Fellow Referees - Please continue to check this page often for updates on changes to the Laws of the Game, Referee Instructional Information, and Interpretive Memoranda issued by the United States Soccer Federation. 

If you have any questions, please contact our Referee Coordinator, Rob Marino, at referee@hvsasoccer.org

• March 31, 2009 – Memorandum from Alfred Kleinaitis, NJ State Referee Committee
  Topic: Kicks from the Penalty Mark Checklist
  In many parts of the country, tournaments are starting to occur and often their rules include requirements for breaking ties. However, information about the mechanics and procedures involved in taking kicks from the penalty mark to break a tie is spread across several sources:
  • the Laws of the Game,
  • the new “Interpretation and Guidelines” section of the Laws of the Game published by FIFA (and available on the USSF website under “Laws of the Game”),
  • Advice to Referees, and
  • earlier memoranda distributed by U.S. Soccer Referee Department.
  
  The following checklist of responsibilities, guidelines, and procedures is provided as a useful single source of guidance for referees who need to conduct this process.

   

• March 31, 2009 – Memorandum from Alfred Kleinaitis, NJ State Referee Committee
  Topic: Head Injuries

  USSF guidance for referees at all levels has always emphasized the importance of responding appropriately to serious player injuries. National Referee clinics in the past have dealt with this matter in no uncertain terms. A specific directive was issued this year in advance of the 2009 MLS season, and entry level USSF referee training materials have reminded all officials that the seriousness of an injury is more liberally defined for youth players.

  In the DC United - LA Galaxy game (March 22), two players collided while attempting to jump for the ball (see accompanying clip). As a result, both suffered head injuries, with bleeding, that required stitches or staples to close the wounds.

  Play should have been stopped immediately. Whenever a player's head is injured, regardless of whether the collision was with an opponent, a teammate, or an object on the field such as a goal post -- the safety of that player is of prime concern. There is no higher priority.

   

• March 25, 2009 – Memorandum from Alfred Kleinaitis, NJ State Referee Committee
  Topic: Offside – Interfering with Play

  The first goal scored in the new MLS season (New York Red Bulls at Seattle Sounders, March 19) (see accompanying clip) was the subject of controversy based on the argument that a teammate of the scorer was in an offside position at the time and had become involved in active play by interfering with play. The goal was from Sounder #17(Montero) against the Red Bull goalkeeper #1 (Cepero) and the Sounder forward alleged to have been offside was #23 (Nyassi).

  The following facts are not in dispute:

  • Nyassi was in an offside position.
  • Nyassi did not become involved in active play by gaining an advantage (historically, this is only an issue if the ball has rebounded from the crossbar, a goalpost, or a defender, which it did not in this case).
  • Nyassi did not interfere with an opponent. He did not get in the way of a defender, make any movement or gesture which deceived or distracted an opponent, and, most importantly, did not block the goalkeeper’s line of sight (the attack came in from the goalkeeper’s left whereas the attacker ran from the goalkeeper’s right and was at least several yards away from the goalkeeper when the shot on goal was made).
  • Nyassi did not interfere with play (no contact with the ball).

  The assistant referee was well placed, in line with the second to last defender, to confirm these essential elements in deciding for an offside violation. Accordingly, there was no offside violation and the goal was valid.

  The debate has been vigorous over the last several years regarding the way in which an attacker in an offside position can be involved in active play. The definition provided by the International Board regarding “gaining an advantage” is clear and based on concrete observable facts. The definition of “interfering with an opponent” involves various judgments but is generally clear in its application since the primary issue here is whether the interference results from blocking paths and/or lines of sight. This memorandum confirms that “interfering with play” cannot be decided unless the attacker in an offside position makes contact with the ball.

   

• March 24, 2009 – Memorandum from Alfred Kleinaitis, NJ State Referee Committee
  Topic: Priority of Assistant Referee Responsibilities

  In a recent professional exhibition match, a group of referees, instructors, and assessors was discussing an incident in which the assistant referee was faced with a conflict in priorities – whether to hang back and observe the goalkeeper with the ball in case the goalkeeper went outside the penalty area with the ball still in his hands (a handling offense) or to move up field to get in position for assisting with offside in case there was a quick counterattack after the goalkeeper released the ball. The conversation was vigorous, but the matter should have been easily settled by reviewing the relative importance of the two possible violations.

  A similar conflict in priorities can arise when a team is attacking along the touchline and the assistant referee must choose between looking up the touch line to signal if the ball leaves the field and looking across the field to monitor whether an attacker moves into an offside position. Dividing attention this way is not impossible, but both responsibilities will suffer.

  The single most important responsibility for the assistant referee is making timely and accurate offside decisions. All other duties outlined in Law 6 are secondary. Offside decisions are often “game critical” regardless of their specific result. A decision for offside is just as likely to be challenged as a decision against an offside violation. Whether the issue is offside position or involvement in active play, if a goal is called back, allowed, or interrupted as a result, the decision will be controversial. It must therefore be supported by the best fitness, mechanics, communications, and concentration that the assistant referee can bring to bear.

  If there is not much difference between where the assistant referee must focus to handle each different duty then clearly both duties should be attempted. As one duty increasingly becomes a distraction for the other, the assistant referee should attempt to adjust positioning to reduce the conflict. Where the distraction is too great, the only solution is to focus on offside, leaving to other members of the officiating team the responsibility of covering to the best of their abilities the less critical conflicting duty. Among the topics which must be covered in the officiating team’s pregame discussion is the issue of what the assistant referee should do to resolve a conflict between offside and such other responsibilities as determining if the ball has left the field, which team has possession, and the occurrence of violations which do not involve violence.