop play because of outside interference (Law 5). 

The manager should be asked to remove himself from the vicinity of the field of play, and informed that a report of his misconduct will be sent to the FA.

The restart must be a dropped ball, due to play being stopped for a temporary stoppage. The ball is dropped at the place where it was located when play was stopped (Law 8).

SPORTING BEHAVIOUR  - OR GAMESMANSHIP?

Question: The practice over the last few years is for players to return the ball to the opposition after the game has been stopped for injury etc. Whereabouts in the Laws of the Game is this covered, and do you have any advice on the current abuse of this situation, all be it, at a far higher level than I participate at?

Answer: The situation of players kicking the ball out when a player gets injured, and then returning it to the team last in possession, seems to have lost its way just lately.
There was a time, when the Referee was the only one who made the decision to stop play (or not). It is now the players who have 'taken over the mad house', by innocently taking the responsibility away from the Referee. Invariably, this will sometimes lead to awkward situations where teams returning the ball, are not quite sure what they are supposed to do, thus leading to retaliation and abuse from all quarters. 
As also seen in the 2006 World Cup, players are feigning injury by dropping to the floor, with the sole purpose of wasting a few minutes. The team in possession of the ball then kicks it out, forcing the Referee to assess the injury situation, which invariably requires no treatment for the 'supposed' injured player. The ball is then kindly returned, to the team last in possession, and a few minutes of time have been lost, without anyone really identifying that the delaying tactics of gamesmanship has been used.
Of course, this has got to be stopped. But until you received proper guidance from the top, it would be pointless in you starting a crusade to try and change this at the level you Referee at.

One hopes that in the near future, the Referee will (once again) resume control of the mad house. And players will (once again) accept that the Referee will make the decision to stop play (or not) when a player goes down. As is his duty in accordance with Law 5 : "stops the match if, in his opinion, a player is seriously injured etc…."

OFFSIDE OR NOT? 

Question: Player (A) passes the ball (not too hard) forwards, towards an area in his opponent's half, where one of his colleagues (B) is standing in an offside position. 

Colleague (B) runs towards the ball, and the Assistant Referee raises his flag for offside. At the same time, the original passer of the ball, player (A) yells out to his colleague (B), to, "Leave it!" at which time, colleague (B) stops his movement towards the ball.

The Referee overrules the Assistant Referee's flag, and allows play to continue, by allowing player (A) to run on to his own ball (therefore, no offside offence has been committed by player (A)).

On seeing the raised flag, a few of the defending players momentarily stop playing, thus theoretically allowing player (A) a greater chance of a clear path towards goal.

Player (A) subsequently runs forward to collect the ball and scores a goal. 

The defending team are clearly upset about the confusion caused by the conflicting signals from the match officials. What advice can you give?

Answer: In general, a Referee will always accept an offside flag from his Assistant Referee, but there will be occasions when an honest Referee will need to overrule his Assistant, and allow play to continue. Whilst this can be infuriating for the Assistant Referee involved, it is in line with the Law 6 (The Assistant Referee) wording, "subject to the decision of the referee, an assistant referee…. can indicate when a player may be penalised for being in an offside position."

In short, whilst it is the Assistant Referee who generally 'indicates' offside, it is 'subject to the decision of the referee'. 

In the scenario described in this question, player (A) runs on to collect his own pass, and has therefore not committed any offside infringement. The crux of the confusion lies with the advice and changes introduced into the offside Law over the past few years. Is player (B) (in the opinion of the referee) involved with active play or not, by (1) interfering with play, (2) gaining an advantage by being in an offside position, or (3) by interfering with an opponent?

In accordance with Law 11 (Offside):
(1) Player (B) did not interfere with play by touching the ball. 
(2) Player (B) did not gain an advantage by being in that position, by playing a ball that rebounds to him off a post or the crossbar, or playing a ball that rebounds to him off an opponent.

The answer to the scenario must therefore be found in whether or not player (B) is interfering with an opponent or not?

(3) Law 11 tells us that; 'Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.'

The key words here are: 'making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent.'

It is clear that by naturally moving towards the ball, player (B) did not intend to deceive an opponent. 

This leaves us with the final question: Did player (B) distract an opponent?
As this is a subjective opinion, only the Referee can answer this with any degree of accuracy. 

Nevertheless, it is very unlikely in the scenario discussed in this question, that the movement of player (B) would have distracted an opponent. And it would be impossible to prove so, in the blink of an eye (the time taken by the Referee to make a decision). 

The problem that the defending team has, is not so much whether player (B) distracted them (thus breaching Law 11), but rather the distraction caused by the Assistant Referee having his flag signal overruled. This is where the nub of the problem is; for as far as the Laws are concerned, there was no infringement of Law 11.

The Assistant Referee was right in raising his flag, when it looked like player (B) was about to become active. This is in accordance with FIFA Circular No. 987 issued on 17 August 2005, to clarify when a player may be penalised.

"A player in an offside position may be penalised before playing or touching the ball if, in the opinion of the referee, no other team-mate in an onside position has the opportunity to play the ball.

If an opponent becomes involved in the play and if, in the opinion of the referee, there is potential for physical contact, the player in the offside position shall be penalised for interfering with an opponent." 

The confusion arises, because whilst the Assistant Referee is primarily focused on the movement of player (B), it is the Referee who actually has the bigger picture, of the full involvement from both player (A) and player (B). 

These types of situations will occur from time to time, and will generate frustration on behalf of the players. One of the hardest aspects for being an Assistant Referee, is to completely attune to the Referee's control of the game, and to slightly delay the delivery of an offside flag signal, thus minimising future occurrences of this nature. 

Wait, Wait and then Flag (or not).

Albeit that a slightly late flag for a correct decision will also generate some banter and frustration from the participants, it will allow for more consistency between the match officials, and allow the Assistant Referee more time to see how a move develops. Had the Assistant Referee in this question slightly delayed his decision, he may have been able to go along with the Referee's decision to allow play to continue. 

Its not an easy call to make, and each situation is different. But in general, a correct slightly late flag signal (or a delayed decision not to flag), is much better than raising the flag too quickly. This is a very difficult art to perfect, but once achieved, will certainly minimise frustration following match-changing moments. 

Let me have your thoughts on this month's topics. Regards Julian Carosi

I hope that you have enjoyed this issue of the newsletter, and that you are all continuing to enjoy your refereeing roles.  All the very warmest wishes to you all, wherever you are in the world.

Regards, Julian Carosi (Newsletter Editor):

Disclaimer: The content of this newsletter is not sanctioned by or affiliated with any governing body of soccer. The opinions expressed here are sometimes those of the Corsham Referee webmaster and the readers, or from other media sources. Reference to the male gender in this newsletter is for simplification only, and apply to both males and females. All rights of the current Laws mentioned in this newsletter are reserved by FIFA, and they are the official laws of the International Football Association Board. The Editor is not obliged to publicise unsolicited manuscripts or photos.

This Newsletter and previous copies will be available via The Corsham Referee web site Newsletter page. 
PRINTABLE pdf VERSIONS OF ALL THE NEWSLETTERS ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE WEB SITE.